3 ms·
Wow, a valuation of several billion? What a joke. They have no revenue stream, they're just giving away search for free. I don't see how this startup could e
by tsally 17y ago
Wow, a valuation of several billion? What a joke. They have no revenue stream, they're just giving away search for free. I don't see how this startup could ever be successful.
- NathanKP 17y agoYour point is obvious: Twitter could very well be the next Google. But back to the original article, all I have to say is that Google sure has changed a lot since those early days. ;)
- igorgue 17y agoIs there a "next Google", I don't think so
- adrinavarro 17y agoNobody thought so when Google started!
- unalone 17y agoNot a "next Google", but certainly another site that'll be as big as Google. As I've said before, my money is on Facebook. People my age use it like it's the Internet. To them, that's all there is. And they click its ads.
- dcurtis 17y agoFacebook is already there. What makes you think they click ads? I've heard the opposite.
- unalone 17y agoI don't think they click ads, I see friends checking out ads all the time. Particularly music ads. I'd imagine that it's not just a small-time thing, considering they're in the green now, but perhaps that money's coming from something else. Their ads are also a lot better than they were a year ago. They target more effectively, within reason. (My ads are screwy since I list no information about myself, but they used to try and sell me Arrested Development t-shirts and they almost succeeded on multiple occasions.)
- rokhayakebe 17y agoAlmost selling is not selling.
- unalone 17y agoI clicked the ad. I didn't buy the shirts, because last year was the year I grew out of buying t-shirts.
- andreyf 17y agoTwitter could very well be the next Google Even in 1998, Google provided a lot more value to users than Twitter ever will.
- indiejade 17y agoI think the point is to provide value to the investors. In either case, I disagree; Twitter provides all kinds of valuable information to very specific groups of people.
- andeka 17y agoNot to mention the problem of search has already been mostly solved by yahoo ,webcrawler, and altavista. It's good enough.
- maukdaddy 17y agoYou forgot hotbot!
- timr 17y agoThe problem with your comment is that nine out of ten times, it's actually correct.
- tsally 17y agoActually, I would imagine the odds are worse than that. Not all startups give away their product for free, and I'm guessing the failure rate is higher for those that do. But I don't see the problem with that. Software companies that want to change the world have to be free, at least initially. If somebody wants to swing for the fences, I don't think anybody should stop them. It's not the business model I would choose, but I certainly admire those that do.
- samg 17y ago"Software companies that want to change the world have to be free, at least initially." Why? I can think of plenty of software companies that changed the world with a paid product (Oracle, Microsoft, etc.)
- diN0bot 17y agofor some reason i feel more fuzzy inside thinking about the companies that change the world with free software, free as an ideal, with $$ secondary and on a sliding scale. i mean fuzzy as a human being rather than investor (although investors are also human beings).