Archives For Web 2.0

Steve Rubel: Technorati Intros Smarter Blog Search Feeds

Spam blogging just got a whole lot easier. Why rip a feed or two when you can just get a smart topic feed from Technorati on auto pilot and without the need for an account. OK, so they’re part feeds. Guess what, the parsing part from the link to ripping all the content is actually very easy…and no, I’m not doing it, I’m not a programmer, but I know where to look and I’ve seen it work. Having said that though maybe I should set up a Popurls.com style site, after all they all seem legit trading on links going elsewhere, all nicely on autopilot as well. The sky is the limit topic wise, after all, I’d just run a RSS aggregation plugin for WP pulling a Technorati smart feed on the given topic…tweak it so the template is nice, then presto 🙂

 

Tags:

We are not in a bubble…yet

September 29, 2006 — 1 Comment

Jason Calacanis writes that we are now in a full blown bubble, bubble 2.0 if you like. Far be it for me to not agree with this, after all I’m fairly well known for my general skepticism on well…just about everything, but in this case I don’t concur. Sure, we have bubble like activity, but it’s more like a storm, lots of froth that makes lots of little bubbles, but I still don’t think fundamentaly that, at least investment wise, we are looking at a tech bubble in the same way we did in the late 90s.

Firstly, saying we’re in a bubble because Podshow took $15 million in second round funding is like saying that global warming is upon us because New Orleans was hit by Hurricane Katrina. The single act doesn’t prove the overall proposition, although it may be indicative of things to come.

Secondly, as much as my natural inclination is to think that $15 million going into PodShow is sheer and utter lunacy, I don’t know anything about PodShows current revenues, their business plan(s) or even what they are intending on doing with this money. Neither does Jason Calacanis. One would presume that the second round investors into Podshow have been sold on something…that something has not been disclosed.

Last: there’s still a fundamental difference between Bubble 1.0 and the in theory Bubble 2.0, and that’s what is being delivered. The money flooding into tech in the 90’s was pure speculation: unproven technical ideas, unproven market potential…and generally into firms that hadn’t made it to market yet, and as a consequence had never ever made income..let alone a profit. Todays funding, although some of it (but only a small amount) is going into pure speculative plays, is primarily going into firms with proven products and/ or marketplaces. Sure, I personally don’t see a massive return for all the players in podcasting, but we know that 1. Podcasting works 2. that millions are already listening to podcasts and 3. That the market for podcasts continues to grow. The same holds true for a whole slew of other Web 2.0 plays: we know these ideas work, because in the whole most Web 2.0 companies aren’t actually creating new ideas or new marketplaces, they are actually looking a bettering existing ideas and/ or marketplaces. Short story: the fundamentals are totally different this time.

Big grain of salt now: people are going to get burned investing in Web 2.0. But so do people investing in any marketplace. I can remember reading that something like 85% of all small businesses in Australia fail within 5 years of launch. Here’s my bet, I think the figure will be lower than that in Web 2.0. Having said that, 50% is not an unreasonable presumption, and that’s still a lot of lost money..but it’s better odds than a whole pile of other things in life.

Food for thought.

Tags: , ,

This is nuts. Beyond nuts. Interesting usage figures though, given I’ve read elsewhere lately that the 100 million users figure for MySpace is rubbish due to inactive accounts etc, Reuters claims MySpace has 90 million active users. Amazing, but still a crazy valuation.

The Scoble Show.

Got to say it’s pretty damn good. Scoble avoids the mistakes of many in podcasting by keeping the interviews fairly short and punchy so they don’t drag on (like that horrid podcast he was on with Arrington and Om over at Techcruch the other day). I’ve only watched a few so far (naturally the interview with Jeremy Wright was my first choice) but so far it bides well.

 

Tags:

techcrunch

All of a sudden the previously full feed from Techcrunch has moved to a part feed (click image for larger shot)…is this an accident or a deliberate move? Will Scoble and others who hate part feeds now boycott Techcrunch? Developing… 🙂

Tags: ,

Michael over at the Solostream blog posts that the NY Times is looking for a WordPress developer. As much as it’s nice to know that even a huge MSM company like the NY Times group is using WordPress, the criteria is a bit rough, in particular “2-3 years experience developing and maintaining WordPress blogs”. That would mean you’d have to have started developing for WordPress prior to September 2004. Given WordPress didn’t really take off in a huge way prior to the MT 3.0 launch in mid 2004 it’s pushing things, and even looking at the Whois record for WordPress, the domain was only registered in March 2003…ie, WordPress itself is only 3 1/2 years old! Getting someone with 3 years experience is well….a very big ask indeed 🙂

 

Tags: ,

Techcrunch rips Zecco

September 23, 2006 — 9 Comments

Techcrunch reviews Zecco. WTF? God help us that there’s a startup with a business plan that actually might meet an unmet niche….oh no, because Techcrunch would much rather hype flash in the pan over capitalised and business plan free startups that create solutions for problems that don’t exist.

