The Color of Money(techcrunch.com)
techcrunch.com
The Color of Money
http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/24/color/
11 comments
Article summary: Color is an app. It might be successful, it might not. Sequoia believes, the internet doesn't.
Slight nitpick. The article is clear that the real "win" for Color is as a new type of social platform
(likely with a multitude of different "apps" leveraging it). I'm as skeptical as anyone on this, but I can at least buy that point. There may be a really compelling platform... if enough people use it.
Great idea, terrible execution.
Looks like on HN we finally found out the value of ideas:
42
One flaw I see in this big idea that nobody seems to see is the total anonymity of the process of sharing and the inability to select/delete the content you see (or at least, I tried and I could not find one).
This sounds to me like Chatroulette: there was much hype about it at the beginning and then it started filling with guys showing their genitals.
How long will it take before people start uploading questionable content? Even if not done on purpose, just think about using the app in a 100 ft. radius from a swingers club/gay bar. Something probably you don't want to have on your phone.
This sounds to me like Chatroulette: there was much hype about it at the beginning and then it started filling with guys showing their genitals.
How long will it take before people start uploading questionable content? Even if not done on purpose, just think about using the app in a 100 ft. radius from a swingers club/gay bar. Something probably you don't want to have on your phone.
Shouldn’t we be rooting for it to succeed? Ultimately, wouldn’t that be better for everyone across the board? The startups, the investors, and the users?
Of course.
I suppose this is good for the community as long as every one of these gambles works, but the reality is that not every one does, and I would imagine investors would become increasingly skittish because of it.
Of course.
I suppose this is good for the community as long as every one of these gambles works, but the reality is that not every one does, and I would imagine investors would become increasingly skittish because of it.
Can someone summarize the vision here? Everything I've seen has made this look like a weekend project (except for the $41MM thing).
I think people are missing one of the key features. This is described in the video here http://vimeo.com/21413899, but not discussed in any article I've seen.
When you turn on Color it starts recording all of the pictures that others in your local area are taking. All of those photos _are stored in your "visual diary"_ forever!
This is a "life recorder" app. Remember this: http://www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/17-09/p... ?
In the future you'll be making a documentary of your life just by moving through space, and I think that's a beautiful concept. Your grandkids will be able explore how you lived your day to day life as witnessed by those around you.
When you turn on Color it starts recording all of the pictures that others in your local area are taking. All of those photos _are stored in your "visual diary"_ forever!
This is a "life recorder" app. Remember this: http://www.wired.com/culture/culturereviews/magazine/17-09/p... ?
In the future you'll be making a documentary of your life just by moving through space, and I think that's a beautiful concept. Your grandkids will be able explore how you lived your day to day life as witnessed by those around you.
I suspect the key feature that has the VCs excited is the concept of "implicit social networking". Which is, rather than relying on explicit, self nominated constructed social networks this will grow the network organically - Color will end up with a huge implicit social graph that has a unique authenticity to it (these are not people who are pretending to know each other, they are people who really actually get together).
Or they are people who just happened to be in the same neighborhood. I don't really get how that creates a social graph that's any more valuable than people you've explicitly added. Just because I'm in a neighborhood today doesn't mean that I'll want to connect with (or even be in the same place at the same time) the other folks whose pictures I can see in the app.
It's a fun concept, but after using it for a bit, I'm still trying to think of why I would care. If I can only see pictures from the neighborhood, I'm unlikely to see anything that I can't already see with my naked eyes.
It's a fun concept, but after using it for a bit, I'm still trying to think of why I would care. If I can only see pictures from the neighborhood, I'm unlikely to see anything that I can't already see with my naked eyes.
The app: take pictures with your phone, instantly/automatically upload them to the cloud, meanwhile see what other pics other people nearby are taking.
The experience: a frenzy of sharing entertaining photos and having fun anytime, anywhere, with anyone.
The reality: a classier, more respectable and 'innocent' rival to Grindr.
The money: push advert pics into the localized photo streams, even making them geographically contextual, exposing them to an already captive audience, who may even react and start talking about it (the advertised product/service) on the spot.
Actually, have to admit, I really like the idea.
The experience: a frenzy of sharing entertaining photos and having fun anytime, anywhere, with anyone.
The reality: a classier, more respectable and 'innocent' rival to Grindr.
The money: push advert pics into the localized photo streams, even making them geographically contextual, exposing them to an already captive audience, who may even react and start talking about it (the advertised product/service) on the spot.
Actually, have to admit, I really like the idea.
Still not sure I understood: I assume the point is to share (currently only photos) with people near you in both space and time.
Why would you do that? You're right there. You can directly see them right?
