Socializing

How Will We Read?

Fri, 12 Mar 2010 06:58:47 -0600

According to Homer, first you get the sugar then you get the power. He may be right, but as we also learned from PSAs during Reading Rainbow commercials - knowledge is power.

I still get the print edition of the WSJ which is like a morning stroll through the news. The editors hold your hand and guide you. I like that and it’s well worth the hard earned dollars I spend on it. That being said, google reader is changing the way I consume information. I can get hundreds of knowls (not Beyonce) in bite size pieces, but can also choose what to read and digest. However, like any buffet one can over-eat.

I hope google or another startup will help curate our google reader by auto populating stories useful to us based on our social profiles. That’s a story I’d like to read.

Wisdom from Warren Buffett (as heard first hand and edited by...

Sun, 07 Mar 2010 14:43:49 -0600

Wisdom from Warren Buffett (as heard first hand and edited by @mbaconsultant):

Leadership: Happiness and good habits breed the same in others. People want to follow charitable, helpful leaders who give credit to others.

Investing: Invest in a business that an idiot could run and the owners are passionate about.

Marketing: Winning share of mind leads to winning share of dollar.

Business Ethics (“the newspaper test”): Make sure you’d be proud for you family to read anything that you’ve done that gets reported on the front page of the paper

America: Ingenuity, ambition and innovation have not died and make the country sure to succeed.

Happiness: Success is getting what you want. Happiness is wanting what you get.

TEDxATX Yesterday I had the pleasure of joining @joshdilworth,...

Sun, 21 Feb 2010 14:03:15 -0600

TEDxATX

Yesterday I had the pleasure of joining @joshdilworth, @mickmillsap, @eugeneaustin, @bmenell, @jeffdachis, among few lucky others, in attending Austin’s first TEDx conference. Although there was a “no tweet” policy, McCombs sponsored a live stream of the event for all to see and hear. The speakers and performers remained a mystery until the day of the event which made some nervous, but was exciting to me. When was the last time you went into something not knowing what to expect? In the end, all were impressive and some were great.

The Greats:

Doug Ulman - I had the pleasure of meeting Doug recently, who gave me and a small group of ADLers a tour of Livestrong HQ. Doug is incredibly passionate and is doing amazing things for those battling cancer. Although TEDxATX’s theme was “Play Big”, Doug impressed on us that small is the new big. I was shocked by one thing that he said, which was that there will not be a cure for cancer; however, if we all give, we will all profit. “Non-profit” is a misnomer.

Steve Tomlinson - Steve, a professor at Acton MBA, told us to not discard our passions. The only thing we should discard is the traditional notion of a career. We don’t need one, we just need a calling, which is where a passion meets a need. Lead with what you love and don’t blink.

Richard Garriott - He’s been to space. He is one of only 7 private citizens who can say that, and the other 6 are Russian oligarchs. His father was also an astronaut, making him the only second generation space traveler in history. He was probably the biggest “rock star” at the event and is a true visionary. His speech can be summed up with one phrase - it’s not rocket science anymore. Start planning your vacation…to space.

The Best of the Rest:

Rip Esselstyn preached a plant-based diet and informed us that only 12% of the average American’s diet is plant-based, and half that is french fries!

Chris Shipley told us to forget about the Fortune 100 and think about the Fortune 500,000. The next great innovations will come from that group.

Janet Maykus, a theologist, asked us to play big by listening to the people in our lives. She said the average number of friends has decreased from 3 to 2. facebook friends are presumably not factored in to that research…

Mark Rolston asked us if we’d trade an eye for a computerized one, like the Terminator. He said social norms are changing and that we will eventually interact seamlessly with technology, a la Minority Report.

John Pointer - Hopefully they will post a video of his performance at TEDx, because it was amazing.

DILBERT DOES IT AGAIN I am lucky to work with a lot of startups...

