benrpeters

I have a similar app (http://pickmoto.com) for iPhone and iPad. It's clear that we can't legally use the logos without a license. But of course the leagues aren't going to pay attention to indie developers until they are genuine threats. At that point, maybe you could afford to pay for the license or work something out.

We decided against risking it with logos because Apple could yank us at a moment's notice even if we made it into the Store. And considering that some of the best selling apps are developed by the Leagues, we imagine Apple would be pretty quick to act if the Leagues asked.

So instead, we're using pennants without logos. Not ideal, but safer.

Congrats ESPN. You're going to get a lot of boring derivatives of what you already have. Meanwhile, developers interested in making money will build right around you. There has been staggeringly little innovation in products for sports fans. ESPN is ensuring that "the Worldwide Leader" doesn't appear anywhere on the next great product.

I'm curious why YC likes 2-3 founders over 4-5. Do more people = more potential for internal drama? Or are larger groups more resistant to changing on the fly? I would think that 4-5 talented go-getters would be better than 2-3.

I'm optimistic that future students will be more curious about entrepreneurship. Their disillusioned older brothers and sisters with graduate degrees will report back to them from the job front. There is an educational arms race that has caused the bar for degree and GPA requirements to be raised for many professional jobs. Folks are being squeezed to less rewarding jobs. And I'm already seeing a shifting mindset about the safety and inevitability of a good career after grad school.

As schools see their post-grad employment and salary figures drop, they will come around on what makes good preparation for life in the future job market.

It seems that the author had to come up with those complicated theories b/c he couldn't get Milner to open up. The loan insight that he uncovers about the perception that led to investing in SV is that YM foresaw that social networks could generate huge margins from advertising. Well, that certainly was smart of him, but how did he get there and how did he pick the companies he did? He buys Mail.ru and then ... he buys facebook? One dinner with Goldman people in Moscow and voila!?! The article provides a decent biographical sketch but the author is left to speculate on all the whys. I wonder whether he asked tough questions and was simply rebuffed or whether YM provided access but laid strict ground rules. If so, the author should have let the readers know this.

That he would prefer to remain enigmatic rather than open up about his process means that he is at least partly responsible for the overly complicated theories about him. Maybe he has good reasons not to or maybe it reflects a different culture. But I find it more than a little ironic that someone so tight-lipped is a social network tycoon.

“Doctors and scientists can draw a lesson in prudence and humility from this,” he said. “When you manipulate nature in a way you don’t completely understand, the consequences can be unpredictable and absolutely disastrous.”

-the law of unintended consequences

Good post. I'm curious whether you've written about the evolution of your idea at Betable. To what extent does your product now compare to the business plan you hatched in the beginning?

This article reminded me of my undergrad econ classes. I understand that it was just undergrad and we were learning a basic tool set. But it seriously scares me when I remember how my classmates and I (some of whom are on Wall St) took class after class that drilled supply/demand graphs premised on rational, utility maximizing populations into our heads. Whether the theories in this article are oversimplified or not, they do provide an important counterweight against anyone who thinks that they can reliably predict people's decisionmaking. I hope econ textbooks are evolving to reflect the growing marriage between econ and neuropsych.