3 ms·

I'm sympathetic, of course. I was part of a startup that iterated for a couple of years on a social thing looking for revenue, so I know the semi-delusional lev

I'm sympathetic, of course. I was part of a startup that iterated for a couple of years on a social thing looking for revenue, so I know the semi-delusional level of hope that any startup requires before you find product-market fit. I agree that's one thing investment is used for. But another thing it's used for is to prop up things that never find a revenue model until the lack of money forces people to swallow some hard pills. Bluesky's been going quite a while for not having a proven revenue model. And it's not like it's the only social media company ever; this is a space that has been well explored over decades. So the lack of it in any social media startup these days seems pretty glaring to me.

pfraze 2y ago
Toss it on the pile
- wpietri 2y ago
  That is a pretty glib response, and disappointing in that you aren't grappling with the negative externalities of this approach. I also think the reflexive dismissiveness is a sign that Bluesky is not really taking the problem seriously, even internally. Which is exactly what I'd expect from the external behavior. And I get it! Building products is way more fun than building businesses. But as somebody who has put a number of years into things that turned out to be unsustainable, I encourage all startup people to at least try to avoid the "me sowing/me reaping" ride.
  - pfraze 2y ago
    I didn’t mean to come off as dismissive, really I was trying to voice that part which we’ve both been through, the endless stack of existential concerns that you have to get comfortable with in this job. I’m actually quite acutely concerned about revenue and spending a fair amount of my time preparing for our answer; I’m just not at liberty to share our plans yet, so I went for the shorter response. I know you’re concerned. I hope we find a good answer!
    - wpietri 2y ago
      Thanks! I hope you do too. Good luck in your search!
xelamonster 2y ago
Twitter launched in 2006 and didn't turn a profit until 2018. They're not making money now either and don't show any signs of stopping, so I agree it needs to happen at some point but I'm not convinced it's an immediate existential threat.
- wpietri 2y ago
  You're conflating being sustainable with turning a profit. I don't much care if Bluesky is ever profitable, but it sounds like it's pretty far away from being sustainable. I think Twitter is a bad example in a few other ways. At the time, Twitter was a pioneer, so on reason they were burning money was to figure out the landscape. That landscape is pretty well known now, and the experience of Bluesky is not wildly different than Twitter was a decade ago. Another is that Bluesky claims the aren't going for the Twitter- and Facebook-proven revenue model of ads, so we can't use Twitter's success to say much about Bluesky. But the biggest reason it's a bad example is that Twitter shows what happens when you're not sustainable on your own. Their original owners, VCs, pushed them to monetize through ads. Later, different investors kept pushing for more revenue, causing a lot of flailing inside Twitter without much success. (E.g., Vine's rise and fall, or when Twitter tried streaming NFL games.) And most recently, of course, Twitter's new owner gives a good example of why one doesn't want to be too dependent on outside money over the long haul.
  - xelamonster 2y ago
    Fair points. Still--and I'm no financial expert and haven't looked at any data so maybe I'm wrong--I don't get the impression that they're in danger of going bankrupt within the next year, and a lot can happen in a year. I guess I just have more confidence that they are actively working on it and have the talent to figure this out before it's too late.
    - wpietri 2y ago
      Oh, I certainly believe they're talented at creating software and products. But those talents aren't well correlated with building businesses. If anything, I think it's negatively correlated. I hope they make it, though!

pfraze 2y ago

Toss it on the pile

wpietri 2y ago
That is a pretty glib response, and disappointing in that you aren't grappling with the negative externalities of this approach. I also think the reflexive dismissiveness is a sign that Bluesky is not really taking the problem seriously, even internally. Which is exactly what I'd expect from the external behavior. And I get it! Building products is way more fun than building businesses. But as somebody who has put a number of years into things that turned out to be unsustainable, I encourage all startup people to at least try to avoid the "me sowing/me reaping" ride.
- pfraze 2y ago
  I didn’t mean to come off as dismissive, really I was trying to voice that part which we’ve both been through, the endless stack of existential concerns that you have to get comfortable with in this job. I’m actually quite acutely concerned about revenue and spending a fair amount of my time preparing for our answer; I’m just not at liberty to share our plans yet, so I went for the shorter response. I know you’re concerned. I hope we find a good answer!
  - wpietri 2y ago
    Thanks! I hope you do too. Good luck in your search!

xelamonster 2y ago

Twitter launched in 2006 and didn't turn a profit until 2018. They're not making money now either and don't show any signs of stopping, so I agree it needs to happen at some point but I'm not convinced it's an immediate existential threat.

wpietri 2y ago
You're conflating being sustainable with turning a profit. I don't much care if Bluesky is ever profitable, but it sounds like it's pretty far away from being sustainable. I think Twitter is a bad example in a few other ways. At the time, Twitter was a pioneer, so on reason they were burning money was to figure out the landscape. That landscape is pretty well known now, and the experience of Bluesky is not wildly different than Twitter was a decade ago. Another is that Bluesky claims the aren't going for the Twitter- and Facebook-proven revenue model of ads, so we can't use Twitter's success to say much about Bluesky. But the biggest reason it's a bad example is that Twitter shows what happens when you're not sustainable on your own. Their original owners, VCs, pushed them to monetize through ads. Later, different investors kept pushing for more revenue, causing a lot of flailing inside Twitter without much success. (E.g., Vine's rise and fall, or when Twitter tried streaming NFL games.) And most recently, of course, Twitter's new owner gives a good example of why one doesn't want to be too dependent on outside money over the long haul.
- xelamonster 2y ago
  Fair points. Still--and I'm no financial expert and haven't looked at any data so maybe I'm wrong--I don't get the impression that they're in danger of going bankrupt within the next year, and a lot can happen in a year. I guess I just have more confidence that they are actively working on it and have the talent to figure this out before it's too late.
  - wpietri 2y ago
    Oh, I certainly believe they're talented at creating software and products. But those talents aren't well correlated with building businesses. If anything, I think it's negatively correlated. I hope they make it, though!