Yahbsoorbed Xoogling.
Over on the east coast the union squarers are talking about traction, and how they prefer to fund a web startup that has already beta'd. That makes total sense, but is also interesting when looked at from the perspective of the already launched website nay business. (that may or may not need VC; indeed may be a business unit within an online group)
When you work at a portal or large online group, often there are "build" teams, and then "maintain" teams. (this goes through cycles as with all organisational structure theories) Alot of builders dont want to be maintainers and so the mutation goes. For the lucky few that are able to innovate once they launch, the trick then is to listen to customers (and not just those really loud people who make a point of emailing/feedingback) - listening to what the right critical mass of customers really need sometimes doesn't align with what you already had in the business plan to build. (or leftover from the previous spec that you didnt finish)
Just as they say first impressions count, and people know within blaagh seconds they had met their soulmate, so too do websites often only get one chance. A few seconds on the home page, and bang you might hit it off. Or they just click back and haul ass out of there. Never to be seen again. Let alone visit you for your post beta-clean up :)*
Union Square Ventures : "So, we may love the idea but until we see the implementation in a live setting (closed beta isn't live enough for us) we do not feel like we can assess the social adoption issues that are so critical. We don't care if it's called beta or commercial code. As long as it has been in the market and we can use it, see how others are using it, look at internal weblogs, and external services like Comscore and Alexa, we can make a good assessment of the adoption curve."
* I have different theories on build vs maintain depending on stage I am in the cycle, and size of company/team unit makes a difference. (solo artist vs being in band) My experience in big and small companies though is that alot of energy can go into launch, and then innovative front end iterations get neglected due to techs being allocated to back end scaling that comes with increased use of site. Throw in a few sales and marketing projects which affect tech resource and bang, you can be just another Yahbsoorbed social media play. (the very best companies avoid this)
When you work at a portal or large online group, often there are "build" teams, and then "maintain" teams. (this goes through cycles as with all organisational structure theories) Alot of builders dont want to be maintainers and so the mutation goes. For the lucky few that are able to innovate once they launch, the trick then is to listen to customers (and not just those really loud people who make a point of emailing/feedingback) - listening to what the right critical mass of customers really need sometimes doesn't align with what you already had in the business plan to build. (or leftover from the previous spec that you didnt finish)
Just as they say first impressions count, and people know within blaagh seconds they had met their soulmate, so too do websites often only get one chance. A few seconds on the home page, and bang you might hit it off. Or they just click back and haul ass out of there. Never to be seen again. Let alone visit you for your post beta-clean up :)*
Union Square Ventures : "So, we may love the idea but until we see the implementation in a live setting (closed beta isn't live enough for us) we do not feel like we can assess the social adoption issues that are so critical. We don't care if it's called beta or commercial code. As long as it has been in the market and we can use it, see how others are using it, look at internal weblogs, and external services like Comscore and Alexa, we can make a good assessment of the adoption curve."
* I have different theories on build vs maintain depending on stage I am in the cycle, and size of company/team unit makes a difference. (solo artist vs being in band) My experience in big and small companies though is that alot of energy can go into launch, and then innovative front end iterations get neglected due to techs being allocated to back end scaling that comes with increased use of site. Throw in a few sales and marketing projects which affect tech resource and bang, you can be just another Yahbsoorbed social media play. (the very best companies avoid this)
posted by redbarren at 9:26 PM
<< Home