I visited each website from the list of Demo finalists.
Boy, do they suck. Really, really suck.
| |
- Subscribe to SVW by email - You should follow me on Twitter here - Send me a friend request on Facebook and LinkedIn. |
By Tom Foremski - September 7, 2008
I popped in to see Pat Phelan and pals on Sunday evening because of the Techcrunch50 (TC50) conference this week. Pat is one of Ireland's top entrepreneurs and CEO of Cubic Telecom and the MaxRoam service, a disruptive mobile company (new info tomorrow). Pat and a few others have rented a house in San Francisco for the week and had a bit of a house warming with a few dozen people.
In addition to TC50, the DEMO conference also starts start this week. And although DEMO is in San Diego and TC50 is in San Francisco, there are a lot of people in town because of these events, and a lot of chatter about the merits of the two conferences.
Some people say that it's not right that DEMO, which selects presenting companies, as does TechCrunch50, charges $18,000 per company for the opportunity. But if you factor in travel costs, accomodation, and tickets to the conferences for your teams, there is probably little difference between the two when each company's costs are summed up at the end of the week.
My opinion is that there is room for both conferences and this rivalry is just plain old link baiting and tiresome.
Also tiresome is Robert Scoble's attack on the web sites of nearly all the companies presenting at DEMO. He criticized their web site design and thus their marketing.
Startups: your web site sucks
I visited each website from the list of Demo finalists.
Boy, do they suck. Really, really suck.
This is just Robert trying to be controversial and it seems to be backfiring badly. The people I met with yesterday and today were universally disdainful of his approach. He spent much of the weekend trying to put out the fires online.
Scoble’s rant reflects badly on him, not the 72 companies — Alec Saunders SquawkBox
Moving to San Francisco: Gabe Rivera who runs the popular Techmeme news aggregator is now living in San Francisco in the "Dog Patch" neighborhood in the south of the city. He moved up from Menlo Park about three weeks ago. I'm trying to persuade Gabe to host a loft-warming party.
Also new to San Francisco is Bobbie Johnson, from the UK newspaper The Guardian. He is living South of Market and trying to decide on which neighborhood to live in. "Our closest correspondent is in Los Angeles, which is not close enough for covering Silicon Valley," he said.
- - -
Please see:
The Man Who Broke the Telco Cartel . . . and Bridged the Global "Voice Divide"
« Weekend Watcher: Hornucopia - a Celebration of all Things Horny . . . and the Importance of Culture | Main | New Media Increasingly Looks Like Old Media Says Techmeme Founder »
Posted to Silicon Valley
September 7, 2008 | Permalink | Comment | Subscribe to SVW
- New! SVW Webcast Channel - Interviews With Top Executives - Free Registration.
Tom Foremski #28 on San Francisco - Silicon Valley Top 50 Most InfluentialAn excellent analysis, Tom Foremski. I think there could be a great long term benefit for Google by its foray into China. By the timing of its very prominent presence there, coming during the great boom in Internet usage and awareness, Google's retreat, may become a kind of catalyst in the long term memories of tech savvy Chinese...the leaders of tomorrow. I forecast a triumphant return for G
Great post. I believe publishers can have advertising supported businesses. In fact I don't think that's debatable. First though they need better tools to leverage their audience data and their own ad matching systems. Essentially they need to build a new improved display channel. New pub controlled networks could then emerge that would crush the performance of what exists today. Then all the
Eric, What's wrong with making a reasonable profit as a news organization? I agree with you that there is a race to the bottom going on because the econopmics of online news continue to worsen.
At some point, we have to figure out how to reward news organizations doing a good job otherwise we are in serious trouble as a society. That's what I would like to see Mr Hellman's money go to
Gabe: You should get a press pass and if you don't, you should ban SXSW stories from Techmeme. (SXSW gets very noisy, you'd be doing us all a big favor :)
Tom, two points:
1. You are a strange man.
2. Press passes cost $299? You sure? In any case I wasn't offered one. Please reread my tome on this matter: http://twitter.com/gaberivera/status/10238453895
Money is neither noble or ignoble. It is value-neutral.
You seem convinced that this project will be exclusively funded by the ultra-rich; obviously BANP's hope is that the community will step up and slowly allow the organization to be weaned off Hellman's seed money. I wish them luck -- but to be honest, the track record for local endeavors of this type isn't great so far. Still, I res
Danny: I agree... But press passes aren't free this year. They cost $299. Gabe can afford $299.
This sums it up perfectly:
'Advertising doesn't sell stuff' by Dave Trott
http://digg.com/u1Ps9L
Eric: What's so noble about a non-profit status in regards to news organizations? What's so noble about relying on handouts from billionaires to produce local news?
