The Hipsters are a Billion Dollar Industry(simply.io)
simply.io
The Hipsters are a Billion Dollar Industry
http://simply.io/blog/2012/03/the-hipsters-are-a-billion-dollar-industry/
9 comments
I suppose if this were the 70's he'd be dissing the folks who bought pet rocks. But seriously, why pass judgement on what other people think is worth buying? I've long since given up trying to figure out fashion trends or the people who report on them.
As Reddit is apt to say: Stop liking things I don't like.
Genius! That's an app!
You know, is it just me, or does it seem like working as an engineer for one of the internet gambling/porn sites would be both more fulfilling and challenging than 90%+ of these hipster-social-twitterscape-search-blogomisation things?
EDIT: why choose? cant i combine my love for vintage polaroid burlesque with modern erotic search engine optimization?
EDIT: why choose? cant i combine my love for vintage polaroid burlesque with modern erotic search engine optimization?
I think it's a little odd how he chose to pile all those startups together.
For example, I think path is a much different animal than the others, and while I agree with his overall point (there are some ridiculous valuations going around), it's more of an angry rant than a critique of the apps themselves.
For example, I think path is a much different animal than the others, and while I agree with his overall point (there are some ridiculous valuations going around), it's more of an angry rant than a critique of the apps themselves.
You're right, it's more of a rant than I like. But I see it as more of a critique of the startup industry than specific apps.
@DavidZhangToGo - out of curiousity, what exactly does Simply.io do? [EDIT]: This isn't meant to read as a snarky comment - I am truly curious.
We're just a bunch of college kids hacking away and trying to explore different projects, and hopefully turn it into a successful startup.
Correction: definitely turn it into a successful startup.
Especially as at least one of them isn't even a startup but a privately owned company.
You know what else is of now value? That blog post...
You know what else is of now value? That blog post...
> What do Path, Hipstamatic, Highlight, Hipster (yes, that’s an app), and Color have in common? They create absolutely nothing of value.
The post begins with and relies upon this faulty premise. This is not explained, and I would argue that Hipstamatic and Path do create value for the users. The latter allows me to socialize with people in a more private manner, while the former takes photos, values in of themselves.
Furthermore, why must the users of these apps necessarily be "hipsters"? Is this a requirement for the use of these apps? (Clearly not, as Hipstamatic was one of the biggest apps on the store last year, and not all of those users can be generalized as hipsters).
The post begins with and relies upon this faulty premise. This is not explained, and I would argue that Hipstamatic and Path do create value for the users. The latter allows me to socialize with people in a more private manner, while the former takes photos, values in of themselves.
Furthermore, why must the users of these apps necessarily be "hipsters"? Is this a requirement for the use of these apps? (Clearly not, as Hipstamatic was one of the biggest apps on the store last year, and not all of those users can be generalized as hipsters).
> What do Path, Hipstamatic, Highlight, Hipster (yes, that’s an app), and Color have in common? They create absolutely nothing of value.
This is like complaining Jersey Shore adds nothing of value to people's lives. Sure, it doesn't, but it's not supposed to. It's entertainment. Just because people are easily entertained and advertisers will pay for those eyeballs, doesn't mean it's not a financially viable business.
Some apps solve problems and are useful. Some apps entertain (solving a different problem - boredom). Confusing the two purposes leads to posts like these.
(For the record, I completely agree that there are a lot of useless apps out there, but how is that different from there being a ton of useless TV shows, movies and video games out there? If you don't want to contribute to that because you think it's a poor use of time, then don't, but it doesn't mean that there's not a market for it and that there isn't money to be made there).
This is like complaining Jersey Shore adds nothing of value to people's lives. Sure, it doesn't, but it's not supposed to. It's entertainment. Just because people are easily entertained and advertisers will pay for those eyeballs, doesn't mean it's not a financially viable business.
Some apps solve problems and are useful. Some apps entertain (solving a different problem - boredom). Confusing the two purposes leads to posts like these.
(For the record, I completely agree that there are a lot of useless apps out there, but how is that different from there being a ton of useless TV shows, movies and video games out there? If you don't want to contribute to that because you think it's a poor use of time, then don't, but it doesn't mean that there's not a market for it and that there isn't money to be made there).
Definitely agree. I really love Path's design and I use Instagram. But I do think those apps + a lot of tech blogs give people a narrow view of what most startups are actually doing - which is solving real problems that people have.
I thought your point was that most startups aren't solving problem and "create nothing of value" as you put it.
>This is why 90% of the companies posted on TechCrunch fail!
How does this figure fair in comparison to other startup, small business failure rates. Isn't the default for most startups death? (pg article for reference - http://www.paulgraham.com/hubs.html)
How does this figure fair in comparison to other startup, small business failure rates. Isn't the default for most startups death? (pg article for reference - http://www.paulgraham.com/hubs.html)
How do you define value? I'm asking this question because i really don't know a wholesome answer. Not a philosophical statement.
Not by how much money you make.
Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker in 2009 said, "I wish someone would give me one shred of neutral evidence that financial innovation has led to economic growth - one shred of evidence… [U.S. Financial services increased its share of value-added from 2 percent to 6.5 percent] Is that a reflection of your financial innovation, or just a reflection of what you're paid?" The only financial innovation over the past 20 years that impressed Volcker was the automated teller machine.
Former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker in 2009 said, "I wish someone would give me one shred of neutral evidence that financial innovation has led to economic growth - one shred of evidence… [U.S. Financial services increased its share of value-added from 2 percent to 6.5 percent] Is that a reflection of your financial innovation, or just a reflection of what you're paid?" The only financial innovation over the past 20 years that impressed Volcker was the automated teller machine.
Well the website is definitely not built for this.
F* it, we'll do it live! We're going to live edit now...
F* it, we'll do it live! We're going to live edit now...
They buy the people not the company. Google and facebook need developers. Not the college graduate developers that have only done school project in C/C++ and never manage anything that people want in their life. They need people like the ones who made path because they know the people who made path understand mobile, understand design, and understand how to gain hype. It wasn't luck these guys were on tech crunch they understood their market. That is what is worth 100 million. Some people are academics, but only real test for a great app developer is can you make something people want.
Yes, Instagram has some value, but it's in the users and the eye of that particular person that you enjoy. The photographs themselves are rarely anything of note.
I do think it's unfair to lump these companies. Hipstamatic is just selling an app. Even if the community turns into nothing, they sold quite a few apps at $2. Most of these companies though have nothing to sell and little value to provide. They are just hoping for some angel to bail them out until the inevitable Google buyout.
And stop reading TechCrunch already.