1) I disagree with your assessment of 9gag. It's similar to previous social news sites, but different in a couple key ways.[1] Reddit was originally called a "del.icio.us clone" but now we call things reddit clones. There's some ick-factor from the way that content is copied from reddit and elsewhere, but that really goes both ways.
2) It's pretty clear how 9gag makes money: paid placements. Unlike reddit it doesn't appear to have a strong anti-commercial taboo. If it can grow big enough, it will make money. Remember: Facebook is already quite profitable (by the billions!) just not profitable enough to justify at $100 billion valuation yet. So this objection makes no sense to me.
3) Facebook was a HUGE success from the point of view of pretty much every investor except people who bought for the "pop" right after the IPO. Every VC investor in Facebook did great. Maybe they IPO'd above their true value, but it's still a $40 billion company. That's larger than 99.99% of all companies that get started. So I really don't get where you're coming from here at all.
[1] Specifically, it is image-only, presents the images inline, and uses Facebook likes and comments instead of native ones.
Comments
1) I disagree with your assessment of 9gag. It's similar to previous social news sites, but different in a couple key ways.[1] Reddit was originally called a "del.icio.us clone" but now we call things reddit clones. There's some ick-factor from the way that content is copied from reddit and elsewhere, but that really goes both ways.
2) It's pretty clear how 9gag makes money: paid placements. Unlike reddit it doesn't appear to have a strong anti-commercial taboo. If it can grow big enough, it will make money. Remember: Facebook is already quite profitable (by the billions!) just not profitable enough to justify at $100 billion valuation yet. So this objection makes no sense to me.
3) Facebook was a HUGE success from the point of view of pretty much every investor except people who bought for the "pop" right after the IPO. Every VC investor in Facebook did great. Maybe they IPO'd above their true value, but it's still a $40 billion company. That's larger than 99.99% of all companies that get started. So I really don't get where you're coming from here at all.
[1] Specifically, it is image-only, presents the images inline, and uses Facebook likes and comments instead of native ones.
> I really don't get where you're coming from
ok. we can can disagree. I never intended to convince you of anything. have I failed? lol