If we can develop profitable news business models then we will have competition, and that is good for news, good for everyone.
San Francisco used to have more than a dozen daily newspapers. Each one trying to compe
While I'm no fan of the way the BANP has acquitted itself thus far, your comment that "There's plenty of 'non-profit' media businesses around, the largest local one is the San Francisco Chronicle." is glib to the point of meaninglessness.
As I'm sure you're aware, an organization's not-for-profit status is far more germane to its mission than to its ability to generate revenue. The Chro
Free the Gabe 1! The Techmeme 1?
Seriously, if there are any TV editors getting passes, then Gabe should. Press isn't just defined by writing stories.
Actually, there is good news for publishers ... And it involves creating engagement experiences with the content rather than trying to sell content directly. (see some examples in this AdAge article: http://micurl.com/xijmu)
The key is create an experience that broadens the one:many experience of today's newspaper expereince with a socially connec
It is "underground" now because the consultants are pretending Social Media is a big "secret" worth $22K/ day (see my post on this - Is Chris Brogan Worth $22K?http://micurl.com/wpFeo)
As a client trying to buy social media services -- it is too hard today. There many little "bits" running around without a mature understanding of how to create value through a programmatic marketing ap
I think many PR/communications professionals are still getting their heads around the new media world order. What's surprising here is this happened at SXSW.
Good stuff Tom. Did you see this interview with did with Megan McCarthy of Techmeme btw? http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/techmemes_new_editor.php
Judy, yes, it is a new mdoel but is it already broken? One of my contacts told me that there is a lot of social media marketing going on but that it is underground. I thugh that the point is for it to be seen, rather than be 'underground.'
Ted: Yes, I agree, some big roll ups on the way. Every week I'm introduced to yet another successful ad network I've never heard of, with tons of people and VC money. They have the upper hand right now, but ad networks are not a sustainable business long term, imho.
I agree re the sophisticated news consumer. Note that this consumer is probably more likely to respond to the news in some way as well.
Tom,
My biggest beef with the Poynter Online piece is the implication that auctions only work well for high priced goods which strikes as basically ridiculous.
In addition, I concur that the notion of creating artificial scarcity will not work either.
Fact of the matter is that there are too many *bad* advertising units out there that will get sold at rock-bottom prices
Actually Tom I disagree. Social media does work at promoting products. What you miss is a mature marketing approach to social media.
I personally could not find a social media agency - I did find lots of "social media consultants".
And social media is not just part of something else -- it is new corporate branding model. What is missing is marketing maturity - but it's coming...
I 100% agree. As you say Tom, there's just not enough liquidity in the marketplace. The only way such a market place would work is if every advertiser from P&G to the corner deli and every publisher from NYTimes to corner blog are all on the same network and all watching prices like an experienced market floor trader. The market places I hear envisioned aren't anywhere close to that and I expec
Guy: I like that Drucker quote.
I had a very similar experience with Apple. My MacBook just wouldn't work after about 2 1/2 years of life, the logic board was replaced three times and the issue still wasn't fixed (not starting, turning off randomly, etc.) I had to FIGHT with Apple Service via phone to get a new computer issued, as the issues with the old one were obviously not fixable. The store was worthless, they couldn't e
Marshall: Yes, you are right, bad marketing can ruin good products. Sometimes even good marketing and good products is no guarantee of success. I remember the excellent word of mouth marketing around Tivo, a great product, yet growth was still very slow.
That sounds like a variation on the old "build it and they will come" idea that continues to plague technology companies.
The problem is that can have the coolest, most useful, most technologically superior new way to do 'X', but if the idea doesn't develop sufficient awareness within your target market, you're a flop.
Put simply - the world won't buy your better mousetrap un
Guy: Well said.
You just echoed the eternal mousetrap fallacy, which has killed more Silicon Valley start-ups than Oracle.
Drucker himself said that business has only two functions -- marketing and innovation (everything else is admin work).
Marketing is essential to getting great products into buyers hands. That being said, my consultancy has had to repair a lot of other people's terrible mar
Marketing is important and it is a whole lot easier if you have a great product or service in the first place. It sucks when you are trying to sell something which isn't very good.
Might be a bit of a quick draw statement. There are lists of pretty awesome, relevant and accessible products that have failed due to consumer 'non-awareness.' Marketing (and that includes PR) can definitely contribute to a product's viability - if only by getting the word out and capturing your attention.
I have an amazing product. My competitor no so much. They do spend a great deal more than me in marketing. It makes it difficult sometime. Have lost many sales because no one ever heard of us.
People have to know about your product. People have to know how great it is.
Silicon Valley Watcher--reporting on the business and culture of disruption. © Tom Foremski 2004 - 2009 Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-noDerivs 2.5.