What is Digg?19 Comments
- faramarzhashemi, on 12/10/2007, -2/+8The bottom line is, if you can't justify why you need VC money, you don't need it. so many 'web' self-entitled entrepreneurs today seek capital as if it's the required task to do.
VC's on the other hand, think they are entitled almost always to majority ownership. they have different sets of agenda, which, along with their controlling stake, can easily dissemble the vision of the entrepreneur.
As a consumer, I will say this, Bring value to my life and you will have my loyalty (which is attached to my wallet). - konysony, on 12/10/2007, -0/+3Thats exactly true. The ***** "web 2.0" age where everyone gives ***** away for free - ruins the web economy. Some people will spend time and effort building real applications, while others will slap-stick few gradients, buzz words, large bright fonts together with a URL friendly URL call it GAZOOBLE and give it away for free. Total insanity.
- GeneralKickass, on 12/11/2007, -0/+2OMG The Google Apps ad got thru Adblock!
- fkr3, on 12/10/2007, -0/+1Bandwidth costs for digg are irrelevant compared to the dozen+ people it apparently takes to run this site and the 100+ servers it apparently needs to provide it.
- inactive, on 12/10/2007, -0/+1not with bandwidth costs, I wouldn't think.
- HonoredMule, on 12/11/2007, -0/+1Exactly. Computers and bandwidth cost nothing compared to people and salaries.
- inactive, on 12/10/2007, -4/+5What the hell is the deal with all this "entrepreneur" crap on here? For goodness sake everyone, you are NOT going to start a successful business by copying others or listening to anyone that spouts random rubbish like this.
The successful ones are those who just get on with it and ignore all this crap. Why are diggers so obsessed with it? - Jack9, on 12/10/2007, -0/+1marked inaccurate. this is garbage.
- reeder, on 12/10/2007, -4/+5I'm a former dejanews.com/deja.com/Google Groups Employee, and let me tell you that nothing has changed. Venture Capitalists have to make the decision to trust 1st, give money 2nd, and get the hell out of the way 3rd.
Nothing worse than having a 2-digit typer telling you how to run a website. Except maybe the current administration. - dreesemonkey, on 12/10/2007, -1/+2Yea how dare those investors not hand out money willy nilly to web startups that don't turn profits, and at best just carve out a niche and establish a name for itself. I would not be surprised if some of the most popular websites aren't profitable. I know facebook isn't 'making money', they just have a recognizable brand. Does digg even turn a profit?
- inactive, on 12/10/2007, -0/+1that is my point
- GoatMonkey2112, on 12/10/2007, -0/+1The lowest price is something unique.
- 0crabby0, on 12/10/2007, -1/+1"Old Guard" entrepreneurs not only worry about positive double-digit comp for this year, but how the business is going to do next year.
Will trends stay the same? Or will they change.
Venture Capitalist can't control these issues, so they readily discard these worries.
Venture Capitalist = Moderate to substantial risk - simpleid, on 12/10/2007, -2/+1yea, don't do research or learn others lessons, run yourself in to the ground and go broke! wooo! neiltc13 the billionaire, right right?
- JimPivonka, on 12/11/2007, -1/+0What Google ad? ;-)
It will help to *read* the article, and the comment thread. The thread adds a good deal (omitting a parallel kiddie thread inside it - that one is weird). The article has served to draw out some interesting observations from people who have been involved in start-ups, and who have developed empirically based judgments about the place of VC in start-ups and the merits/demerits of various approaches to capitalizing a new and expanding business. The totality, article and comments, is well worth while for those with any interest at all in such things. - inactive, on 12/10/2007, -8/+5The best thing you can do starting a business is to keep it simple. Too often I want something and I can't just find the basic product that I want. I can find 100 different versions that have all kinds of enhancements, special technology, etc. But I am just looking for a basic product at the cheapest price.
Please do not listen to this article the last thing we need is a ton of companies trying to be unique. - ArchieAndrews, on 12/10/2007, -9/+5What, you mean VC's aren't writing 7 figure checks for the old business model:
1. Do something on the internet
2. ???
3. profit
Imagine that... It's almost like they have some kind of "experience" with such a scheme in the past. - fkr3, on 12/10/2007, -11/+5Of course they're shy. Web 2.0's definition of "bold" is to give them the cake, the recipe and a private table to sit at for free. It's a self-perpetuating cycle of stupidity to see who can do the most for the least and with so few real successes that you've got a better chance putting your capitol into a slot machine.
- sum1randum, on 12/10/2007, -8/+2Very interesting post from Clarence Wooten of CollectiveX and ImageCafe... someone who has built 2 successful startups:
December 9th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
Mike,
Incredible post… and timely. As a “old guard” pre 2000 Internet entrepreneur (I founded ImageCafe.com in 1998, it was acquired in Nov. 1999 just before the 2000 bubble burst) I have the benefit of feeling exactly where you are coming from - with one exception. I was never based in Silicon Valley and never had more money then I could wisely spend.
Since founding my latest startup (http://www.CollectiveX.com) in 2006, I have taken a similar approach to the one that you describe for Techcrunch by keeping the team small and not raising VC — despite the fact that other companies in our space (i.e., Ning & KickApps) have raised massive amounts of money. In many ways, I feel that I haven’t been bold enough.
It’s been 18 months since CollectiveX first launched and I feel that we are getting closer to the point where it makes sense to be bold. We are doubling our user-base every 4 months and our revenue model has been proven. Consequently, I am happy that we’ve done it the way we have… however, I can’t say that I would have done it any different than Keith at Edgeio had the funding been available from day one.
So the moral of this rant is… I now see that there is a positive side to being based in the mid Atlantic where early-stage pre $1M run-rate funding is virtually non-existent. However, I would never admit it to any local mid-Atlantic based VC.
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is