Or is it something where you go somewhere and you can see photos taken at this location 3 months ago or something? (ie, they use space but not time for proximity)
Or is it something where you go somewhere and you can see photos taken at this location 3 months ago or something? (ie, they use space but not time for proximity)
Having actually looked at the thing on App Store, I realized that it also solves very nicely a classic problem of social photography: bunch of friends/family at a gathering, all taking pictures, 'you take one with me in it' etc., but then everyone goes home with a separate set of photos.
Sure, Facebook, Bebo etc. alievate that problem somewhat by having people upload their photos and sharing with their friends list, so you might eventually get to see everyone's photos. Assuming they bothered to upload and tag. But Color guarantees that everyone walks home with The Definitive Album for that event, with no extra effort required.
From a user perspective, that's a pretty big win. Just put Color on your grand-dad's phone and suddenly he gets to join the fun, without the whole registering/tagging/uploading/friending/browsing rigmarole.
Sure, Facebook, Bebo etc. alievate that problem somewhat by having people upload their photos and sharing with their friends list, so you might eventually get to see everyone's photos. Assuming they bothered to upload and tag. But Color guarantees that everyone walks home with The Definitive Album for that event, with no extra effort required.
From a user perspective, that's a pretty big win. Just put Color on your grand-dad's phone and suddenly he gets to join the fun, without the whole registering/tagging/uploading/friending/browsing rigmarole.
People are wierd. I don't even look at facebook photos but other people are obsessed with them. Then there's those sites where people (young women mostly) look at photos of people going in to local nightclubs (ie they actually pose for the shot then it's uploaded), and they spend time looking at what fashion items people were wearing. Anyway I imagine in this case the focus is on right there, right then, and the whole thing will be driven by flirtation. Think about it like using technology to broaden the radius of effective flirtation from a few meters to a few dozen meters.
I think the idea is good, I just don't understand why anything you've mentioned requires VC at all, much less that magnitude.
The thing will only be great if lots of people use it, and it works seemlessly. For THAT, surely you do need quite a lot of capital (marketing and hosting/bandwidth). They could slowly and organically grow the userbase, but to have any hope of fast-forwarding through that phase, large funding is the only option, no? Maybe also deals with phone manufacturers and carriers.
Sounds like a good idea but will people use it long term? I doubt it. The only draw to use the app all the time is for entertainment. If people don't get entertainment at least 80%* then they will probably stop using it.
*I just made that figure up obviously but I hope you get my point.
*I just made that figure up obviously but I hope you get my point.
The money, part 2: paid accounts that allow you to hide the implicit activity track that you never asked all these strangers to record. Dont have an account? Too bad, your face is out there on everyone else's phones.
The money: push advert pics into the localized photo streams, even making them geographically contextual, exposing them to an already captive audience, who may even react and start talking about it (the advertised product/service) on the spot.
I wasnt aware of this aspect... I must say - I think it is brilliant if it works, as the geographically contextual adverts has so far been an uncracked nut.
Further - imagine a social groupon-like play where your pics of the ambiance and blast you and your friends are having while eating at [#ThisRestaurant] BECOME the ad and coupon to entice others to come and eat there... click on this photostream of [#ThisRestaurant], watch it then see a deal for you too coming here and having such a greeat experience for a discount coupon...
I wasnt aware of this aspect... I must say - I think it is brilliant if it works, as the geographically contextual adverts has so far been an uncracked nut.
Further - imagine a social groupon-like play where your pics of the ambiance and blast you and your friends are having while eating at [#ThisRestaurant] BECOME the ad and coupon to entice others to come and eat there... click on this photostream of [#ThisRestaurant], watch it then see a deal for you too coming here and having such a greeat experience for a discount coupon...
Yes, they could charge for 'commercial' accounts, so that resteraunts etc. are allowed to push coupon/adverts into the local stream.
"... While your first name appears on your posts, there is no password and no friending. So unlike Facebook, the notion of limiting private content to a friend network doesn't exist. In the future, the app will be able to intuit relationships based on whom its users spend time with regularly because it collects data constantly. ..." [0]
I'll take a stab at the vision. If you can get a lot of users the tools to give away key emotional & identity information freely you might just be able to take on Facebook. This might explain the valuation & choice of the mobile platform and why the pedigree of the founder (ex Apple) matters.
A consumer device to share information easier for undisclosed "X" use for "Y" clients. The key part of the vision is the generated information, location, a users connections, the verified identity of the user and money. A mobile phone is for all intensive purposes a credit card. These raw functions are made possible by the mobile device and the front and back-end software.
[0] 'Ex-Apple executive takes on Facebook with photo app', AP ~ http://www.theage.com.au/digital-life/smartphone-apps/exappl...
