Mob Wars CEO: Twitter Is Run by Hippies(mashable.com)
mashable.com
Mob Wars CEO: Twitter Is Run by Hippies
http://mashable.com/2009/06/23/mob-wars-twitter/
8 comments
No, twitter is run by a bunch of geeks that have seen countless companies like youtube get bought out for hundreds of millions, or in the case of youtube, ~$1.6 billion, and are hoping to cash in the same way.
They're trying to let somebody else come up with a way of monetizing it, and probably hoping for google.
They're trying to let somebody else come up with a way of monetizing it, and probably hoping for google.
By countless do you mean a handful?
It is considerably more than a handful
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Google
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Yahoo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Microso...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Google
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Yahoo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_acquisitions_by_Microso...
Even bigger:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=f...
*If we had 'list of companies not acquired by anyone', or 'list of companies quietly making a reasonable profit', we could compare.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&client=f...
*If we had 'list of companies not acquired by anyone', or 'list of companies quietly making a reasonable profit', we could compare.
You mean one company- blogger, right? Even that alone is enough justification.
>I don’t know who puts hippies in charge of these companies.
"These companies" being the ones the hippies start. The same ones guys like this don't know how to start either. Let's keep guys like this away from "these companies."
"These companies" being the ones the hippies start. The same ones guys like this don't know how to start either. Let's keep guys like this away from "these companies."
To be fair, Jason Bailey's company is profitable and doing 8 digits in revenue a year. How much is Twitter making again?
How much is Twitter making again?
What does it matter? They're certainly not starving (yet). These hippies started up something from scratch, are having an incredibly fun time doing it, getting funded, making waves and headlines and may yet make money. Ev already got loads of cash from selling Blogger before. And wasn't that the same question people asked of Amazon and Google before? How much were they making two years after launch?
What does it matter? They're certainly not starving (yet). These hippies started up something from scratch, are having an incredibly fun time doing it, getting funded, making waves and headlines and may yet make money. Ev already got loads of cash from selling Blogger before. And wasn't that the same question people asked of Amazon and Google before? How much were they making two years after launch?
Amazon: 15.7 million in 1997
Google: 86.4 million in 2001
Google: 86.4 million in 2001
It does matter. Venture capital is not infinite and it will eventually get tired of investing in things that just turn out to be popular ideas that can't generate revenue.
Then they won't invest in your real deal because they have been burned too many times.
Then they won't invest in your real deal because they have been burned too many times.
His comments don't even make sense. He calls twitter hippies because they aren't starting a virtual currency business that his company can glom onto. If his company is so loaded, why doesn't he start his own virtual currency business? Oh right, because starting a virtual currency is hugely risky, full of regulatory hassle and not very interesting. If anyone should start a virtual currency, it is the game company that is going to use the virtual currency! (Like you know, MMORPGS already do...)
Wow. Yeah. Nobody "put" them in charge of this company.
Perhaps "hippies" have the vision to create something that will change the world (a bold claim about twitter... but at least somewhat true already) and "non-hippies" have the pragmatism to make a copycat mmorpg that will rake in a few million bucks but no one will remember next year.
When I think about what spurred the creation of a memorable technology that changed the course of human history, I see vision, not monetization. (Ford => a car for each family, Edison => light in every home, Apple => easy to use computers, Google => bigger, better search)
Perhaps "hippies" have the vision to create something that will change the world (a bold claim about twitter... but at least somewhat true already) and "non-hippies" have the pragmatism to make a copycat mmorpg that will rake in a few million bucks but no one will remember next year.
When I think about what spurred the creation of a memorable technology that changed the course of human history, I see vision, not monetization. (Ford => a car for each family, Edison => light in every home, Apple => easy to use computers, Google => bigger, better search)
"I see vision, not monetization."
You see years of great PR, not reality. Most founding myths are the result of gross simplification and made-up mythology which the are designed to be interesting and consumable for mass media. (see Amazon, eBay, YouTube, PayPal etc).
You see years of great PR, not reality. Most founding myths are the result of gross simplification and made-up mythology which the are designed to be interesting and consumable for mass media. (see Amazon, eBay, YouTube, PayPal etc).
So cynical, yet so true.
As much of a douche as Jason Bailey comes off as, and as random an idea as virtual currency is for Twitter, there's this:
They do not need to rush into a business model, especially with their eye-popping growth.
Is that the growth fueled by celebrity curiosity and spam of all types? Do they really have unlimited runway?
The quality of Twitter is going downhill so fast that I can't help but think it may have already jumped the shark masked by huge amounts of worthless traffic. I know, I know, "you choose who you follow," but at this point I'm getting followed by so many porn bots that blocking them is almost a daily task.
They do not need to rush into a business model, especially with their eye-popping growth.
Is that the growth fueled by celebrity curiosity and spam of all types? Do they really have unlimited runway?
The quality of Twitter is going downhill so fast that I can't help but think it may have already jumped the shark masked by huge amounts of worthless traffic. I know, I know, "you choose who you follow," but at this point I'm getting followed by so many porn bots that blocking them is almost a daily task.
Ugh, I really don't want twitter to do payment processing because I don't want my idle chit chat mixing with my bank account.
I unfollow people who play games like that, drowning my twitter and facebook with stupid posts. I think a lot of people do.
Is that a veiled compliment? I quite like being called a hippie.
Maybe making Mob games makes you think you're in the mob.
- Jason Bailey is the CEO of Super Rewards (http://www.srpoints.com/). They do payment processing and CPA offers for social apps.
- lolplaying (http://lolplaying.com/) made the game 140 Mafia. 140 Mafia implements Super Rewards for virtual goods.
- Jason Bailey made the comment "I don't know who puts hippies in charge of these companies" in reference to Twitter not doing a centralized virtual currency.
- The "CEO" of Mob Wars is Dave Maestri. He didn't say anything about Twitter, from what I can tell. Mob Wars is made by Psycho Monkey LLC
- The "CEO" of Mafia Wars is Mark Pincus. Mafia Wars isn't a "sequel" of Mob Wars, it's a clone. Just like 140 Mafia is a clone of both. Mafia Wars is made by Zynga.
EDIT: Thanks to joshuaxls for corrections.