Ok, here we go again. As soon as people get tired of blaming the venture capitalists for the downturn and layoffs, they start to point the finger at bloggers and journalists who write about them. In a blog post, SocialMedian founder Jason Goldberg criticizes us for our coverage of layoffs and deadpooled companies, saying it’s “sensationalist journalism,” adding “there’s no need to go tabloid when startups go sideways or don’t make it.”
Fred Wilson brought this up almost two years ago when he criticized our coverage of failed companies as well. A year ago Louis Gray said similar things. Our response is the same now as it was then: Don’t shoot the messenger.
Reporting on layoffs or a dead company isn’t tabloid journalism. We do not take pleasure in seeing companies fail. But it’s inevitable that most will. And not only is it news, but readers have a right to know about it.
I also think it’s important to look at the balance of our reporting, which focuses on the positive: new ideas, new technology, new startups and the success stories that follow. Nothing makes me happier than when a company that we launched on our blog, or at TechCrunch50, becomes profitable or gets acquired.
But when a company stumbles, it’s important to note that too, and talk about why it may have happened.
It’s also important to remember that real lives are being affected, notably those who no longer have jobs. In the U.S. there are very few restrictions on letting employees go, which allows companies the freedom to hire quickly in an upturn, knowing that they aren’t married to these employees forever and can trim down in hard times. But that doesn’t mean those companies shouldn’t have to think twice before laying people off (and over hiring to begin with). If they’re called out for it when it happens, other companies may weigh that cost and be more careful in the hiring to begin with.
To ignore layoffs and other bad news is to pretend that there’s no downside to starting a company, or going to work for one. That’s not the reality of startup life. And it would be irresponsible of us to lead people to think otherwise.
See all
Post
You’ve got to tell the truth - and the truth is sometimes news you don’t want to really know or hear.
for all its ingenuity and creativity, humanity still has difficulty dealing with reality, hence the finger pointing, etc.
But this should not come as a surprise, particularly in this country, where a 5 or 10 year plan is considered long-term (but what do you expect from a country whose existence is only 232 years old).
Such myopic outlook on life is what causes, in our society, so much “irrational exuberance” when all is well, and the same levels of “irrational fear” when all is not.
The beauty of it all though is that, using the same human ingenuity discussed above, you should be able to identify irrational fear for what it really is, opportunity, and convert it into irrational exuberance, or exuberance at the least.
Why in the world don’t you know it’s all your fault? After all, McCaine and Obama are.
–Glenn
Someone’s been cherry picken comments from here again. what goes around comes around, suit yourself. what happened to democracy? i now feel like a reporter at a john mccain rally being quarantined by the secret service from mingling with the crowd.
Nothing worse than “phantom comment hackers.”
FakeLocator.com-spill the real
it’s not “phantom comment hackers” removing your comments, its the ADMINS of this site removing your spam comments…. How can you build the next best, killing google, search thing…. when you don’t know the difference between a “Hacker” and a site admin… you fucktard
If possible please send the comment back to me. i will get the message and understand. my comments mean alot to me. i did manage to get a snipet from backtype but im still missin a chunk. thanks in advance.
and to all the phantom haters i will stack the relevancy of my comments against any of ya’all anyday.
look below somebodies been talking about you fools!
http://www.wired.com/entertain.....1/st_essay
Ignoring the downturn appears to be en vogue right now in the tech industry (at least, outside of VCs). I’ve seen many overconfident founders who are happy with their money in the bank and a good revenue model, thinking that they’re invincible. The problem is, they’re not taking into account the inevitability of their customers going out of business. Having a healthy business is a great thing, but when your customers start getting sick, you’ll soon catch a cold too.
awesome comment, but depends on customers again !
Get off the cloud allready. Even from a “failed” company there is much to learn. So please keep the info comming.
now if you could just rename the deadpool to interim startup sick bay or so
So you are only supposed to cover the positive side of business, only cover successful launches, successful funding rounds, but not cover when things go bad for a company???? one sided under the guise of “fair and balanced coverage” they must be Fox News Junkies?
Tech Crunch by it’s very name implies coverage of tech troubles.
Just read a great post about this very issue yesterday. It’s never too soon to expose the power mongers! http://tinyurl.com/6nnx7z.
Very good post. The best way to be optimistic in a downturn is to acknowledge the reality of it. We all learnt that in 2000 - both those who survived and those that didn`t.
Honestly, I don’t see any evidence anyone learned anything last time around.
I shot the sheriff, but I did not shoot the deputy ………………
Actually, if you read my post, I’m not at all saying to ignore the downturn. In fact I think it is important to cover layoffs. My point is that it’s a mistake to sensationalize them with hyperbolic terms like “deadpool” and “layoff tracker.”
From the blog post:
“It’s sensationalist journalism. It’s done just for ratings. It’s counter productive. It’s hyperbolic. And it’s time for it to go. There’s no need for it and no place for it.
