3 ms·

It baffles me that they're taking this long. Quite honestly, if I had invested in Twitter, I'd be on them like white on rice to get /something/ out business-wi

by daeken 17y ago

It baffles me that they're taking this long. Quite honestly, if I had invested in Twitter, I'd be on them like white on rice to get /something/ out business-wise. It doesn't have to be good, it just has to bring something to the table and set the stage for future money-making. Perhaps we simply have ideological differences, but I can't help but think they just really don't see the importance of moving quickly on this.

sachinag 17y ago
You remember earlier today how Amazon just put several startups out of business with their auto scaling and whatnot? Here's the lesson: if you own the platform, and the platform's growing, grow the platform as big as you can because you can always add tools for monetization later. When you add tools, they become the default. (example: Facebook Photos.) The mindset is totally different when you're growing a VC-backed company. The rational thing to do when you have capital to spare is to go for growth - it's just not the same as bootstrapping with a back pocket full of cash. You run the business differently. Plus, the minute you start making money, the metrics totally change. What's the metric Twitter investors use right now? Tweet views[1]. The only example I can think of that failed was eBay's BillPay and it turns out that PayPal was a platform with its own viral nature, not a mere feature (oh, and they burned $180 million before they hit breakeven[2]). [1]http://www.businessinsider.com/what-twitter-really-wants-from-google-2009-4 http://www.businessinsider.com/what-twitter-really-wants-fro... [2] http://www.pehub.com/40062/peter-thiel-on-valleywag-its-the-silicon-valley-equivalent-of-al-qaeda/ http://www.pehub.com/40062/peter-thiel-on-valleywag-its-the-...
- daeken 17y ago
  I think the biggest problem with this view is that it assumes users will stick around if things stay the same. Twitter may be growing at impressive rates right now, but will that continue, and will the users actually continue using the service? I simply can't see the majority of these users sticking around without there being more to it, in the form of value-added services. In addition, there are many cases of the "grow the platform" idea failing: Myspace and Youtube are damn good ones. Yes, they both have lots and lots of users, but where are they in terms of profit? Last I heard, they're both operating at a significant loss, although I haven't seen numbers for Myspace in a while.

by daeken 17y ago

sachinag 17y ago

You remember earlier today how Amazon just put several startups out of business with their auto scaling and whatnot? Here's the lesson: if you own the platform, and the platform's growing, grow the platform as big as you can because you can always add tools for monetization later. When you add tools, they become the default. (example: Facebook Photos.) The mindset is totally different when you're growing a VC-backed company. The rational thing to do when you have capital to spare is to go for growth - it's just not the same as bootstrapping with a back pocket full of cash. You run the business differently. Plus, the minute you start making money, the metrics totally change. What's the metric Twitter investors use right now? Tweet views[1]. The only example I can think of that failed was eBay's BillPay and it turns out that PayPal was a platform with its own viral nature, not a mere feature (oh, and they burned $180 million before they hit breakeven[2]). [1]http://www.businessinsider.com/what-twitter-really-wants-from-google-2009-4 http://www.businessinsider.com/what-twitter-really-wants-fro... [2] http://www.pehub.com/40062/peter-thiel-on-valleywag-its-the-silicon-valley-equivalent-of-al-qaeda/ http://www.pehub.com/40062/peter-thiel-on-valleywag-its-the-...

daeken 17y ago
I think the biggest problem with this view is that it assumes users will stick around if things stay the same. Twitter may be growing at impressive rates right now, but will that continue, and will the users actually continue using the service? I simply can't see the majority of these users sticking around without there being more to it, in the form of value-added services. In addition, there are many cases of the "grow the platform" idea failing: Myspace and Youtube are damn good ones. Yes, they both have lots and lots of users, but where are they in terms of profit? Last I heard, they're both operating at a significant loss, although I haven't seen numbers for Myspace in a while.