Goes to show that realizing there is a lot of opportunity somewhere and throwing an obscene amount of money at it is not enough to succeed.
786 karma · joined April 1, 2008
Goes to show that realizing there is a lot of opportunity somewhere and throwing an obscene amount of money at it is not enough to succeed.
It's a nice story for bloggers and journalists, but I don't think she's someone I need business advice from.
As much as people here think advertising is boring, I think Twitter could actually have a great contextual ad business. As long as the ads are relevant. If someone Twitters about HD TVs, would they not be especially be engaged by an ad for TV's? What about people who tweet about flights seeing ads from airlines? There is a lot of potential there.
2. Artificially low interest rates reflect Greenspan's belief that given enough liquidity, markets will be self correcting. He thought banks were in the best position to protect themselves from risk because they bear the greatest consequences of failure. (He has since admitted the failure of this belief.) Clearly they were not, as the low interest rates lead to further inflation of the credit bubble.
No, it is certainly not Adwords. For some offers it doesn't work. For some it works better than search. Just because it's not search does not mean it's not an incredibly valuable marketing channel.
They will never be as profitable as Google because the CTR of the ads is pathetically low (compared to search) and the clicks are much less valuable, but there is massive traffic there. Even if they never develop the killer ad product there is still a big business there.
The idea that unbridled self interest leads to the greatest good guided Greenspan's monetary policy and got us into this mess.
There is certainly a lot to be said for enlightened self interest and personal freedom, but the absolutism of objectivism is just as wrong as communism.
What type of thinking is that? That VC companies are required to shoot for the home run exit? That's not a mode of thinking, it's the reality of the VC industry. Lean, efficient, profitable companies are great, but unless they aim to become big businesses they are not VC worthy.
As for the other side of the argument, I must be too stupid to see it. All I could glean from that convoluted mess was that Digg and Facebook should be more like Google and eBay.
The author clearly does not get it. Profitability is not a "pipe dream" for companies like Digg and Facebook. If profitability was the only objective, I'm sure they could achieve it. The pipe dream is attaining the massive scale necessary to build a publicly traded company.
Some interesting bits though. I hate how knowledge gets degraded into self help pseudo-science to sell books.
Seriously? That does not make any sense. Why not try a paid search campaign? Or networking with teachers via twitter? What is the purpose of building a business and then not doing anything to market it?
The 40% conversion rate increase seems dubious, unless it applies only to current G-Checkout users, which as other have said are few and and far between. Amazing with Google's clout and advertiser perks like this their market share is still pitiful.