I think the point he's making is that they are going to try to figure out your actual real-world social graph based on who you associate with and where. I'm sure that was the killer part of the pitch.
If you forget about the photo sharing app for now, and imagine they do manage to create such a graph - it seems to me that it would be a lot more valuable than what Facebook calls a social graph - which is really more like a social game.
Imagine being being able to identify the people who are 'hubs' and 'influencers' in real life as opposed to online. Now imagine you can predict where they are going to be hanging out so that you can promote things to them, and then track the fanout as they meet people in real life. That is what Sequoia think their $41M might get them.
But they're in a situation where they need a compelling application first. You can't get the data without multiple people opening up the application. Color is really not compelling.
This is a classic problem I have in my own research at a university: in order to test the cool stuff, you have to convince people using stuff they already get. The convincing is way, way harder.
Maybe Color is just one of a suite of apps. Maybe the idea is to license the patents to Apple or Google so it all happens transparently (but the idea that my phone is silently collecting and transmitting data about me all the time makes me want to puke). However, what they've got is going nowhere fast.
Agree 100%. The trick for them is to build a compelling application.
I faced a similar problem with delineal.com. Like Color, my groundbreaking stuff is in the data choices, algorithms and data filtering and in my generalized approach to solving problems. I don't lead with detailed discussions of the technology because A) the vision and direction tell a more entertaining story B) The matching and filtering algorithms do not a product make. I need to build products that solve real-world problems to generate revenue.
I like the recognition they're getting for their technical work. It bodes well for me...and provides some nice hints about how to better frame my pitch... because I can say "I have technology AND useful apps".
I agree with this 100%. I'm really, really not sure I want anybody to have that kind of data about me - but I'm equally sure that most people are going to love it.
All the bang of Facebook, without any of the drag of data entry? And it's always freaking right, assuming all the people on your morning train into the city don't get added.
They are so right to pump money into this. Although I have to admit that the decision to spend $350K of it on an entirely unremarkable and unGoogleable domain name sort of leaves me wondering.
If Color gains any initial traction at all in hopes of making a social graph, I wouldn't be surprised to see Facebook immediately going after it as well to cover their grounds. They have robust photo capabilities and strong mobile integration already, and it makes sense with their location check-ins to events and places.
assuming, of course, that the people you interact with all have smartphones with the color app running. as far as I know "passive" social networking or "let's interact with strangers" apps never gain traction, because most people don't find that idea compelling. outside of the handful of places with some density of early adopters and technohipsters (SF/NY basically), I just don't see anyone using this over the much more familiar model facebook provides.
Comments
I think the point he's making is that they are going to try to figure out your actual real-world social graph based on who you associate with and where. I'm sure that was the killer part of the pitch.
If you forget about the photo sharing app for now, and imagine they do manage to create such a graph - it seems to me that it would be a lot more valuable than what Facebook calls a social graph - which is really more like a social game.
Imagine being being able to identify the people who are 'hubs' and 'influencers' in real life as opposed to online. Now imagine you can predict where they are going to be hanging out so that you can promote things to them, and then track the fanout as they meet people in real life. That is what Sequoia think their $41M might get them.
But they're in a situation where they need a compelling application first. You can't get the data without multiple people opening up the application. Color is really not compelling.
This is a classic problem I have in my own research at a university: in order to test the cool stuff, you have to convince people using stuff they already get. The convincing is way, way harder.
Maybe Color is just one of a suite of apps. Maybe the idea is to license the patents to Apple or Google so it all happens transparently (but the idea that my phone is silently collecting and transmitting data about me all the time makes me want to puke). However, what they've got is going nowhere fast.
Agree 100%. The trick for them is to build a compelling application.
I faced a similar problem with delineal.com. Like Color, my groundbreaking stuff is in the data choices, algorithms and data filtering and in my generalized approach to solving problems. I don't lead with detailed discussions of the technology because A) the vision and direction tell a more entertaining story B) The matching and filtering algorithms do not a product make. I need to build products that solve real-world problems to generate revenue.
I like the recognition they're getting for their technical work. It bodes well for me...and provides some nice hints about how to better frame my pitch... because I can say "I have technology AND useful apps".
True - but if the technology behind it works, the money will let them keep launching products until one sticks.
I agree with this 100%. I'm really, really not sure I want anybody to have that kind of data about me - but I'm equally sure that most people are going to love it.
All the bang of Facebook, without any of the drag of data entry? And it's always freaking right, assuming all the people on your morning train into the city don't get added.
They are so right to pump money into this. Although I have to admit that the decision to spend $350K of it on an entirely unremarkable and unGoogleable domain name sort of leaves me wondering.
If Color gains any initial traction at all in hopes of making a social graph, I wouldn't be surprised to see Facebook immediately going after it as well to cover their grounds. They have robust photo capabilities and strong mobile integration already, and it makes sense with their location check-ins to events and places.
assuming, of course, that the people you interact with all have smartphones with the color app running. as far as I know "passive" social networking or "let's interact with strangers" apps never gain traction, because most people don't find that idea compelling. outside of the handful of places with some density of early adopters and technohipsters (SF/NY basically), I just don't see anyone using this over the much more familiar model facebook provides.