4 ms·

>Yeah, the 13-21-year-old chunk of society MySpace had that one nailed, and look how that turned out for them. This is exactly the kind of demographic that is

by Grue3 10y ago

>Yeah, the 13-21-year-old chunk of society MySpace had that one nailed, and look how that turned out for them. This is exactly the kind of demographic that is susceptible to fads and keeps leaving dead services in its wake.

oxide 10y ago
once it hits the mainstream it isn't cool anymore, take Facebook for example. kids hate it now, because grandma, mom, dad and aunt marie all use it. when it comes to social media of any type, if your grandma is using it, you don't want to be using it, since it must be for old people. according to teenager logic, anyway.
- pm90 10y ago
  Well to be completely fair, it is quite embarrassing even for me as an adult to have my parents/grandma looking at the stuff I post of facebook, which has caused me to reduce engagement there and post to instagram, which is restricted to close friends.
  - oxide 10y ago
    Agreed. I didn't mean to bust teenage chops so hard, haha.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
  - janywer 10y ago
    That's exactly the reason why I, along with my circle of friends, moved to Snapchat.
askafriend 10y ago
The MySpace argument is tired and stale and not even that insightful. MySpace made several mistakes as a company that had nothing to do with their premise (connecting people, the same as Facebook). It just turned out that Facebook had better execution in the long run.
- nickgrosvenor 10y ago
  Just because the myspace argument is stale doesn't mean it's wrong. I don't know if you remember how that went down, but people loved myspace. It worked well, then all the cool kids jumped to Facebook. It was herd mentality. Definitely a trend situation over product features. With network effects, you live by the sword and you die by the sword.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- angryasian 10y ago
  I disagree, Myspace could have done incredibly well if they focused on their strengths in music early on. Instead they wanted to be a media company going in a bunch of different directions, which sounds very very familiar. Snap is doing publishing with content partners, they announced special formatted tv shows, hardware and glasses, AR and adtech.
  - WillPostForFood 10y ago
    Wanting to be big in music = wanting to be a media company, and comes with a similar set of pitfalls, namely being beholden to a bunch of anti-tech established music companies. Also, I'd challenge whether there is room for incredible success. What's the biggest music success? Spotify? Pandora? Compare that to Facebook, and it is clear which direction had more potential.
    - angryasian 10y ago
      >big in music = wanting to be a media company I would disagree, being a publishing company, a movie review company, a comic book company, video company ... these are all things Myspace was attempting, is not the same as being a music company.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

by Grue3 10y ago

oxide 10y ago

once it hits the mainstream it isn't cool anymore, take Facebook for example. kids hate it now, because grandma, mom, dad and aunt marie all use it. when it comes to social media of any type, if your grandma is using it, you don't want to be using it, since it must be for old people. according to teenager logic, anyway.

pm90 10y ago
Well to be completely fair, it is quite embarrassing even for me as an adult to have my parents/grandma looking at the stuff I post of facebook, which has caused me to reduce engagement there and post to instagram, which is restricted to close friends.
- oxide 10y ago
  Agreed. I didn't mean to bust teenage chops so hard, haha.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
- janywer 10y ago
  That's exactly the reason why I, along with my circle of friends, moved to Snapchat.

askafriend 10y ago

The MySpace argument is tired and stale and not even that insightful. MySpace made several mistakes as a company that had nothing to do with their premise (connecting people, the same as Facebook). It just turned out that Facebook had better execution in the long run.

nickgrosvenor 10y ago
Just because the myspace argument is stale doesn't mean it's wrong. I don't know if you remember how that went down, but people loved myspace. It worked well, then all the cool kids jumped to Facebook. It was herd mentality. Definitely a trend situation over product features. With network effects, you live by the sword and you die by the sword.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
angryasian 10y ago
I disagree, Myspace could have done incredibly well if they focused on their strengths in music early on. Instead they wanted to be a media company going in a bunch of different directions, which sounds very very familiar. Snap is doing publishing with content partners, they announced special formatted tv shows, hardware and glasses, AR and adtech.
- WillPostForFood 10y ago
  Wanting to be big in music = wanting to be a media company, and comes with a similar set of pitfalls, namely being beholden to a bunch of anti-tech established music companies. Also, I'd challenge whether there is room for incredible success. What's the biggest music success? Spotify? Pandora? Compare that to Facebook, and it is clear which direction had more potential.
  - angryasian 10y ago
    >big in music = wanting to be a media company I would disagree, being a publishing company, a movie review company, a comic book company, video company ... these are all things Myspace was attempting, is not the same as being a music company.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]