When you are suffering from a chronic disease, sometimes the only people who can understand what you are going through are other people with the same condition. But when that condition is rare, it can be difficult to find them. WeAre.Us wants to help. It is a platform of 16 social networks that connect people with chronic illnesses. And it just launched a revamped version (which mainly features an improved user interface). The site entered the crowded health 2.0 market last April, but stands out with its focused internal framework and commitment to supporting the patients who use it.
In contrast to health platforms like DailyStrength or Revolution Health, which serve as a contact point for health-related topics of any kind, WeAre.Us connects people affected by severe illnesses only. In that sense, it is more like PatientsLikeMe. But rather than create an all-encompassing site, WeAre.Us decided to take more of a niche social network approach.
Given that these patients deserve special attention, the company decided to set up separate sites with individual domain names. The subsites, such as WeAreFibro.org (for users suffering from fibromyalgia, a chronic pain disorder) or WeAreCrohns.org (Crohn’s is a gastric disease), run on the same core engine but are independent from each other.
WeAre.Us tries to avoid Ning-like scattering effects by allowing users to create communities only if more more than 1,000 members can be expected. CMO Robert Patterson says another differentiator is the active, individualized support the company provides all WeAre.Us members.
The approach seems to work: While Ning has over 50 Crohn’s-based (mostly inactive) micro social networks, for example, WeAre.Us’ single Crohn’s community boasts over 2,000 members. One weakness is the lack of a cross network ID and profile system (such as that used by Ning). But according to Patterson, demand for such a system is so far almost non-existent.
The site’s 16 social networks are being monetized by a full sponsorship model (one sponsor per site per month) and a lead generation system: WeAre.Us collects anonymized health data from its users and passes it on to pharma companies, which can cut costs on recruiting suitable patients for clinical trials.
WeAre.Us’ strategy of self-controlled sites, vertical focus, unique branding for each interest group, and human-powered user support is paying off so far: The user base, while still small, currently grows 35% month-over-month (expecting to pass the 10,000 member mark this month), with each member spending two hours on the site per visit.
WeAre.Us will also soon officially announce it took the first prize in the premiere VenCorps Community Driven Capital Contest ($50,000 in cash and accolades), which is backed by New York-based private equity firm Spencer Trask. (VenCorps, for those who follow these things, is what emerged from the now-defunct Cambrian House).
See all
Post
This competition was very unfair.
They call themselves community powered capital, but after people vote the vencorps staff go in and modify and select whichever one they think is best.
There is nothing democratic or fuck about this process.
@Martinator
That’s not true at all.
Yes our staff vote, but they vote just like all the other 2500+ members of the VenCorps alpha. What’s unfair about that? Why exclude members of our team that have 10+ years in Venture Capital?
Does Obama not get to Vote in November?
Is it unfair if he does?
Ahh, that would be fair IF company members could also vote for themselves. But alas, that is not allowed. So yes, the voting can be greatly skewed. If it isn’t, then show a full audit of who voted what and how the winner was tabulated. This should also include what weight the “experts” have on the overall decision. I say “experts” since the experts rate even if they are not part of the due diligence calls.
Funny how those that don’t win… cry foul. Obviously that’s you, since by your own admission (but without the transparency you are criticizing us for) were on the DD calls.
As we stated on the site, Experts don’t have any weight on voting. Well they have same weight that Randy, Paula and Simon have on Idol. I’m sure the experts influence voting, but that’s it. There is no mystery here.
As for founders voting for their own startups, that was a community decision and only came after days of discussion and much thought. Again, sorry you don’t agree with the community you hope will support you, but maybe there is something too that.
As for full stats and audit, again, we post this on the site. http://www.vencorps.com/blog/w.....esults.jpg
Sean Wise, founder
http://www.VenCorps.com
Sean,
How is VenCorps related to Spencer Trask?
Spencer Trask funded the creation of VenCorps and acts as our parent company.
Congrats to them.
Your TeleDoctor is willing to participate in the next Vencorps competition.
Mehdi,
Your TeleDoctor’s Founder,
Teledoctor.com? - If your are looking for funding, I wish you luck. Honestly,
I visited the site and, seriously, cannot find a good reason NOT to keep using Dogpile.com for a health-related search.
Myron
Anything that helps bring people with certain health conditions together to help them cope should be congratulated on a job well done.
Jon
http://WoodMarvels.com - Create Unique Memories
PS if anyone would like to help pick our next winner, just go to http://www.vencorps.com/join/utr and signup.
Sean Wise
Founder,
VenCorps.com
the vencorps site is riddled with angry folks and a very poor community and angry comments. the 50k convertible debt is a total joke and mockery of a competition. vencorps gets a zero for execution and a 10 for promotion
Brand dilution, too many sites.