Fri, 19 Feb 2010 09:18:00 -0600

DILBERT DOES IT AGAIN

I am lucky to work with a lot of startups across many different industries that are attempting to solve a variety of pain points, both big and small. Through these interactions and having seen a few life cycles, I have changed my outlook over the 5 or so years I’ve been in the startup community as to what businesses I find interesting. My money is on startups that are trying to do one of two things: (1) changing the paradigm of an existing business (usually a big business with slow moving participants) (e.g. Infochimps - creating an online marketplace for data that will appeal to businesses, academics and individuals) or (2) filling a void (which may or may not be a short term play) (e.g. Nutshell Mail - email-based web account overload management). I like these models because with (1)’s you can attract venture capital and really hit it big (think Amazon), and with (2)’s you can make a lot of money in a short period of time, either by charging for your service or getting acquired (think xobni). Obviously these have their risks, with (1)’s the risk is failure (think Webvan), and with (2)’s time is your enemy - if you are making money the space will get crowded and someone may solve the problem better than you or you will eventually be outdated (think redbox). The worst thing you can do is be a me-too business. That is what the Dilbert cartoon is referring to, and that is where veoh failed. At least they went big. Don’t be just another me-too iPhone, twitter or web app, unless you are really filling a void and someone will pay big for you to solve their pain (think salesforce).

"If you are not embarrassed by the first version of your product, you’ve launched too late."

Thu, 19 Nov 2009 10:15:42 -0600

“If you are not embarrassed by the first version of your product, you’ve launched too late.”

- This quote by Reid Hoffman, founder of Linkedin, has an equal number of supporters as it does dissidents. There are many examples of startups who took this advice only to be ushered more quickly to the deadpool. To me, this is OK. I am a believer in Mike Maples Jr.’s philosophy to fail fast and fail cheap. That is our only downside risk with 2taps, a simple bookmark app for the mobile web. That being said, in the face of failure, it is important to recover intelligently. The user knows best and will let you know what features should be on the roadmap and in what order. If you can take that information and execute on it, your users will reward you. (They will also forgive you if you are open and maintain a dialogue. Participation chains keep the conversation going.) In short, have the cojones to release fast and iterate often.

I saw this cartoon thanks to a tweet from the folks at...

Wed, 28 Oct 2009 13:29:06 -0500

I saw this cartoon thanks to a tweet from the folks at http://www.economistsdoitwithmodels.com/. This pretty much sums up what I am talking about here and here. Don’t be the “egg carton”, be the creative environment that values the individual. Just because you have a game room doesn’t mean you have a great company culture. Follow these tips for startups.

"You don’t have to read a book to have an opinion."

Sun, 18 Oct 2009 08:22:36 -0500

“You don’t have to read a book to have an opinion.”

- Tom Townsend from the 80’s teen angst film set in Manhattan’s UES (an especially interesting film when juxtaposed against John Hughes’ typical setting in suburban Chicago), Metropolitan, prefers good literary criticism because you get both the novelists’ ideas as well as the critics’ thinking. In this post I am going to provide my thoughts on a book I have only read the review for: Freedom, Inc.

The reviewer boils it down to the following theme: corporations’ rigid, top-down management style too often makes workers miserable, stifles innovation and, not least, leads to economic distress for employees and stockholders alike.

Reading this sentence made me wonder which of those factors are causes and which are effects. Productivity is a function of motivation which is a function of incentives. When there are no incentives, or worse, negative incentives, people will not be motivated to work hard. Productivity will thus decrease and profitability will soon follow, eventually making stockholders “distressed”.

On a related point, I recently had an interesting conversation with Josh J-D about how to motivate and cultivate stars, a topic I’ve previously covered here. One take-away was that if you treat your employees like people, and not just resources, that goes a long way towards building loyalty. Bringing employees up in an organization reduces turnover and provides incentives—promotions—which leads to increased productivity and, in some cases, innovation. [Remember: not everyone can be a star, cash cows are OK too.]

