Pinterest’s first investor explains the secret to the startup’s success | Hacker News Reader

Pinterest’s first investor explains the secret to the startup’s success

mashable.com

27 pointsbootload20 comments

Should be titled, "Pinterest's first investor explains nothing."

Not only does he make no offering of a "secret to success", but in reality says:

'there’s no way to explain how the company that has done no PR, no marketing and is still operating on an invite-only basis is “captivating so much of the conversation”'

It's the old bait-and-switch article title.

Here's the secret: they guessed and it turned out people liked it.

'there’s no way to explain how the company that has done no PR, no marketing and is still operating on an invite-only basis is "captivating so much of the conversation"'

At first I thought of the article as a Submarine? ~ http://paulgraham.com/submarine.html

"... 'As the app (Tote) was being used, he recognized that women were grabbing, tagging specific items that they were able to view later when they got home,' said Cohen. What Silbermann saw was that huge numbers of people were grabbing items and sharing them with friends. 'He recognized that these women were sharing their tastes.' ..."

but the initial idea noticed the above phenomena & rebuilt as a service. The idea appears to come out of nowhere but it didn't. Hence the mantra, "connect everyone in the world through the 'things'" ~ http://pinterest.com/about/

"... They want to know how they did it. Aside from what Cohen sees as the obvious simplicity and elegance of the site, Cohen said Silbermann remained open to smart people throughout the development process. Early on he engaged with partners, customers and even designers. “I used to see him in New York just taking out small rooms to meet with customers ..."

This is the schlep-work ~ http://www.paulgraham.com/schlep.html ...out meeting with clients to further Pinterest as a new kind of digital version of a high-end coffee table mag and has the potential place to profit ~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinterest#Business

Pinterest definitely has popularity-and for good reason; it's a well designed site/service-but "success" has a very broad definition.

Whilst it may be a black-and-white view on things, I don't think it's a success yet. If I were an investor, I certainly wouldn't think so. They have two big questions over their head:

1) How are they going to turn a profit, without degrading the quality of the service or UX?

2) How are they going to deal with potential copyright lawsuits and/or DMCA takedown notices?

Saw the best explanation in a college newspaper:

Girl: “Do you know what Pinterest is?”

Guy: “Yeah, it’s like porn for girls.”

Girl [blank look]: “What ...?”

Guy: “Girls enjoy that as much as guys enjoy porn.”

http://www.mndaily.com/2012/03/08/overheard-around-campus

I'd say it's more like a reddit for girls, but whatever.

“I had a really fun time! Well, you know, until I started puking everywhere ...” —Superblock

I see nothing's changed in the nine years since I graduated from the U of M..

As I was reading this article I started to wonder how long they had been working on Pinterest. It turns out they registered the domain in November of 2009, so this is another example of an overnight success taking much more than just we all probably realize.

I remember first hearing about pinterest a few months ago then not hearing anything else for a while. Then all of a sudden a few weeks ago every female I knew with a few exceptions was using it. It seemed to hit some gender specific nerve there and just took off.

Pinterest items started showing up consistently in my facebook feed sometime back in february (at least), so I'm guessing they got a spike in popularity when they implemented some FB feature, made wall-posting more frictionless (less permission-based), or some other technical development.

The author clearly doesn't understand the concept of a "social entrepreneur". Just making something conducive to sharing and socializing is a gross distortion of the term social entrepreneurship.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't social entrepreneurs creating and managing a venture for social change, not enabling people to share pretty beads and sexy dresses.

While the word "social" get's thrown around in every possible way, we are losing our semantics by labeling any blowout success in "social media" as a force for positive change. While Pinterest is a very interesting step forward for creative expression, it is hardly a product of social entrepreneurship.

> “I was Pinterest’s first investor.” That’s a sentence I bet you wish you could say.

I don't think I wish that. By what metric is Pinterest successful? Are they profitable? I don't get it otherwise.

Edit: From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinterest#Business they aren't profitable, and don't seem to have even a remote path towards becoming profitable as it stands. What here is a success?

So presumably you're also pleased you weren't the first investor in Google, Amazon, Facebook or Twitter either. After all becoming hugely popular before they became profitable was a clear indication they'd never be profitable. No wait..

If I invested in, say, Twitter and you asked me right after they exploded "how do you feel about this investment?", I'd tell you plainly: I doubt they'll ever be profitable, but I'll make my money back in future rounds. And that's what happened, except that they eventually, maybe became profitable (if you look at the numbers the right way). Pinterest may end up being a brilliant investment that makes everyone a ton of money, but I find it highly doubtful, and right now they're hoisting the "Mission Accomplished" banner before they've even gotten into the hard part. Sorry, but the metric for success in business isn't getting people to use your product, it's turning that utility into money. They haven't shown they can do that.

Survivor Bias.

After taking a gander at Pinterest's Terms of Use I deleted my account. The legal disaster that is Pinterest's terms is just epic. It's bad for its users and awful for the sites that had their content pinned. It puts everybody in a bad spot. I realize they drive a lot of traffic to sites but still they have some legal issues to clean up.

Honestly, these link bait or bait-and-switch articles should be down voted. This article is without substance and is total crap. Nothing at all was explained... rubbish!

Article didn't say much. Waste of time.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com