Brand Dilution? I think you have failed to see the idea of what they are doing, a more niche approach naturally creates a stronger affiliation to the brand. Picking an individual disease and tailoring all activities to that field is good on several counts. With something as important and private as a chronic illness the best option is to be niche and focused. Generalist social networks can only so deep in providing users with relevancy, privacy and intimacy, so brand dilution?? Please! Get up to date with how social media is monetizing > going niche.
>> niche
Please. This site is ‘relevant’ and ‘intimate’ because they slapped a single t-cell count field on the HIV site. At least all the cancers will fit together in a single site bc they’re so similar. er.. not. MySpace with a disease specific chrome is no achievement.
I agree with Elaina in that I do not believe that the creation of separate sites with similar branding each catered to a specific market segment (in this case a specific medical condition or ethnic group) can be considered as brand dilution for a company specializing in the creation of niche social networks any more than the creation of NA or OA has served as brand dilution for Alcoholics Anonymous.
Congratulations!
Hi, I work at Cambrian House, so uhhh…I’m pretty sure I”m qualified to say we aren’t “defunct”
For those who ACTUALLY follow things, VenCorps is built on Cambrian House’s crowdsourcing platform…and good journalists/bloggers usually do a little fact checking before posting stuff
Have a great day,
Blue
I just went to your site to ask if you’re really defunct. Thanks for answering here.
Allan,
We’ve also posted specific details about are non-deadness here: http://www.cambrianhouse.com/b.....-not-dead/
- Michael
Fibro is a serious illness? Come on…
Well I guess Pfizers and Eli Lilly are a bunch of jokers, I guess they spend billions of dollars on drug development and production for a laugh…talk to anyone that has been diagnosed with Fibromyalgia (millions in the US, including myself) who live with not only FMS but the co-morbidity of depression, chronic fatigue syndrome and panic attacks; no nate, you jackass its not serious at all. Obvious to see that some are too ignorant to think outside their sphere…btw just checked out the site, pretty good, I certainly like what I see.
I have been part of the Vencorps community since the early days. I don’t know why you think its angry. And I can vouch for the validity of the voting process. I have discussed it on many levels with the company founders. They are legit and so is the site.
Some of this discord sounds like sour grapes to me.
My company came in third (Buybak.com) in the just completed showdown on VenCorps. From my current experience and perceptions, VenCorps really has something here. As I’m sure it will evolve - serious startups currently receive many intelligent/constructive comments from the community (this is a good thing) and because of this and what VenCorps requests as far as an Executive Summary (and video), the answering of “20” questions that all investors would ask, bios, power point presentations (with requested audio accompaniment) and going through an “expert” review it puts startups through an accelerated process within a 30-60 day period that would take much more time through trail and error with real investors and stakeholders. I’ve seen pretty much most startups benefit from this experience.
They are just in Alpha, but have been responsive and iterate their development and the top three finalists in each showdown are moved over to their “Launchpad” were they conference call the top three of each showdown (not just the winner in which they have a financial relationship with) to assist their growth. They have plans to assist the top three finalists of each showdown in numerous ways, most have yet to be communicated. I am a 15+ year entrepreneur and I can say that so far this is the best site (as compared FundFinder, AngelSoft, GoBigNetwork, VentureDen and many others that profess to “help” startups evolve and/or connect to funding) that I’ve come across to assist new startups to enhance their efforts and as such put themselves in a better position for success whether that is through outside funding or continue bootstrapping effort. If you’re a real (not an idea on the back of a napkin) startup you would serve yourself well to check VenCorps and their community out and if you’re a budding entrepreneur (or interested observer) it’s a great way to see the challenges and evolution of a startup.
Our company has not been asked and does not receive any benefits for this review from VenCorps.
Just wanted to mention that the two other startups that finished #1 and #2 in the latest VenCorps showdown (before us) were StyleHop and Change Round-Up. Check them out (online or VenCorps) and you’ll see they have valid business propositions.
I was able to review WeAre.Us entry into VenCorps startup showdown and they were definitely a worthy winner. They take the social platform concept and apply it to specific groups that are best rewarded from an online social community - people with similar chronic illnesses.
Dear TechCrunch, are you fucking mad? Why do you insist on publishing articles that claim a company (in this case CH) is dead, when it’s clearly still running? They have an office, employees, customers, products, and there’s no sign of them stopping. I know this because I can walk there for lunch on Tuesday and watch them work with my own eyes. I’ve been a pretty loyal reader of TechCrunch, and in this case I simply happen to have first-hand knowledge of the subject of this article. Unfortunately it makes me wonder what other sorts of misinformation I am unknowingly being subjected to with your shit articles. Seriously… quality control Mr. Arrington.
I’m pleased to see attention drawn to our space, but i’m disappointed that press (and awards) are being given to this particular company, whom i had to contact personally to stop the incessant spamming that they were conducting on DailyStrength, my site. I’m fine with competition, but it’s particularly bad form in my eyes to ransack your competitor’s site to attempt to steal their members.