All of us in the “internet industry” are not just in the business of developing new products and ideas that could change the world, we’re also all in the business of figuring out a sustainable business model. That’s very hard to do. Efforts should be lauded. Mistakes should be acknowledged. Report the facts when layoffs happen. But there’s no need to go tabloid when startups go sideways or don’t make it.
The technology startup industry and supporting economy/financing model is designed to reward trying and failing and trying and failing and trying and failing and hopefully succeeding over time. Not every startup will make it. In fact, very few will. That’s just how it works. So, let’s celebrate the entreprenuership spirit and have educated discussions around mistakes made and lessons learned. But leave the deadpool and the layoff tracker at home.
This writer/startup CEO also wonders outloud if the new media websites/blogs (the TechCrunch’s, ValleyWag’s, etc.) of the world will be as transparent when they themselves go sideways, screw up, or god-forbid have to layoff some employees. They too are still figuring out their business models. And that’s ok.
I’d prefer we just change the tone entirely and focus on substance vs. getting ratings out necessary layoffs. In fact, I’d much rather read a thoughtful post by one of the editors of the new media websites/blogs on why they think tech startups should or should not tighten the belt right now. Lead that debate vs. encouraging the pile on. There are going to be A LOT of layoffs in the months ahead in startup land. We’re just getting started on this. Let’s get ahead of it and plan for resources for the laid-off. Take a leadership position in interviewing and highlighting companies who are hiring. Be part of the solution.”
Anyway, agree with me or disagree with me — that’s fine. This is a worthwhile debate to have.
you have no evidence of sensationalism. “deadpool” isn’t gloating, it’s descriptive. same with “layoff tracker.” you also compare us to valleywag, which is insulting. This isn’t a worthwhile debate when you are stirring up the crazies to think that we are responsible for the downturn. That has very real world consequences on people’s lives (ie me).
Mike,
I would like to make a more neutral comment:
Jason is being hypersensitive to the words “layoff tracker” and “deadpool.” Those two words are in no way moving markets, nor could they be deemed inappropriate. In addition, it is in no way a news organization’s responsibility to “laud efforts,” “reward failing,” or “celebrate the entrepreneurial spirit” all of the time. That wouldn’t be sensationalist that would be sentimentalist. Both are equally bad for journalism. It isn’t your job to give companies a pat on the back when they fail to get their legs.
That being said, I have been frustrated with the content lately. I’m a long time TC reader and I think that in order to produce more volume your writing staff has sacrificed detail. The posts don’t have the same depth that they used to and the analysis has become more and more routine and watered down. Tell your writers to go through these companies with a fine-toothed comb like they used to or hire writers that can. I’m tired of the fluff. I want to hear more about:
1. Analysis of underlying technologies
2. Market size
3. Competitors (not just listing them…analysis…strengths/weaknesses)
4. Pain points
5. More analysis of the business model: has it been tried before? by who? what will make or break it?
6. Management
7. Intellectual property?
8. What are the questions left unanswered?
I understand the need to go more mainstream to grow the TC readership. TC is a company too and needs to be profit maximizing. Maybe the solution is to spin-off a more analytical site for those of us out there who are craving it. Either way, I would like to see this change.
Thanks.
Sorry. I really don’t know what I wrote. Must be the four Red Bulls I had this morning.
Please disregard.
I think the term “deadpool” and placing a company in the deadpool has sometimes come across more as sport vs. just factual. The layoff tracker tends to be a scoreboard for failures.
It is important to note the facts but I think the press also has a responsibility to set a tone.
Michael, you don’t need to defend TechCrunch from people like Jason. Just ignore them and keep writing about the latest tech news, whether it’s good or bad. You’re not the problem.
@Jason Goldberg — “I think the press also has a responsibility to set a tone” –
I may be wrong but don’t think that TechCrunch is ‘The Press’ as you erroneously perceive it.
It used to be, long, long time ago, that the press “responsibility” was to report ‘the news’, meaning what was happening, not to ‘analyze’. ‘enhance’ or. actually twist the truth. What is now known as ‘journalism’ is actually ‘whore-nalism’ which of course applies to the usual talking heads like Brokaw, Rather, Stephanopoules and several others.
BTW, I think that Mussolini as well as Putin also expressed that “the press also has a responsibility to set a tone.”
I didn’t write this:
“Sorry. I really don’t know what I wrote. Must be the four Red Bulls I had this morning.
Please disregard.”
That was someone faking to me.
I think terms like Deadpool and Layoff Tracker are there because the closer you are to the flame the more it feels like war. I agree it may seem like tabloid terminology but it has become part of startup language and when you are on IRC with your dev team and stuff is going sideways you can say “Listen man if we don’t get this thing turned around we are diving in the deadpool”.
