5 ms·

As a meetup organizer, this is a huge relief honestly. Meetup joining Wework was one of the most concerning things since you know how Wework was lavish in every

by amrrs 7y ago

As a meetup organizer, this is a huge relief honestly. Meetup joining Wework was one of the most concerning things since you know how Wework was lavish in everything. One good feature though was to book space directly through meetup which was quite handy since as a programming language local group organizer every month I've to look for some free space provider. Hopefully meetup.com can bring that side to this service!

suyash 7y ago
As a fellow meetup organizer, I think Private Investors will be worse than WeWork for Meetup.
- benmarks 7y ago
  It depends on the PE firm. We thought the same at Magento (eBay > Permira Funds), but in the end it was a pretty good ride into Adobe. Ryan does not strike me as a corporate raider - he seems to genuinely like building companies (e.g. MongoDB)... curious if others have more to add.
  - nerpderp82 7y ago
    Meetup cannot be saved, they attempt to milk their existing herd too hard rather move them to better pastures. Meetup is only a verb, elastic search and a document store replaces it with <new verb>. It has zero compelling functionality.
    - zrobotics 7y ago
      Eh, technically I'd agree that the site itself wouldn't be very hard to clone. However, Twitter wouldn't be hard to clone either; the value with meet up is the user's are there and people are familiar with the site.
    - ravenstine 7y ago
      People don't choose sites like Meetup for the features. They use it because it provides discoverability that would otherwise take effort outside of Meetup.com. I've run a few Meetup.com groups in my time, and I currently run the LA Ember.js meetup. I still choose to use Meetup because it's ridiculously easy to get people to join and show up. When I've done Facebook or Eventbrite, I had to put in effort, but all I have to do on Meetup is pay the monthly fee and people will come. If what you say is true, then there would be a new verb to replace it. Can you name one? I can't really.
hodgesrm 7y ago
I'm mildly hopeful this acquisition will be an improvement. I really depend on Meetup for scheduling open source community meetings. It's quite useful but over the last couple years it seemed as if they had stopped trying. p.s., It's kind of a mystery to me how anyone thought Meetup would be the next big thing. It's hard to monetize.
- netcan 7y ago
  This, in a nutshell, demonstrates where the internet has gone awry. Wikipedia is hard to monetize, but it's still a "big thing." Luckily, it's organised in a way that doesn't require S&P 500 revenue targets. The economics of startups->dragons is such that it's near impossible for certain mass-market services exist even thought they are useful and economically viable. The internet makes it possible to serve tens of millions on a modest budget. In theory, this enables a business to exist on a modest budget. In practice, serving tens of millions represents more-than-modest potential and that chance, even if quite small, is worth more than the business. Say a service like meetup makes $20m revenue, expenses of $16m and is growing @ 10% pa. In theory, a nice business. Should be worth $50m-100m. In reality though, a business like this is not just a business. It's a chance, however small, to be the next FB. At the least, it's a chance to be a FB acquisition. Even a minor threat to FB could easily be worth $1bn. Chances of success don't have to be very high for the "risk the house" strategy to dominate. A 10% chance @ $10bn is worth $1bn. Systemically, that means a meetup is destined to be continuously bought or funded by investors taking that chance. It can never settle into a steady, viable state where it just does its job.
  - indigochill 7y ago
    >It can never settle into a steady, viable state where it just does its job. I agree with your argument that numerically, playing the odds make sense, but I don't see how this necessarily rules out the possibility of settling into a steady business if that's what the company's owner(s) want. Especially with the backlash/burnout from VC demands, it seems to me like there would be plenty of business owners who would prefer the stabler "lifestyle business" over the moonshot because for emotional reasons, they prefer to leave potential money on the table in exchange for stability.
caseysoftware 7y ago
I run a system called Tech Events Network that tracks events across the US - meetup, eventbrite, facebook, etc, etc - and venues along with it. I want to help organizers find meetup-friendly venues in their area proactively. No charge, just broadcasting info. If you're in the US, drop me a note.
shermozle 7y ago
Yes also hopeful. I _HATE_ Meetup. Our meetup pre-dates them existing but we tried listing on their site and got an immediate and sustained boost in numbers. Their attempt to own your meetup is really frustrating. The fact I can't even format the emails they send to my subscribers is awful. Hopefully this will improve with a more focused owner.
- ValentineC 7y ago
  > Our meetup pre-dates them existing but we tried listing on their site and got an immediate and sustained boost in numbers. Do you have rough percentages on how many attendees are recurring, and how many are new?

