I'm going to be on Mixergy today at 11am PDT(ycombinator.posterous.com)
ycombinator.posterous.com
I'm going to be on Mixergy today at 11am PDT
http://ycombinator.posterous.com/im-going-to-interviewed-on-mixergy-tomorrow-a
29 comments
I recently tried 99designs for the first time. They have an unusual model, but every time I was about to get confused, I noticed that their UI cleared up my issue.
I couldn't figure out how they made their site so intuitive.
Then, after I paid for my design, I got an email from them asking me to fill out a Wufoo survey.
That's when I realized how they know their customers well because they keep asking for feedback.
That's why I keep asking for feedback. I could do it off camera, after the interview is over, but I'd much rather be open about my process than hide it.
I couldn't figure out how they made their site so intuitive.
Then, after I paid for my design, I got an email from them asking me to fill out a Wufoo survey.
That's when I realized how they know their customers well because they keep asking for feedback.
That's why I keep asking for feedback. I could do it off camera, after the interview is over, but I'd much rather be open about my process than hide it.
That's a great point, and I agree that it's always important to get feedback, and that's why I'm glad that you're here on HN discussing the interviews.
One thing to be careful of, however, is making sure you're not disrupting your primary user experience to gather the information.
In your 99designs example, it sounds like they did everything right. They presented a clear, kick-ass UI that guided you through things without being in the way, without cluttering things up with surveys while you tried to do it.
Sometimes I worry that you're in-interview questions are more akin to having 99designs offering a dropdown menu next to each UI element, asking for feedback ;)
Best of luck, and thanks for doing these.
One thing to be careful of, however, is making sure you're not disrupting your primary user experience to gather the information.
In your 99designs example, it sounds like they did everything right. They presented a clear, kick-ass UI that guided you through things without being in the way, without cluttering things up with surveys while you tried to do it.
Sometimes I worry that you're in-interview questions are more akin to having 99designs offering a dropdown menu next to each UI element, asking for feedback ;)
Best of luck, and thanks for doing these.
Quite funny, I read this comment, then clicked the link (Missed most of this interview), and heard Andrew ask "And can I ask you, what can I do to improve?" Timing was impeccable ;)
Here's my 2c:
I clicked on the link, and am in "Live interview chat #3", with 2 other people. I hate it when chatrooms overflow and create other rooms. Makes me feel unwanted :(
I'd also really like to see more interaction with viewers. Pick up questions from chat. Maybe if the person being interviewed says something controversial, ask the viewers if they agree or not (Have a spot poll).
Keep up the good work though, always useful bits of info in each interview. And I much prefer video to a transcript.
Here's my 2c:
I clicked on the link, and am in "Live interview chat #3", with 2 other people. I hate it when chatrooms overflow and create other rooms. Makes me feel unwanted :(
I'd also really like to see more interaction with viewers. Pick up questions from chat. Maybe if the person being interviewed says something controversial, ask the viewers if they agree or not (Have a spot poll).
Keep up the good work though, always useful bits of info in each interview. And I much prefer video to a transcript.
I've only seen two of his interviews so far (Alexis Ohanian and Paul Graham), but I had the exact same reaction. After a nice interview I was actually interested in, there's this abrupt change into what felt like an attention grab.
There's nothing wrong with asking the question, IMO, but I don't think it needs to be part of the public broadcast / streaming replay. That sort of thing should be done "offline" and regular viewers should simply notice an improvement in style as time goes on.
That said, I have a lot of respect for what Andrew does. As someone who has had actual panic attacks in college when faced with small group presentations, watching someone conduct an interview with the caliber of guests he attracts is a very impressive feat.
I'm quite sure he'll find a style that works for him soon (if he hasn't already - as I said, I believe I've only seen two of his interviews), but for now there is definite room for improvement.
There's nothing wrong with asking the question, IMO, but I don't think it needs to be part of the public broadcast / streaming replay. That sort of thing should be done "offline" and regular viewers should simply notice an improvement in style as time goes on.
That said, I have a lot of respect for what Andrew does. As someone who has had actual panic attacks in college when faced with small group presentations, watching someone conduct an interview with the caliber of guests he attracts is a very impressive feat.
I'm quite sure he'll find a style that works for him soon (if he hasn't already - as I said, I believe I've only seen two of his interviews), but for now there is definite room for improvement.
Really? I mean he is usually just asking for suggestions on how to improve his interviewing skills from the interviewees.