According to the reviewer the book talks about two kinds of companies: ’Comment’ in French, or ‘how’ companies, and ‘pourquoi,’ or ‘why’ companies. What about ‘if’ companies? Companies that give their people a long leash and the opportunity to innovate (not only to sink or swim) will build a “can-do” culture. Those companies will see their people stick around when the economy improves. The ones that don’t will see an exodus. That time is coming soon.

Be thoughtful about your pricing strategy.

Sat, 19 Sep 2009 17:58:00 -0500

I remember a year or so ago asking a founder of an Austin startup what he was going to charge for his SaaS product (which is launching at DEMO) and he said $X.00/month. When I asked him how he came to that number, he replied “that’s what we think the market will pay”. A couple thoughts: (1) don’t “think”…survey, (2) don’t leave money on the table unless you are competing on price, and (3) if you are solving a pain point, price your product or service accordingly.

I would only go to market with one of 3 prices: free, just below market or at a premium to the market. This is an over-simplification and there are many difficulties to making the first two work as price wars are incredibly costly, but if you are anywhere in between the bottom and top, you need a huge marketing budget to educate the consumer why you are worth the price you are charging.

Rupert Murdoch has been struggling with pricing his prized acquisition, the WSJ, which I subscribe to (in print only) and read daily. They clearly have a problem segmenting with at least 5 different rates: online only ($2/week), print only ($2.30/week), print and online ($3.00), mobile only ($2/week) and mobile premium ($1/week if you subscribe to print or online). They need to simplify this as it causes a lot of customer confusion and is hard to reconcile. My sub recently came up for renewal and they tried to triple the price on me. When I didn’t renew, they sent me 2 letters in the mail, each offering a slightly discounted rate to their original proposal. They ultimately retained me as a customer since I googled a rate in line with what I was previously paying but why play the game? I am less happy with the service and they left money on the table. It pays to have a thoughtful (and consistent) pricing strategy.

Brett Hurt Keynote Speech at Startup Meetup at UT Brett Hurt,...

Tue, 15 Sep 2009 20:31:00 -0500

Brett Hurt Keynote Speech at Startup Meetup at UT

Brett Hurt, CEO of BazaarVoice (my girlfriend’s employer), gave an incredibly motivating speech at the first annual McCombs Startup Meetup. Brett got some laughs by saying that his precocious programming ability was both a blessing and a curse. It was a blessing because he found his passion early but a curse because he was always getting beat up.

Bazaarvoice connects customers to one another in ways that drive measurable results – what they call “social commerce”. Brett says their biggest sales hurdle is retailers’ fear of negative reviews. I imagine the response is that if they use Bazaarvoice they can figure out which products need to be fixed or pulled. User generated content is king and the “voice of the market” should be heard, aggregated and analyzed.

Bazaarvoice raised $25 million in venture capital including from Austin Ventures and only needed $8.5 million of it to get to profitability. They aspire to go public in the next 18 months and are well on their way to 400 employees. This is an Austin success story and I am proud that Elizabeth is a part of it. Brett inspired the crowd to want to be a part of it too because of their unwavering focus on culture. It’s a rocket ship and every team member is on board. They have a winner culture and Brett allowed that “there is nothing more de-motivating than having B players on an A team.” I couldn’t agree more.

Capital Factory Demo Day Today I attended the demo of Capital...

Wed, 09 Sep 2009 20:36:00 -0500

Capital Factory Demo Day

Today I attended the demo of Capital Factory’s first crop of incubated startups: Hourville, PetsMD, Famigo, Cubit Planning, and Sparefoot. I was surprised by the quality of attendees as all of the top Austin VCs were in attendance (pictured are Tom Ball - AV, Bill Wood - Silverton and Rudy Garza - G51) and some from the Valley as well, including Battery Ventures.