But probably more seriously here, who at Zecco doesn’t Mike Arrington like? Is there some past history here? after all, given the usual gushing reviews we normally get, this one is cold and calculated. Sure, they’ve got the Neil Kjeldsen is an expert disclaimer out front, but seriously can we trust someone with a history with paid brokers to be positive about a threat to their industry + this would have had to have been signed off up the line prior to publication as well.

 

Tags:

Interesting post at Techcrush, a Web 2.0 review site:techcrunch

We put down our pencils here at the Crush-Room for the next days due to possible legal issues. Please stay with us, we will see how things are going to work out.

Legal issues? we’ll the only possible person who could have legal issues with the site would be Mike Arrington, and it would be related to the name of the site, presuming that Arrington’s TechCrunch is a trade marked name. Now before everyone jumps up and down and says that it’s fair game legally because the name may well infringe on Arrington’s trademark, isn’t Web 2.0 suppose to be about being inclusive? Sure, the name similarity is there, but it’s hardly a major Techcrunch competitor, and we’re hardly going to mix up Techcrush with Techcrunch now are we? Story I guess is….developing 🙂

 

Update: Tony from Deep Jive Interests (via the comments) points to this comment on his blog where it would seem Mike Arrington confirms that he would be behind the C&D/ legal action against Techcrush. Mike can blame lawyers all he wants, at the end of the day he’s the one who says yes or no.

Tags: ,

No love at Techcrunch for Zecco, a new startup that is offering free online stock trading. Is it because they have a business plan?

Om gives a good run down. As a startup concept goes, this has the ability to deliver major disruption, it could literally change the market place, after all, why would you use a online discount broker that charges between $10-$20 per trade when you can do it via Zecco for free. They claim the actual cost of doing a trade for them is $2 per trade, but they believe they can drive this down further as they gain more users. And yes, they a relying on advertising (indeed, they’re even running Adsense ads) but as we all know, financial terms pay very well per click on Adsense, direct advertising on the site would pay even better. So the idea: they offer trading for free and promote other products to make a profit, but more importantly unlike so many other Web 2.0 startups, it would appear they’ve got a business plan and financial projections that means that they well and truly could.

Two points for me: I’m not a share holder, but I once dabbled in a bit of online trading a couple of years back, I sucked at it, but the one thing that held me back was paying $20 per trade at the time, had I been able to execute trades for $0 I would have day traded a lot more than I did and cashed in and out of stock more often, and hence probably more likely at a profit. Secondly, I’m surprised that the cost of executing a trade is even as much as $2, I guess the cost is in having the equipment, networks and backend to support the trading. I worked in merchant banking back in the days prior to the ASX introducing Chess (their electronic trading system), indeed I was working in the field when it was first introduced. I can remember running cheques around Sydney for literally hundreds of millions of dollars to complete the settlement of trades made…yep, you use to have to physically deliver a paper cheque to complete a major trade! Times have changed alot since then, its all automatic now, all electronic. Most of the physical cost is gone. If there is major steps in the evolution of equities trading, Zecco could herald the last major revolution, and maybe one day we’ll all look back at the thought of paying for equities trading the same way we look today at the thought of paying for news online 🙂

Techcrunch covers an upgrade to the Web 2.0 television guide site MeeVee. It’s a service that offers….a television guide….I’m so under whelmed, after all it’s something MSN and Yahoo to name but a few have been offering for years, not to forget hundreds of other sites. But it’s Web 2.0 I hear people saying, it’s innovative! Bullsh*t, it’s a TV guide, and it’s a TV guide that only covers the US as well, so before they’ve even started they’ve excluded hundreds of millions of potential users. But it has Ajax I can hear others saying! We’ll so does the TV guide I use at Yahoo7. But it does social search, allowing you to find shows you might not know about! Wow (not), so does Torrentspy 🙂 But it’s going to be big in the tech/ Web 2.0/ first adopters crowd you might well say? well isn’t this the exact same crowd that is abandoning television for video on demand and the internet.

I give it 6 months at the most. Probably less. It’s some how got an Alexa ranking of 18,000 odd, I honestly dont believe it. At the moment their only income appears to be tribal fusion banner advertising, and they can’t even get this to work properly when I load the page (see below). eBay, here comes another one.

meevee

 

Tags: