Where: Like Foursquare, except with profits and lots more users | Hacker News Reader

Where: Like Foursquare, except with profits and lots more users

blogs.wsj.com

41 pointscwan15 comments

The name change from 'uLocate Communications' to 'Where' was sideways at best. 'Where' is hard to google, prone to confusion in spoken communication, and very generic. For example, a conference for their market is already called "Where 2.0".

I'm wary of 'Where' as a name. Will 'Where' wear well, if whereever it's discussed we're also hearing competitors' wares emphasizing 'where' features? Where, with all these word collisions, will Where find the werewithal to forge a brand image where we're likely to see 'Where' as meaning what Where wants 'Where' to mean?

Maybe There: http://www.there.com

Wait, no, there's no There anymore. Maybe there wasn't a market for There with Second Life in the picture.

It may be a confusing name, but it's not hard to google. They're already #1 for the term "where": http://www.google.com/search?q=where

Kudos to Google for that... but it's still hard to find discussion about 'Where'. Try for example [where reviews] or [where company management].

I couldn't agree more. This is a major oversight. When your customers are kind enough tell their friends about your service, you don't want an Abbott and Costello routine to play out...

First, bonus points for using wherewithal.

Secondly, thanks for the reminder of how complex English can really be. Your example makes me glad I'm a native speaker :)

The article mentions it, but the achievement aspect of Foursquare is a Very Significant Differentiator as opposed to a footnote.

You have two competing services with similar functionality and one is fun to use. Investors are betting that the fun to use one is the one that will catch on and stick now and in the future. The fact that the not-so-fun competitor is making money should make Foursquare investors jump for joy. It's a proof of business concept that's been done for them.

Wow...amazing no one has heard of these guys. I love the fact they have a business model and are cash flow positive. Sleeper hit...

The article said they had several million more users so it's not really a sleeper; it just isn't bouncing around the Silicon Valley echo chamber.

It seems that people always underestimate good marketing. Why don't startups spend more time/money on marketing? No time, I guess.

Actually, it really shows that hype is overhyped. Cashflow and profits are where it's at.

True, unless you really want the big $$$ payday/buyout. Then the hype might be worth it over cash flow and profits.

True. But marketing != hype.

Except it does not work outside the US of A.

Yep. Not even available in Canadian iTunes store.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com