I'll take a stab at the vision. If you can get a lot of users the tools to give away key emotional & identity information freely you might just be able to take on Facebook. This might explain the valuation & choice of the mobile platform and why the pedigree of the founder (ex Apple) matters.
A consumer device to share information easier for undisclosed "X" use for "Y" clients. The key part of the vision is the generated information, location, a users connections, the verified identity of the user and money. A mobile phone is for all intensive purposes a credit card. These raw functions are made possible by the mobile device and the front and back-end software.
[0] 'Ex-Apple executive takes on Facebook with photo app', AP ~ http://www.theage.com.au/digital-life/smartphone-apps/exappl...
"If you had more capital, could you get to the future faster?"
"Will $25M help you get five years into one?"
-- @Sequoia_Capital invest in Time Machine
I really want to know why they didn't launch at SXSW....it would have been the perfect place to launch this
Perhaps they purposely did not launch a SXSW to redirect the limelight from all the great apps that did to themselves, a mere week afterward. If this blogging, tweeting, posting frenzy continues then they are going to be nearing $41 million worth of marketing in a matter of days, making it potentially money very well spent.
Surely this is a tech investment that can either succeed in its own right or be bought by a major player. How long is it till Facebook will need to start propping its platform with startups to keep improving their tech.
I think that is where the real money lay for Color. The technology behind it doesn't seem like something to stand on its own, rather something that plenty of other companies would really like to get their hands on.
Maybe I'm naive, doesn't $41M for two years of runway seem like a lot of cash to be burning through? How many people are they planning on hiring/what other costs do they have while they explore this space?
This is a company working on a big idea that got a large amount of funding to work on that big idea uninterrupted for a couple of years.
Given the reminder of why Duke Nukem failed making its way up the board this is actually quite funny. Not having constraints can often be a bad thing, not a good one.
And regardless of this, what is the 'big' idea? There's nothing big about it. It's a pathetically small idea.
This is why the bubble thing is making the rounds, there's nothing big about social apps, they're notoriously hard to make any return on.
Given the reminder of why Duke Nukem failed making its way up the board this is actually quite funny. Not having constraints can often be a bad thing, not a good one.
And regardless of this, what is the 'big' idea? There's nothing big about it. It's a pathetically small idea.
This is why the bubble thing is making the rounds, there's nothing big about social apps, they're notoriously hard to make any return on.
Many may disagree with me here. I'm not going to comment on the money, because that's what everyone else is doing.
I downloaded the Color app. I like it. I'm in downtown San Francisco. A number of other people apparently are using it right now, so I'm able to see some local content.
I think the setup experience is very nicely done. Its simple. Ask for a name, then it takes a photo of you using the front facing camera.
The interface is minimal and well designed. I'm not buried in tons of options I don't need. I played with everything for a few minutes and it didn't take long to get the hang of it.
Its insanely easy to upvote and leave a comment on someone's photo. I was actually surprised that my comment went through as soon as I hit Done, instead of showing me what the comment looks like and another button to post it.
The only thing that threw me off a little was the layout of images. The feeling I get from the interface is its reminiscent of Windows Phone OS. I personally kind of like that non-iOS kind of interface, in that its something new and interesting, but not bad. If that's where they indeed took their inspiration from, its not a bad source.
So money or not, I've had fun using it today.
I downloaded the Color app. I like it. I'm in downtown San Francisco. A number of other people apparently are using it right now, so I'm able to see some local content.
I think the setup experience is very nicely done. Its simple. Ask for a name, then it takes a photo of you using the front facing camera.
The interface is minimal and well designed. I'm not buried in tons of options I don't need. I played with everything for a few minutes and it didn't take long to get the hang of it.
Its insanely easy to upvote and leave a comment on someone's photo. I was actually surprised that my comment went through as soon as I hit Done, instead of showing me what the comment looks like and another button to post it.
The only thing that threw me off a little was the layout of images. The feeling I get from the interface is its reminiscent of Windows Phone OS. I personally kind of like that non-iOS kind of interface, in that its something new and interesting, but not bad. If that's where they indeed took their inspiration from, its not a bad source.
So money or not, I've had fun using it today.
I was actually surprised that my comment went through as soon as I hit Done, instead of showing me what the comment looks like and another button to post it
Seriously? Because that's pretty much how all forum and comment software works. I'm just boggled that you find this so surprising, it's the path of least effort.
Seriously? Because that's pretty much how all forum and comment software works. I'm just boggled that you find this so surprising, it's the path of least effort.
Yes, it seems obvious to any of us. Its how you and I would design it. But add in some product managers, a separate non-communicating design team, and top it off with 3 layers of ineffective management on top of that and these simple kinds of thing quickly either get overlooked, or purposely designated not to function that way.