Thinktiv, a new venture accelerator, presented Mike Maples, who blew the roof off. Mike was an early investor in some companies you might have heard of: Twitter, BazaarVoice, SolarWinds and Digg to name a few. Mike was nearly brought to tears when talking about the founders he has worked with over the years that “didn’t forget him” when they made it big. It was a very genuine moment and one I will remember.

Mike said tech is a winner-take-all-business and you want to be the winner. Second place is first loser. Invest in “Thunder Lizards” which have a few common traits: 1) they have a complete team with a visionary leader, 2) they try to be awesome with no Plan B, and 3) they devour competitors and unseat incumbents. Mike said in tech, it isn’t an 80/20 rule but a 90/10 rule or greater. Since the invention of the IBM PC, 5% of tech IPOs have created 92% of the wealth.

My favorite slide was “Maples’ Law” which asserts that you will spend whatever you raise in 18 months regardless of the amount. I met the founder of a recently funded AV company who said they were going to make it last at least 20 months, which I found funny, because I didn’t sense any irony. 18 against 20 isn’t all that different. Mike knows what he’s talking about.

Thoughts about the presentations:

PetsMD: WebMD for pets. I like the business as the emotional connection to pets makes people spend lots of money on them. I didn’t love the pitch - they will need an outside CEO, and soon.

Famigo: My buddies run this company and I think they get the market and are going after it with reckless abandon (which is a good thing). One of the VC panelists said they need to figure out if they are going after consumers or developers, and I agree. They will figure it out and they will succeed.

Cubit Planning: If the presenters can’t explain what they do in plain English, I sure can’t. Their website says they automate data gathering for NEPA documents. I liked how Rudy called b.s. on their sizing of the market.

Hourville: Similar to elance, which is a portfolio company of Focus Ventures. I like the idea of a freelancer business platform. This is truly an “execution play” in every sense. They should tie in to linkedin API or ebay so they don’t have to start from a scratch from a trusted source standpoint.

Sparefoot: Audience award winner. These guys nailed it. They are an inventory aggregator (think hotels.com for storage) and have a super simple site and model. I like it a lot and apparently so did Bill Wood. They announced a Series A from Silverton which is particularly impressive because its their first consumer internet portfolio company.

Thoughts about the VC panel:

BIll Wood: Focus on 2 digit (#millions) exit and be super capital efficient. Bill says he thinks about who the acquiror is before he invests.

Tom Ball: Be capital efficient put know when to step on the gas. Culture is a sustainable competitive advantage. He was talking about his experience with BazaarVoice, which has taken great strides to maintain its identity even as it approaches 500 employees over the next year.

Rudy Garza: Quoted DKR (not surprising seeing as he’s President of Texas Exes) and says luck is what happens when preparation meets opportunity. There was a lot of discussion among the panel about this, but they generally agreed that somewhere between 50-80% is in the entrepreneur’s control.

Mike Maples: Austin has a great ability to ego ratio. Yes!

All in all, great day for the Austin startup community. Thanks Sam Decker, Josh Baer, Bryan Menell and the rest of the Capital Factory team.

Keep it simple stupid.

Thu, 03 Sep 2009 20:49:00 -0500

Keep it simple stupid.:

Readers of this blog know I preach simplicity. Some of the great companies I work with (popscreen, infochimps, prefinery and nutshellmail to name a few) have developed sophisticated solutions with intuitive and attractive UIs. Their special sauce is not necessarily the underlying technology (though some have filed provisionals and/or patent applications) but rather their “human” approach to resolving real pain points.

With the amazing speed at which the world is a changin’, there is a great need to streamline information.

Very soon I’m going to put my money where my mouth is. Stay tuned and follow us on twitter @2taps, a little web app I’m developing for fun with Jordan Rex.

TheFunded "Standard" Term Sheet

Sat, 29 Aug 2009 12:57:47 -0500

There has been a lot of blog chatter about TheFunded’s form term sheet, including here, here and here. The sentiment from VCs has been generally positive with some saying that a return to balance for founders has been a long time coming. The WSJ queried whether VCs would put their money where their mouths are. I would be interested in your opinion. I think the term sheet makes too many assumptions and is unlikely to be used as a form.

