3 ms·
That's definitely not what the numbers say. Foursquare is one of the strongest start-ups with good competitive advantages and a solid team. The Foursquare brand
by jordhy 15y ago
That's definitely not what the numbers say. Foursquare is one of the strongest start-ups with good competitive advantages and a solid team. The Foursquare brand is very strong, they've successfully competed against Facebook and Google and (at least judging by their performance over last year) they only do better and better. See some traffic data for reference: http://www.quantcast.com/foursquare.com http://www.quantcast.com/foursquare.com
Nobody knows what the future will bring, but I'm very inclined to say that Foursquare has given no signs of stagnation. How can this company become less relevant after the introduction of NFC, faster smartphones and more precise GPS systems?
- jarek 15y agoFoursquare is three years old, has around a hundred employees, and is valued (however measured) at over 500 million dollars. At what point do we stop using the word "start-up" to avoid rendering the term completely meaningless?
- jordhy 15y agoThat's a great point. I think the term start-up should apply to high growth technology companies in the initial stages of their hockey stick curve (or which ever growth curve applies). Judging Foursquare on that basis, and assuming they can be as big as Twitter, they could still grow by about 15x, so indeed they might be in the early stages of their growth and could be considered a start-up. However, valid criteria for classifying a company as a start-up might include: rounds of funding (# or type), number of employees, relative maturity (compared to industry peers), market share, culture or maturity of the firm's core technology. It is indeed quite messy and hard to classify a company as a "start-up".