4 ms·

"When you're betting on a platform you don't own, the house always wins." Except when it doesn't. It's not a zero-sum game-- the house winning doesn't mean th

"When you're betting on a platform you don't own, the house always wins." Except when it doesn't. It's not a zero-sum game-- the house winning doesn't mean that the bettor loses. Zynga, Rovio, and FourSquare are all pretty fat on platforms they don't own.

jarek 16y ago
For now.
nhangen 16y ago
are they really? Rovio might be the exception, but how fat are Zynga and FourSquare right now, compared to their debt?
- webwright 16y ago
  Uh, what? Zynga is making $50M per month: http://www.engagedigital.com/2010/05/14/zynga-revenue-estimated-at-50m-per-month/ http://www.engagedigital.com/2010/05/14/zynga-revenue-estima... (they've raised $500M). Foursquare is a bit farther from monetizing... Not sure if I'd bet on them but they would be nowhere without the FB/Twitter platforms under their feet. But they've raised ~$20M on a rumored $100M valuation. That isn't debt. In both cases, the companies sold a small minority stake of ownership for a huge pile of cash into the company coffers.
  - nhangen 16y ago
    That post is nearly a year old. I'd be curious to see if anything has changed. Not debt, but it's still money owed.
    - justin 16y ago
      "Not debt, but it's still money owed." False, and inanity.
danilocampos 16y ago
The house always wins because the house always has final say. If they want to put you out of business, they get to. The game is rigged. The point is that in the end, you're never going to be in a better position than the guy who runs the show. You can often win alongside them, and that might be the bulk of developers, but if you're enjoying a better position than the platform operator, that's not going to last forever.