I wonder what the standard startup looks like that would receive this term sheet as its currently drafted? In my admittedly limited experience (having worked on 20 or so venture financings), I just can’t imagine a VC saying, “we want to invest in this standard startup, let’s use TheFunded form term sheet”. That’s just not how it works. A term sheet consists of many levers, or terms, used to satisfy an investor’s risk/reward investing requirements. For instance, if the company is asking for a valuation that an investor perceives as high, maybe they give and make up the risk with a greater liquidation preference. The point being, these deals aren’t standard.

Some comments on the term sheet: Why did they include registration rights? It is unlikely those will come into play, and for a “simple” seed term sheet, seem superfluous. The net-net is most founders would be happy to receive a term sheet with a 1x non-participating preference and full acceleration upon a change of control while maintaining board control, too bad few are going to receive one.

Y Combinator’s RFP for Startups Cleverly Called...

Tue, 18 Aug 2009 09:54:00 -0500

Y Combinator’s RFP for Startups Cleverly Called ‘RFS’

Drop what you are doing and start thinking about how to fix the broken journalism model. That’s essentially what Y Combinator is asking startups to do. I hope they fund a micropayment startup or something of that nature and not a crowdsourced journalism concept. The most disturbing part of the RFP is the following request: Groups applying to work on this idea should include at least one writer who can write well and rapidly about any topic. Why not leave the writing aspect to professional journalists? The problem is certainly not the writing, but the monetization aspect. I hope they are not searching for a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist.

Facebook/friendfeed Thoughts

Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:06:00 -0500

I haven’t been able to get my hands on the purchase agreement but the WSJ reported the $50m purchase price was $15m in cash and the rest in equity installments that vest over time. This is a similar mix to what was offered to Twitter earlier this year. Twitter rejected Facebook’s advances because they didnt want a bunch of illiquid securities they would have to pay taxes on.

If the equity installments are tied to friendfeed’s founders and other employees continued employment with Facebook, then the stock might be taxable as compensation income (although the individual’s basis would carry over subject to Section 83) as opposed to installment payments for the assets. If that’s the case I imagine the $15m in cash was to cash out the VC (Benchmark) and pay the taxes.

Please write in the comments if you have seen any of these details posted somewhere. This doesn’t seem like the most tax efficient structure if the assets of friendfeed were capital assets held longer than a year.

UPDATE 8/14

VentureBeat is reporting that the deal was for $47.5m and that Benchmark took stock in the deal. That lends some support that the cash might have been to pay taxes.

Teens Don't Tweet

Thu, 06 Aug 2009 08:58:18 -0500

The *groundbreaking* report released by Morgan Stanley this week highlighting teenagers’ use of technology was actually pretty predictable. Teens don’t tweet or read the newspaper. Yawn. I am often told by my colleagues that I’m the only person they know who still gets a paper (the WSJ), so its not surprising that younger generations get their news online (if they even read it at all). Also, most articles I’ve read have quoted the following from the report, “Teenagers don’t use Twitter [because] they realize that their ‘tweets’ are pointless as no one is viewing their profile.” Nobody is viewing their profiles because they are probably tweeting about inane things that nobody cares to read, but the critical and overlooked point is that teens don’t tweet because anyone can view them! The reason they use Facebook is because of the privacy settings and controls, which they can use to limit what their parents, teachers, etc. can see. Twitter is an open community and thus not attractive to teens who want privacy. Twitter can of course add more advanced privacy settings (which I imagine they will) but the value proposition is in their open searchable community.

“The Shack” Finds a Way to Stay Relevant After 88...

