Excellent talk by Marc Andreessen, one of the few people who have founded two billion-dollar companies, about VC, startups, technology, market disruption, and more. Well worth the hour to watch.
Filed under: internet & tech, startups | Leave a Comment
My reply to Jason Calacanis’ claim that Google Buzz just made Facebook lose half its value:
Jason,
Buzz might be a better executed product in some ways (as you point out in your email), but there are two HUGE problems with Buzz as a Facebook/Twitter-killer:
1) Way more active Facebook accounts than Gmail
The ratio could be as high as 10:1 in favor of Facebook (see links below). In network effect terms, that order of magnitude difference would mean multiple orders of magnitude of advantage for Facebook. Also, even if you have a Gmail address, there’s no guarantee that you use it. Look at the domains on jasonslist. I’ll bet there are a fair number of yahoo, hotmail, etc. addresses… and that’s skewed way more heavily to gmail than for non-Internet people. On the other hand, you only have 1 Facebook account.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Exactly_how_many_people_have_a_facebook_account http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How%20many%20Gmail%20accounts%20in%20the%20world
2) Weak branding
People think of Gmail for mail and Google for search. They think of Facebook & Twitter for status/tweets. It’ll take a lot more than just launching Buzz to change the mindshare of users. Buzz is a pretty weak brand extension, and putting it in Gmail makes it even weaker. There may be ways to overcome these issues, and I think that Google will outlast Facebook and Twitter. But for now, like Wave, Buzz shows Google’s strength and weakness: cool product & tech, awful strategy & marketing. IMO, Google’s abundance of users severely handicaps their ability to gain traction for their consumer products. Those teams never have to figure out how to get users for themselves, and they never feel the do-or-die financial pressure of a real startup environment.
Thanks,
Anthony
Filed under: internet & tech | Leave a Comment
Tags: facebook, google, google buzz, twitter
Lean Startup Census – Dec 2009
Here are the results for the first Lean Startup Census, taken in December 2009. Thanks for participating!
Some highlights from the results:
- Less than half of the respondents (43%) are just curious, learning or getting started with Lean Startup practices.
- The vast majority of respondents are at startups (97%) or companies or 5 or fewer people (84%).
- Only 2 respondents classified their companies as non-startups, and nobody was from a company of over 50 people.
- Most respondents are working on a web application (78%).
- Most respondents are founders (84%) of their companies, holding a CEO or equivalent title (71%). Lots of 1-person startups out there…
- Few people (22%) are leading Lean Startup efforts from a departmental position, such as Marketing, Engineering, or Product Management.
My observations:
- The learning/getting started part of the funnel is small – only 43%. I’d expect that number to go way up if and when Lean Startup practices gain in popularity.
- Even though the original Customer Development material was created from experience in the enterprise software space, it’s being most widely applied in web applications at very small startups.
- There’s still very little adoption from non-founder/non-CEOs and in larger organizations. It’ll be interesting to see if the movement can gain traction through department heads, or if founders/CEOs continue to be the primary champions.
Complete results are available below. Enjoy!
Total responses: 58
1. What is your level of interest or involvement in Lean Startups?
- Curious/Learning – 10
- Getting Started – 15
- Actively Practicing – 28
- Thought Leader (Steve Blank, Eric Ries, Sean Ellis, Andrew Chen, etc.) – 5
2. To which type of company are you applying or planning to apply Lean Startup techniques?
- New Startup – 37
- Existing Startup – 19
- Established Company – 2
- S%P 500 Company – 0
3. Which of the following best describes your company’s offering?
- Web Application – 45
- Online Media – 3
- Packaged Software – 2
- Ecommerce – 1
- Professional Services – 3
- Other – 4
4. How many employees are at your company?
- 1 – 18
- 2-5 – 31
- 6-10 – 4
- 11-50 – 5
- 51-100 – 0
- Over 100 – 0
5. Are you a founder of a company where Lean Startup techniques are being applied?
- Yes – 49
- No – 9
6. What’s your job title?
- CEO – 37
- Marketing, C-level or VP – 1
- Product Management, C-level or VP – 4
- Engineering, C-level or VP – 4
- Marketing, Director or below – 0
- Product Management, Director or below – 1
- Engineering, Director or below – 3
- Other – 8*
*A few of these were “founder” or “founder/CEO” types of answers, which I grouped into the “CEO” category in my analysis above.
