I visited each website from the list of Demo finalists.
Boy, do they suck. Really, really suck.
| |
- Subscribe to SVW by email - @tomforemski on Twitter - Please 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 »
September 7, 2008 | Permalink | Comment | Category: Silicon Valley | Subscribe to SVW
- New! SVW Webcast Channel - Interviews With Top Executives - Free Registration.
Last time I checked, Al Gore was charging $175,000 for a speech.
I appreciate your tireless work Atul.
Tom - you are right - I shouldn't be so pedantic about it. Gabe seems to online 24x7 so one could also argue he counts for more than one person. And thanks for you flattering comments about me in the article. Cheers.
Personally, I think we're moments away from a paradigm shift in how we rank and filter the web.
Integration of social media annotation data into search algorithms will effectively turn every one of us into an editor of the web. Eliminating the the need for manual tweaks and human editors.
This concept is the focus of my earlier PageRank for People article (http://bit.ly/1
Definitely agree, always good to see these studies and they also seem to be getting more sophisticated/insightful which is positive. Your point about the middle management layer is an interesting one. Could certainly see how that would make sense. Thanks for the post, it inspired a post over on our blog and some conversation here.
Joseph, Text 100
Marshall: Yes, you are right, PageRank is a human-aided system but the harvesting of that knowledge was done by machine, but is this is no loger good enough and requires direct supervision by humans? That seems to be what's happening...
Thanks Atul. Gabe said that he and Omer are engaged in editorial duties so it still adds up to 6 but I take your point about them not doing it full time. But I guess this also means that Techmeme more than doubled their editors...
Tom - A small correction. I believe the # of editors is 4 (or 4.5 depends if you count Gabe is an editor or tweaks the algorithm) and not 6. I believe Megan was the first editor back in Dec 2008 and then Techmeme announced the addition of three more yesterday
In many ways Google is a human-aided algorithm as well.
PageRank leverages human editorial decisions by measuring linking patterns between sites.
Similarly the Hilltop algorithm, developed by Krishna Bharat creator of Google News, uses a list of expert documents to refine search rankings.
Clearly there's no shame in using human intelligence to refine search results.
Ian: I agree that human editors can make Techmeme better. But it won't neccesarily help list other blogs because Techmeme monitors a core set of blogs/news sites and if you are not in it your chances of being mentioned are slim. You make a good point about what happens when they go home for the night - I guess the machine takes over...
I think human editors can improve quality and help frustrated editors (myself included) complaining about why their blogs aren't making it onto TM, but I am curious to see how Techmeme's new setup can be optimized for speedy updates when humans take a lunch break or sign off for the night. That was one area in which the old Techmeme setup and the current Google News setup have excelled.
Joseph, I agree, I'm not surprised but it's good to have some measurement of the effect of social media. The collaborative decision making aspect is interesting and I'd love to see future research explore this aspect further. For example, is it among peers within a group or are all members of a group, regardless of status, taking part? And the middle-age layer, I've noticed anecdotally, that th
I'm not surprised the results of this study reflect the growing influence of social media. What's more interesting, in my opinion, is what seems to be a more fundamental shift toward collaborative decision-making in professional environments. Certainly social media facilitates that but it strikes me as a deeper shift than technology and communication tools.
For example, the fact that '
Yeah. And, too bad for everyone, because there is enough room to increase the pie, we call www, and thus earn more money, instead of trying to carve out as big a piece of it as possible, often at the expense of others.
The latter strategy also brings money, but it is so shortsighted.
Greg, well said. Google has painted itself into a corner and has far fewer options than Murdoch. And it will never get into content creation because that's not its business. Yahoo has tried several times to get into content creation and failed. Silicon Valley companies are server and software based because that's a scalable business. People based companies such as the New York Times have no int
I totally agree. I think it is a disgrace that Silicon Valley's public schools are often basket cases when they should be showcases. We can't go around saying to the world "we are inventing the future" yet our own communities are so poorly educated and our schools so poorly funded. I'm fed up of super star Silicon Valley CEOs flying to Washington D.C to complain about education yet they won't w
I cannot say what Mr Murdoch is planning to do, but I agree that he has a lot stronger hand now than the search engines ever will. Unless, of course, they start creating their own and/or buy 3rd party content, which is unlikely -- that would be against their current business model.
More importantly, Murdoch has one more ace in his deck -- he can buy Yahoo (as he has already tried, I th
One more comment to add to this. The US has a H1B Visa program. It was created for a reason - not enough individuals in the US with the right skills. This article from 1989 entitled "US PUPILS FARE POORLY IN MATH, SCIENCE TESTS" shows part of the cause (http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-8106353.html.) 16 years later another article entitled "A fair comparison: U.S. students lag
I agree, value created does not equal the value destruction. Read the examples I provided above. In many cases, the value created is many times more than the value destroyed. This is the case with video, audio, new jobs in India and China, Graphics design, publishing, housing market and much more. Simply look at the examples like www.gizmag.com, which makes more money since it moved to w
Certainly kicked off a strong debate, which is needed. Firstly, it strikes me that no one has the answers - there is no 'holy grail' and its about testing, trailing and iterating what might work. That, I suggest, is what Murdoch's doing. If your company is split two ways on an approach (for every advocate of the subscription model in news corp, they'll be equal opposing views), send the CEO
Thanks Lisa, it's good to know that there are alternative choices.
I agree that where value is destroyed new value is created. But the creation doesn't equal the destruction, it is not a law of physics where matter and energy are always conserved. I make no ethical or moral judgements I am bringing attention to what the Internet enables, to what is already happening.
Sorry, I could not disagree more. The Internet brings much value. This is like saying "TV devalues books". Such a sweeping statement is naïve and narrow minded, smacking with tunnel vision and a pinch of western elitism.
Just a few examples:
1. I am sure citizens of a developing market like India or China were new jobs were created do not feel that outsourcing has devalued their job
Hi Tom, Good commentary here. If I can introduce an industry quickly... small business owners don't have to hope and wait for a public plan to address health care costs; there's another option currently available that speaks to Theron Kabrich's quote... industry is called Professional Employer Organization (disclosure: I just started working with one a couple of months ago). PEOs take on the b
I definitely would not invest a lot of money at any one time. Cost per hour should be analyzed before committing to be part of a virtual world.
It would be interesting if virtual worlds were required to reveal what the average cost per hour is for the "average user".
I would be cautious of any upfront payment unless it is a very modest monthly payment that can be terminated at
One thing that concerns me in all of this is how in depth reporting will suffer if everyone simply takes their news in sound bites and snippets. But as Jonathan says, Google is only an enabler. People are demanding the services they want in this digital age.
Newspapers are going to have to adapt. The choice does not exist. If Mr. Murdoch cuts off all access to Google he is not going
What I do think is that if Murdoch spent the same amount of time & money monetizing the WSJ traffic & user base as they do in creating content they can be profitable. What do they really know about matching their content with their visitors and their interests? You can't have a successful digital business unless you respond to this. Let's not even get into their failed efforts in Social Media.<
Jonathan, I don't think the B2B publishers you mention are having to spend the same amount of money in creating content as say the Wall Street Journal, New York Times or even regional newspapers. Sure, you can create online publications that are profitable as long as you employ as few people as possible and rely on automated ways to collect and publish content, and on "user" generated content.
"that's not a model that helps publishers fund their content no matter how much optimization they do and landing pages they create."
Tell that to the numerous B2B publishers that have built their digital business models this way and are doing quite well compared to their consumer counterparts. I'm sure they'll find your and Mr. Murdoch's point of view quite amusing.
Jonathan, I did not say that Google traffic has no value I said that some people assume it has more value than it actually does. The fact remains that advertising has become a very poor way to fund news content no matter where you get the traffic. Advertisers increasingly don't want to pay for pageviews they want to pay for performance and that's fair enough. But that's not a model that helps
Silicon Valley Watcher--reporting on the business and culture of disruption. © Tom Foremski 2004 - 2009 Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-noDerivs 2.5.