It seems poor to compare him to George Stephanopoulos when one has had a long professional career of interviewing people and the other does not.
It seems poor to compare him to George Stephanopoulos when one has had a long professional career of interviewing people and the other does not.
Thanks for replying- Andrew is certainly doing well with Mixergy, and I hope things continue to go well for him. The question is just what style works best.
As Andrew mentioned in his comment (above) about 99 designs, asking for customer feedback is important.
I offer my comments here in that spirit-
Personally, I find the self-indulgent questions somewhat distastful, but it's ultimately a decision of what style he's aiming for.
You mention that I shouldn't compare him to George Stephanopoulos; While Andrew isn't at that level yet, Comparisons are among the best ways to get better. Maybe Stephanopoulos isn't the direction that Andrew wants to go, but he should look to people he emulates and try to find what he can do better to be more like them.
A large part of that is choosing your personal style. The Mixergy style works fairly well so far, but there's always room to adjust as you mature, and as the program ages-
For instance, Andrew could pursue a Folksy, relaxed, conversational style, interacting a lot with the audience. This is a lot of fun, and helps us feel connected with him, almost indie rock bandishly.
Another direction would to bring things to a more "professional" level, more akin to Bloomberg news with a focus on young and ambitious starts, rather than the megacorps we see so dominating the media.
A third option, and the one I'd reccomend, is to go for more of a Biographical view. Aim for Timelessness.
When I visit Folklore.org and read about the creation of the original Mac, I'm transported back 30 years. The stories about Atkinson and Jobs are classic and it doesn't matter WHEN I watch or listen to these stories, they'll always be wonderful.
We say good examples of this during the SmugMug interview. These stories work well now, or 5 years from now.
Discussions of current events, such as the iPad and the re-launch of StackExchange are interesting, but don't have nearly the same level of timelessness.
Particularly since Mixergy makes it money by selling back-archives, try to make sure they're valueable into the future.
Think A&E's Biography, not CNN Headline news.
In any events, Thanks for doing the interviews, they are an interesting contribution to the world of Startup Culture.
As Andrew mentioned in his comment (above) about 99 designs, asking for customer feedback is important.
I offer my comments here in that spirit-
Personally, I find the self-indulgent questions somewhat distastful, but it's ultimately a decision of what style he's aiming for.
You mention that I shouldn't compare him to George Stephanopoulos; While Andrew isn't at that level yet, Comparisons are among the best ways to get better. Maybe Stephanopoulos isn't the direction that Andrew wants to go, but he should look to people he emulates and try to find what he can do better to be more like them.
A large part of that is choosing your personal style. The Mixergy style works fairly well so far, but there's always room to adjust as you mature, and as the program ages-
For instance, Andrew could pursue a Folksy, relaxed, conversational style, interacting a lot with the audience. This is a lot of fun, and helps us feel connected with him, almost indie rock bandishly.
Another direction would to bring things to a more "professional" level, more akin to Bloomberg news with a focus on young and ambitious starts, rather than the megacorps we see so dominating the media.
A third option, and the one I'd reccomend, is to go for more of a Biographical view. Aim for Timelessness.
When I visit Folklore.org and read about the creation of the original Mac, I'm transported back 30 years. The stories about Atkinson and Jobs are classic and it doesn't matter WHEN I watch or listen to these stories, they'll always be wonderful.
We say good examples of this during the SmugMug interview. These stories work well now, or 5 years from now.
Discussions of current events, such as the iPad and the re-launch of StackExchange are interesting, but don't have nearly the same level of timelessness.
Particularly since Mixergy makes it money by selling back-archives, try to make sure they're valueable into the future.
Think A&E's Biography, not CNN Headline news.
In any events, Thanks for doing the interviews, they are an interesting contribution to the world of Startup Culture.
On the contrary, I actually enjoy that part. That makes the "story" of mixergy more interesting and makes the thing more personal.
If he would stop that, I would not watch
If he would stop that, I would not watch
Andrew gets a lot of criticism for how he interviews but I have to say, interviewing people -- especially when you are new at it is hard.
You really have to strike a balance in the questions you ask and the small talk you make to get a good flow going and make the person being interviewed willing to talk.
I have a feeling that some people on here would rather him simply read a list of 10 questions, but the problem with that is you often end up with really mechanical answers. Some people will argue he is too nice with the people he interviews, but if you press too hard you will sever relationships and reduce future prospects for interviewing the same individual or people from their network. Good interviewing is really an art.