Dear Doug:
As we spoke on the phone months ago we apologized for some of our overzealous users and interns who had independently taken initiatives of which we would not have approved of. We hope you share with this community that we responded the complaint in timely manner, and put into place several protocols to avoid any such repetition. We appreciate your competition and see that our product offers a different and complimentary focused experience for those in chronic diseases. If you are still concerned that our product is not positive - I recommend you speak directly with our users. Some of their testimonials highlight the value of the service @
http://www.weare.us/testimonials/
Best Regards,
Dr. Declan Doogan
Founder / President
WeAre.Us
It is such a crowded space for health 2.0 community type website. I am not sure there is a business model for it. At least they are not CPM model. Selling data to Pharma and sponsorship model might work. We will have to wait and see.
the site looks nice. really. but if your only edge is ‘we don’t have as many topics’ (which will probably change if they will have enough time and money) you’re not going to stay for long.
I think DailyStrength, MDJunction and MedHelp will eat them alive.
there are many more as you can check in my list of health social networks:
http://health-social-networks......works.html
To Mehdi Akiki, Re “yourteledoctor.com”
“the tool will enable doctors to focus on what is really important: taking care of their patients” –very noble intentions, unfortunately they show ignorance of how things work in the ‘medical field’
This is another absurd justification for throwing a technological “solution” to a “problem” that YOU may perceive as real.
You may argue that there are not enough doctors in remote locations and at the same time, you ignore the fact that it takes *real* time to do the consultation, with the establishment of a patient-doctor relationship, with the medical liability that goes with it.
Who is going to pay for the doctor’s time. knowledge and liability insurance premiums? your company? Get real!!! –plus, here in the US, doctors cannot provide medical advise across state lines unless they are licensed in the state where the patients are .
And, BTW, getting a license in any US state is an expensive, lengthy and cumbersome process. Would your company pay for the expenses too?
There are many, many other important issues here –that you do not know.
But I understand your actual purpose: get funding, draw a salary for a few months, maybe get bought out. etc. while you work on a something that will be failing before it actually starts.
I have a “brilliant” idea: why not harvest clouds to provide water to African countries? Mull on this one… In the meantime, you would be better off just writing software.
Sue
Right on.
I often read, and hear, that the “medical establishment” has been slow to adopt ‘awesome’ new technologies that would greatly benefit everyone’s health and medical care. Rubbish.
This is a long topic, so I would mention just a few points: One –the ‘paperless’ medical office. Cannot be done efficiently. Why? Because, even if the medical personnel, including nurses and doctors start using state-of-the-art wireless tablets or portable computers, there is always the possibility of someone, in the next office or building or on the street, of evesdropping [yes, it happens.] –two: even with wireless devices and powerful management software, there is always a *mandate* from the governement and insurance companies to keep hard/paper copies/charts in the office, as proper documentation recording *everything* that is done, procedures performed, prescriptions, etc. –for obvious legal reasons.
Now, the real question is: why bother with the expensive ‘high tech’ devices and communications when using them would take way more time than simply writing on a chart?
Three -The *online* medical records. It is and will be a colossal failure, even when Microsoft and Google have already spent millions on this dead elephant.
Why, why? –a twenty-something ‘entrepreneur’ would ask… Just ask your mom or aunt, etc. a simple question: “would you put your personal, confidential medical information –Let’s say, hysterectomy, pneumonia, drug overdose, etc., online, on a remote server, where multiple eyeballs would look at it and, most likely, release it to a third party, anonymously, for money [to insurance companies]???” —The answer would be: Mmmm, not a chance in hell…
This is another example of using *new* technology by clueless dudes… Who don;t even understand the reasons when they are hit on the face with them.
Oliver
Thanks for the link about Crohn’s disease
We just participated in the last VenCorps Startup showdown and had a great experience. We won - which helps. But, most important, we’ve learned a ton about what works and what doesn’t as it relates how to articulate and position our business model with potential funding sources. For those of you that have been through funding a startup, you understand getting this kind of feedback “before it counts” is critical and pays huge dividends. Kudos to Vencorps for stepping out with a new model to support startup development. They are really on to something.
I am part of the VenCorps team. It is great to see WeAre.US get some well deserved recognition. I feel compelled to re-inforce that Cambrian House is far from defunct. Since purchasing IP assets from them earlier in the year which became the foundation of the VenCorps platform, CH and VenCorps have had a close working relationship. Their team has been great. I understand that one of their crowdsourced entities, Gwabs, is about to enter public beta.
Doug
WeAre.US is providing a valuable service and is run by passionate founders. Of course business model seems to be the unknown for so many of the Health 2.0 companies. Hopefully, monetization can come soon since big pharma has been slow to provide this type of service.
Christine
http://www.insomnia123.com