Mon, 03 Aug 2009 21:07:00 -0500

“The Shack” Finds a Way to Stay Relevant

After 88 years Radio Shack is losing the *Radio*. Most of the blogs covering the rebranding have decried it (see TechCrunch’s piece titled “Why? Why!?”). I am somewhat agnostic as to the change, though I think its funny they are taking a page from Yum Brands’ Pizza Hut strategy (now just “The Hut”). Name changes are tough to pull off since you risk losing some brand awareness, but I believe The Shack has the potential to not only survive, but thrive. Fred Wilson posted today about how surprised he was to see a bunch of people using pay phones at the airport. The take away is the fact that most technologies live on well after TechCrunch has labeled them has-beens (you may recall FourSquare was the “Twitter Killer” at this year’s SXSW - Twitter has 50 million users, how many does FourSquare have??). Fred noted that technologies take a long time to die unless they are rendered completely useless like analog TVs. Guess who made a killing on the death of analog TVs? Radio Shack pulled in $70 million in Q1 and $50 million in Q2 in digital converter box sales. Not bad.

Harry at Technologizer somehow got the following placed prominently in the TC article: “Its stores are tiny by the standards of the past few decades of American retailing, and therefore can’t compete with the product selection at rivals. (The TV section at my nearest Costco is larger than my local RadioShack.)” Even though Idiocracy predicts the future of retailing is Costco, I don’t. You can get most items shipped. Its the convenience items that people will go to retailers for. Things like converter boxes (nobody is going to go a day without TV), cell phones (when you lose one, you need a new one) and the connectors and gadgets they are famous for (leaving on a trip to Asia tomorrow?). The Shack needs to bridge the gap between old and new technology, stay with their small store concept and carry electronic necessities. That’s a recipe for success even Lance Armstrong can get behind.

Sunday Thoughts

Sun, 02 Aug 2009 14:36:29 -0500

Social media startups are REITS: A REIT is a company dedicated to owning, and in most cases, operating income-producing real estate. Back in the early days of social sites, the only real estate being used to generate revenue was side bars and banner ads. In the ‘now’ economy it is important to think of your site like a mall operator. What spaces and subdomains might be available to license to other startups or retailers to add additional revenue streams. The sites that think like this will be much more attractive to investors and potential suitors.

Finding friends: Social sites should leverage Twitter, LinkedIn and Facebook APIs to permit users to find additional friends from those sites. Using Gmail (or AIM, or worse - Yahoo!) isn’t effective any more since more and more people are communicating and collaborating from social networking sites, not just email.

(Un)classes: (un)classes is a social site that looks to bring its users together in the real world. The site allows users to create and host classes on any subject matter which other users can then search, sign up for and attend. They can be free, or for a fee. Think local —> (un)classes should open up their API to how-to video sites to add a geo-specific revenue stream to instructors on those sites.

Tweet Your People Right Whether or not you believe the whole is...

Sat, 25 Jul 2009 14:06:00 -0500

Tweet Your People Right

Whether or not you believe the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, when push comes to shove all that matters is an organization’s stars and cash cows. Cash cows, however, can become obsolete, whereas stars will always shine. The classic BCG Matrix as reproduced above (sans legend) provides guidance for organizations as to how to distribute their resources. The traditional approach is milk your cash cows and use the proceeds to fund stars and question marks. Question marks generally have great potential but are unproven. Once it becomes clear whether a question mark is a star or a dog (its bark was bigger than its bite), an organization should fund the stars and divest the dogs. Too many organizations keep their dogs when they should put them to sleep. This hogs resources which should be devoted to the stars.

The BCG matrix can be applied to any organization because resources are always limited. GE found out the hard way that if you hold on to your dogs it can poison your cash cows and take resources away from the stars which are critical to growth. This model can also be applied to professional services firms. Some individuals within such firms have more potential (to produce revenue) than others. The firm’s resources should therefore be more heavily weighted towards those individuals. The question marks (new hires, junior team members) should be given a long enough leash to sink or swim. Under-performers should be summarily terminated, cash cows (hard workers without the desire/ability to bring in new business) should be given just enough resources to continue producing, and stars should be given whatever they require to shine as they are the lifeblood of any organization.