by amrrs 7y ago

suyash 7y ago

As a fellow meetup organizer, I think Private Investors will be worse than WeWork for Meetup.

benmarks 7y ago
It depends on the PE firm. We thought the same at Magento (eBay > Permira Funds), but in the end it was a pretty good ride into Adobe. Ryan does not strike me as a corporate raider - he seems to genuinely like building companies (e.g. MongoDB)... curious if others have more to add.
- nerpderp82 7y ago
  Meetup cannot be saved, they attempt to milk their existing herd too hard rather move them to better pastures. Meetup is only a verb, elastic search and a document store replaces it with <new verb>. It has zero compelling functionality.
  - zrobotics 7y ago
    Eh, technically I'd agree that the site itself wouldn't be very hard to clone. However, Twitter wouldn't be hard to clone either; the value with meet up is the user's are there and people are familiar with the site.
  - ravenstine 7y ago
    People don't choose sites like Meetup for the features. They use it because it provides discoverability that would otherwise take effort outside of Meetup.com. I've run a few Meetup.com groups in my time, and I currently run the LA Ember.js meetup. I still choose to use Meetup because it's ridiculously easy to get people to join and show up. When I've done Facebook or Eventbrite, I had to put in effort, but all I have to do on Meetup is pay the monthly fee and people will come. If what you say is true, then there would be a new verb to replace it. Can you name one? I can't really.

hodgesrm 7y ago

I'm mildly hopeful this acquisition will be an improvement. I really depend on Meetup for scheduling open source community meetings. It's quite useful but over the last couple years it seemed as if they had stopped trying. p.s., It's kind of a mystery to me how anyone thought Meetup would be the next big thing. It's hard to monetize.

netcan 7y ago
This, in a nutshell, demonstrates where the internet has gone awry. Wikipedia is hard to monetize, but it's still a "big thing." Luckily, it's organised in a way that doesn't require S&P 500 revenue targets. The economics of startups->dragons is such that it's near impossible for certain mass-market services exist even thought they are useful and economically viable. The internet makes it possible to serve tens of millions on a modest budget. In theory, this enables a business to exist on a modest budget. In practice, serving tens of millions represents more-than-modest potential and that chance, even if quite small, is worth more than the business. Say a service like meetup makes $20m revenue, expenses of $16m and is growing @ 10% pa. In theory, a nice business. Should be worth $50m-100m. In reality though, a business like this is not just a business. It's a chance, however small, to be the next FB. At the least, it's a chance to be a FB acquisition. Even a minor threat to FB could easily be worth $1bn. Chances of success don't have to be very high for the "risk the house" strategy to dominate. A 10% chance @ $10bn is worth $1bn. Systemically, that means a meetup is destined to be continuously bought or funded by investors taking that chance. It can never settle into a steady, viable state where it just does its job.
- indigochill 7y ago
  >It can never settle into a steady, viable state where it just does its job. I agree with your argument that numerically, playing the odds make sense, but I don't see how this necessarily rules out the possibility of settling into a steady business if that's what the company's owner(s) want. Especially with the backlash/burnout from VC demands, it seems to me like there would be plenty of business owners who would prefer the stabler "lifestyle business" over the moonshot because for emotional reasons, they prefer to leave potential money on the table in exchange for stability.

caseysoftware 7y ago

I run a system called Tech Events Network that tracks events across the US - meetup, eventbrite, facebook, etc, etc - and venues along with it. I want to help organizers find meetup-friendly venues in their area proactively. No charge, just broadcasting info. If you're in the US, drop me a note.

shermozle 7y ago

Yes also hopeful. I _HATE_ Meetup. Our meetup pre-dates them existing but we tried listing on their site and got an immediate and sustained boost in numbers. Their attempt to own your meetup is really frustrating. The fact I can't even format the emails they send to my subscribers is awful. Hopefully this will improve with a more focused owner.

ValentineC 7y ago
> Our meetup pre-dates them existing but we tried listing on their site and got an immediate and sustained boost in numbers. Do you have rough percentages on how many attendees are recurring, and how many are new?