7. Do you have any suggestions for future surveys? Feel free to give any ideas for questions and other feedback you might have.
I’m not going to post individual responses, but thanks to those who offered feedback or help. Thanks again for participating!
Filed under: internet & tech, startups | Leave a Comment
Why I’m Not Blogging
I started this blog as an experiment, to learn more about content generation, personal branding, and online media in general. Now that I’ve done a few posts and learned a few things, I’ve come to the conclusion that, like most things, blogging is only worth doing if I’m going to commit fully to it. I need a mission, around which I can develop a brand and produce excellent content about a particular subject area with my own unique perspective. I need time, to think and research and write. And I need a passion to express and share my thoughts. I don’t have any of these things right now, at least not enough of them.
I’m not saying that I’ll never have these things, just that now is not the right time. I may post here and there, but only if I’m inspired to do so. So, please forgive the empty space, and I stand by my previous calls on Lebron, Facebook, Palm, Yahoo, etc. Hope you enjoyed those, at least.
By the way, if you want a better, more in-depth discussion about creating a great blog, try reading Crush It by Gary Vaynerchuk.
Filed under: personal development | Leave a Comment
I don’t know if Yahoo killed themselves with the Microsoft search deal or not, but I do know the following:
- Yahoo is better off without search.
- Microsoft can’t beat Google at search.
Yahoo is better off without search.
One of the biggest complaints about Yahoo has been their lack of focus and identity. Are they a search company or a content company? Well, now it’s clear: Yahoo is officially a content company. That’s a hugely positive step, and I think it’s the right choice, because Yahoo has never really been a search company.
A search company does two things: develop the best search engine and provide the best search advertising platform. If BOSS and Panama, respectively, were Yahoo’s best efforts to date, then Yahoo (as a search company) could never catch Google without a serious shift in focus. As it stood, search would continue to be underinvested and undermonetized, and Google’s shadow would still loom. That kind of burden impacts your strategy, your hiring, your morale, your confidence, your ability to run the company.
Now, that’s not to say that search isn’t a hugely important business. As Jason Calacanis said, “search is the most important business of the 21st century.” However, just because search is huge, that doesn’t mean that Yahoo is required to build their business around it. By outsourcing search, they can still monetize their audience through search without the burden of being Karl Malone (or Ewing or Barkley) to Google’s Michael Jordan. You might not agree with the choice of target (search vs. content) or the execution (this deal), but at least there’s a target now — that’s the most important thing for Yahoo at this point.
Microsoft can’t beat Google at search.
Classic innovator’s dilemma here: Microsoft’s primary business is desktop software, while Google’s is search. When it comes to giving searchers the best results and building the best search advertising platform, Google will always always always win. They have no choice: their entire business (well, 97% of it, anyway) is predicated on delivering these two things. On the other hand, Bing is just a project within Microsoft. Even if it delivered horrible results, Microsoft would still keep it alive. That’s not how you force innovation to happen.
The only real way that Bing would have a chance to beat Google would be for Microsoft to spin it off and make it fend for itself. If Bing had to live and die on its own, it would be forced to figure out how to win. However, I’m pretty sure that we will never see this happen. As poker pro Amir Vahedi put it, in a poker tournament, “in order to live, you have to be willing to die.” I don’t think Microsoft is willing to let Bing die.
One other long-term thing: as Microsoft mounts an attack on Google in search, Google is counterattacking on the OS front. As the desktop goes mobile and Windows becomes less and less relevant, Microsoft better make sure that they have a foothold in smartphones, netbooks, etc. I’d be concerned, since Windows Mobile has all but dropped off the map. Google has to fend off Bing, but Windows is getting eroded from all angles. Microsoft should watch their back…
Filed under: internet & tech | 1 Comment
Tags: bing, google, internet marketing, microsoft, yahoo