So before you criticize, try doing interviews yourself.
And I don't quite understand all the hate Mixergy attracts. I mean all he is doing is providing extra information for the benefit of everyone else via his interviews. You might not find it useful, but I am sure other people do.
For the record, I don't watch most of Andrew's videos. I mostly skim the transcripts. Some people complain about transcript quality but I know that good transcription services cost money and what Andrew's interviews are free... You get what you pay for.
You really have to strike a balance in the questions you ask and the small talk you make to get a good flow going and make the person being interviewed willing to talk.
I have a feeling that some people on here would rather him simply read a list of 10 questions, but the problem with that is you often end up with really mechanical answers. Some people will argue he is too nice with the people he interviews, but if you press too hard you will sever relationships and reduce future prospects for interviewing the same individual or people from their network. Good interviewing is really an art.
So before you criticize, try doing interviews yourself.
And I don't quite understand all the hate Mixergy attracts. I mean all he is doing is providing extra information for the benefit of everyone else via his interviews. You might not find it useful, but I am sure other people do.
For the record, I don't watch most of Andrew's videos. I mostly skim the transcripts. Some people complain about transcript quality but I know that good transcription services cost money and what Andrew's interviews are free... You get what you pay for.
There's no question that Andrew is creating value with Mixery. No one can dispute that.
Andrew, take all the criticism in stride. these are people who care enough to even bother complaining. any criticism is better than nothing at all.
With that frame of mind, you'll get further in creating value for your peers.
Keep it up.
Andrew, take all the criticism in stride. these are people who care enough to even bother complaining. any criticism is better than nothing at all.
With that frame of mind, you'll get further in creating value for your peers.
Keep it up.
[deleted]
Being an introvert, I find that there is way too much small talk than I am interested in. I really think that most of the interviews could be trimmed down to 15-20min.
Now only if there was a highlight reel of the interview...
Now only if there was a highlight reel of the interview...
Andrew, How about an HN-like board where people can up-vote any questions posted by other users in the live chat room. You can have a section in the interview where the top voted questions can be asked
Am I the only one that doesn't like Mixergy?
I watch some of the interviews. I would say what is best about Mixergy is that Andrew Warner works hard on the site and does an excellent job at having a steady stream of high quality guests. On the other hand, I don't particularly enjoy his interview style because I find the questions to be too high-level and "fluffy" most of the time. I'd enjoy the interviews a lot more if the questions were more about specific operational issues that startups deal with. But, that's just my opinion and the interview style is really a matter of personal taste.
Brandon, are you free for a phone call to talk about what you think I should improve in my interviews?
Since you don't reveal your identity in your HN bio, we could use a disposable skype name to maintain your anonymity.
http://mixergy.com/contact
Since you don't reveal your identity in your HN bio, we could use a disposable skype name to maintain your anonymity.
http://mixergy.com/contact
I saw the live interview and it was great.
It seems to me that the charges of fluffiness come not necessarily from "softball" questions, but from the impression that the questions are strictly softball.
Seeing you interview, it's very obvious that you're a genuinely nice guy. You couldn't hide that without changing yourself for the worse. But you don't have to, because it's an asset.
Part of this interview focused on the question of how do you make interviewees comfortable? Comfortable enough to do the interview in the first place, and comfortable enough to answer the questions openly, without fearing that the interviewer is about to spring some trap on them.
I've also noticed you tend to apologize when asking someone a question you think is tough, but it's interesting to see the reaction, almost a "No, no, I'll answer it."
For questions that are particularly salient but awkward to ask, you should continue to use that same technique to push just a bit further, both to stretch your comfort zone, and to get a feel for the real boundaries of what people are willing or even glad to answer.
It seems to me that the charges of fluffiness come not necessarily from "softball" questions, but from the impression that the questions are strictly softball.
Seeing you interview, it's very obvious that you're a genuinely nice guy. You couldn't hide that without changing yourself for the worse. But you don't have to, because it's an asset.
Part of this interview focused on the question of how do you make interviewees comfortable? Comfortable enough to do the interview in the first place, and comfortable enough to answer the questions openly, without fearing that the interviewer is about to spring some trap on them.
I've also noticed you tend to apologize when asking someone a question you think is tough, but it's interesting to see the reaction, almost a "No, no, I'll answer it."