Hat tip to AdvertisingAge, whose recent article titled How to Turn High-Profile Employees Into Brand Ambassadors hits on the point above. The article highlights Fortune 500 companies that are tapping into the personal brands of their most inspiring, effusive and public employees. In fact, rather than being viewed as renegade moonlighters, these individuals are being given the tools to drum up new business and build brand awareness. Here is one gem: “Hiring employees who have established personal brands will help companies immediately inherit value and relevance in a crowded market and may lead to quicker results in meeting growth objectives.” Another take-away is to tweet your people right and foster employee use of social networks to leverage both their individual brand and that of the organization.

A recent study found that the brands most engaged in social media are also experiencing higher financial success rates than their stone-age competitors. Remember, whether you like or not, individuals within your organization are brands in and of themselves. Think of your organization as a mutual fund holding a lot of individual employees. The higher the value of those individuals, the greater the value of the fund. Don’t let dogs dilute the value.

Are we living in a "FREE" economy?

Sun, 19 Jul 2009 19:06:00 -0500

I downloaded Chris Anderson’s “Free” (for free) but haven’t yet turned the first digital page. I look forward to reading Anderson’s thoughts on the future where prices are driven to zero as productivity increases and input prices decrease at an exponential rate. Anderson is testing his hypothesis by providing his new book, the hardback version of which will fetch upwards of $25, gratis through Amazon’s Kindle service. It will be interesting to see retail sales since it can be downloaded legally for free. Samples have always been an important marketing and sales tool, but Chris’s book is not a sample - its the full monty. Chris’s model is more akin to bands who play free concerts in order to sell records, paraphernalia, and tickets to future bookings. Chris can make just as much money or more from the free press (pun intended) garnered from such benevolence. For instance, I am sure sales of his *revolutionary* bestseller “The Long Tail” are going through the roof. Remember, however, that there is a huge chasm between free and $0.99 whereas additional price increases have less marginal effect on demand. Tapulous COO and co-founder Andrew Lacy said install rates for one of its free gaming apps dropped 95 percent overnight when the company started charging 99 cents for it. So if you are going try this tactic you have to go all the way, but make sure you have a monetization plan. If its free with no plan, you will not make any money. That won’t work now or in any future.

* As Amazon calls it in their editorial review of “Free”. They are trying to sell the bundle of “Free” and the “Long Tail” for $39.11 which is 5% off the retail prices of the two. I imagine the code just says where an author has multiple books for sale, bundle whatever item the user is viewing with the most similar or best selling item from the same author and knock 5% off. They clearly need to re-write the algorithm when one of the products is being given away for free.

"News is what somebody somewhere wants to suppress; all the rest is advertising."

Sat, 18 Jul 2009 12:36:21 -0500

“News is what somebody somewhere wants to suppress; all the rest is advertising.”

- Great quote from an unlikely source: Michael Arrington paraphrasing news baron Alfred Harmsworth. What is cleverly being referred to as “Twittergate” has been the subject of much blog chatter. After the most embarrassing of security breaches (Twitter’s password was “password”), Twitter’s confidential information leaked on the web. TechCrunch scooped the breach and got its hands on copies of the files. Relying on the first amendment, precedent and an alleged “green light” from Twitter, they published the files for the world to see. Good for network security professionals, not so good for Twitter. The files contained various meeting minutes, financial projections and some insight on Twitter’s strategy to remain a private company and its relationships with Facebook (viewed as threat), GOOG (viewed as suitor), and MSFT (viewed as irrelevant). Silicon Alley Insider summarizes the findings nicely here. Twitter’s legal threats are not helping from a PR perspective. Twitter has been the darling of the press for some time now (getting a lot of free advertising as Mr. Harmsworth would note), but they are finding out what the other side looks like, and it ain’t pretty.