For questions that are particularly salient but awkward to ask, you should continue to use that same technique to push just a bit further, both to stretch your comfort zone, and to get a feel for the real boundaries of what people are willing or even glad to answer.
[deleted]
I enjoy most Mixergy interviews. Andrew does a very good job at cutting through the boilerplate biography. The long form doesn't bother me at all. Its great for the car.
With that said, I am also looking for content that addresses more tactical operational issues, but I don't know if Mixergy is the podcast for this. There are valuable insights provided in Mixergy's format of walking through the entrepreneur's story. Going too deep (low level) on specific tactical issues might muddy the waters and dilute the value that Mixergy already provides. I do think that Andrew's Fenwick episode did venture into this area though, so maybe there is room for it.
If anybody has recommendations of podcasts that do go into detailed operational issues, please share.
With that said, I am also looking for content that addresses more tactical operational issues, but I don't know if Mixergy is the podcast for this. There are valuable insights provided in Mixergy's format of walking through the entrepreneur's story. Going too deep (low level) on specific tactical issues might muddy the waters and dilute the value that Mixergy already provides. I do think that Andrew's Fenwick episode did venture into this area though, so maybe there is room for it.
If anybody has recommendations of podcasts that do go into detailed operational issues, please share.
I like the Mixergy interviews, but being hour-long videos they do require quite a big time investment.
I would pay for access to professionally edited versions that cut each interview down to, say, half an hour with the fluff cut out.
I would pay for access to professionally edited versions that cut each interview down to, say, half an hour with the fluff cut out.
You can subscribe to the audio podcast version and your iPhone will play it back at double speed automatically!
He has a very unique style, it can be off-putting at times. But, it seems to work. Often, when I think he's going one question too far, the guest will come back with a really interesting reply, something you probably wouldn't get in another interview.
The Chris MacAskill interview is a good example:
http://mixergy.com/smugmug-chris-macaskill-interview/
The Chris MacAskill interview is a good example:
http://mixergy.com/smugmug-chris-macaskill-interview/
Do you dislike long form video in general, or Mixergy specifically?
I don't like watching long videos, so I usually read Andrew's transcription instead. I've found some really great advice in there, its worth another look.
I don't like watching long videos, so I usually read Andrew's transcription instead. I've found some really great advice in there, its worth another look.
No. I'm kind of ambivalent about it at this point though. I've tried to listen to the interviews, but a lot of it seems like voyeurism. Not that that's bad. It's just more entertaining than it is useful in my opinion. I await your downvotes.
I like Mixergy in general.
Some episodes I don't like but I've found that's because of the guest, so I think that speaks well of andrew. If you hear 'This Week in Startups' you know it's all about Jason Calacanis, but in Mixergy it's really about the guest ad their stories.
Speaking of the stories, I like that a lot. I was really tired of hearing Jason Fried and DHH tell the exact same pitch on every podcast (yes, I'm suscribed to too many) but I quite enjoyed Jason F on Mixergy. That's because of the story.
I don't like video, though, and the audio feed only work sometimes. I know I could pay for a reliable audio feed :)
Some episodes I don't like but I've found that's because of the guest, so I think that speaks well of andrew. If you hear 'This Week in Startups' you know it's all about Jason Calacanis, but in Mixergy it's really about the guest ad their stories.
Speaking of the stories, I like that a lot. I was really tired of hearing Jason Fried and DHH tell the exact same pitch on every podcast (yes, I'm suscribed to too many) but I quite enjoyed Jason F on Mixergy. That's because of the story.
I don't like video, though, and the audio feed only work sometimes. I know I could pay for a reliable audio feed :)
This this:
http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/mixergy-for-ambitious-ups...
If it doesn't work, let me know (via email). We've been having some trouble with the iTunes link, but I think it's fixed now.
If it doesn't work, let me know (via email). We've been having some trouble with the iTunes link, but I think it's fixed now.
It worked! Thanks a lot.
Care to elaborate what exactly you dislike about it?
Yes.
I understand the temptation; I'm not saying I wouldn't necessarily want to do the same thing, but when George Stephanopoulos interviews Obama or Putin, he doesn't ask if they watch his show.
I also understand that it's reasonable to use your own site/startup/etc as an example of the larger world, but it seems somewhat unslightly. This may be a place where avoiding the appearance of conflict is best, even if it would otherwise make sense.