TC provides balance and at the same times pushes the envelope. I do get your point that we should be nurturing startups and showing off all that is positive. However TC calls a spade a spade and that is cool because they have earned the credibility to say what they say and are 100% about supporting startups.
Cheers - Eric
Agreed on this one. From an entrepreneurs point of view it’s pretty important to know about others failures, you know how they say ‘Learn from others mistakes’.
If people are smart, they’ll get the message of the layoffs, tighten their belts and try to do more with less.
It’s not about the Yahoo or Seesmic layoffs per se, it’s about the fact that if Yahoo! and Seesmic lay off people, maybe other startups should pay attention to their teams and costs
I’m with Peter. Business at our PR firm is excellent. But, it doesn’t mean it will remain so for our clients. If it doesn’t and they go away, so too will a lot of our revenue. We tightened our belts more than a year ago, and it’s a good thing we did. This “recession” is a long way from being over and it needs to be reported on honestly. I’m afraid many people were ignoring it for too long, thinking it was temporary, and are now they are having to the piper.
Mike:
Here are a few “productive” things TechCrunch could do for the industry wrt to layoffs:
1. Feature/spotlight companies that are hiring. Do interviews with their execs on TechCrunch.
2. Host out-of-work startup meetups. Networking events.
3. Do a series of feature interviews with founders/CEO’s of startups that didn’t make it. What was the initial idea? Where did it miss the mark? Lessons learned.
jason, you insult us, you suggest we’re partially to blame for the downturn, and then you tell us what to write. honestly, you just lost a fan today.
Internet law dictates: Do not feed the trolls!
Jason is the chief of trolls.
Jason: Your post was way off base. Your response is even wackier.
Michael: He’s already hung himself, no need to whack the corpse with a stick.
What is wrong with whacking a corpse with a stick?
go to hell
> you just lost a fan today.
Haha. Michael, you’re just a fan of yourself and nobody else.
I didn’t write some of the comments written here under my name. That’s lame.
WTF
Failure is a result of:
1) Bad Team
2) Bad Execution
3) Bad idea
IF techcrunch is responsible for this -in any way- please let me know, because i would hire them in a heartbeat.. Although Techcrunch has some influence, ultimately its the customers who deside how succesfull a company is. Take a look at alltop, bad review on Techcrunch, yet they are pulling in 250K users a month. (going steady) Its the customer stupid.
Not too mention, there have been countless times that TC has given companies negative reviews (ex: Zecco) and have had to repudiate the remarks and revisit the company after TC finds out that they have flourished. Clearly press matters, but it isn’t a make or break.
@miles: Screw you. You don’t know what you are talking about. And another thing: easy off on the Red Bulls.
Jason has some good ideas on additional types of content, but complaining about TC’s coverage of dead, dying, and life support-needing companies is off base. The majority of the coverage at TC is postiive, yet the vast majority of VC-backed firms will fail. That’s built into the business model. You weren’t complaining when TC was spending a disproportionate amount of its time covering successful companies. You weren’t complaining about its “sensationalist” coverage of rounds of mega-rounds of funding and whiz-bang new web2.0 technologies, either.
If you were going to suggest TC was responsible for helping create the bubble that is now popping through its excessively positive press in the previous few years, then you might have a reasonable argument (not one I would completely agree with, but a reasoned argument nonetheless). Trying to say TC is responsible for the downturn, however, is positively ridiculous.
Maybe what Jason means is “TC is responsible for the downturn” on his pants. I hear that blue V-pills may help…
Did I somehow somewhere say that TC was responsible for the downturn? I’m not tracking that.
I am not responsible for some/all the posts here. It depends. I am not sure.
So, what the heck!
I agree.
Entrepreneurs need to know what works and what does not!
I like the fact that Techcrunch speaks also about endinf startups. It is important for us “Thecky people who might start a StUp” to see that how falling is harsh and recurant. When you see many article about sart ups they only speak about the “Trendy ans successfull one” on the up hill ride. But where are those journalist when later on those companies have difficulties .. or die ?
For me writting about “end of the story” or is education.
Our education, not less.
In fact it is just the opposite of tabloid : Real fact, real information.
Continue,
Thierry, France
Good point. Merde English.
Deadpool is awesome.
It’s great to highlight that people had a stupid idea and failed.
Harsh? No. If every jerk with a stupid idea wins, the world stops working.
Keep doing what you’ve always done, TechCrunch. I’ve seen your blog (RSS feed) go from 80k subscribers to over 1 million. You’re obviously doing something right. I don’t think I would be a faithful reader if you were any different.
Thanks for clarifying, Michael. There was a good article on the psychology of rumors on Boston.com recently (http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/10/12/how_to_fight_a_rumor/?page=full) that added some needed texture to why communities and their media have to watch these downturns. More than schadenfreude, it’s our need to complete a lack of understanding of current events with information, even if it’s of the “gossip” nature. The article points out two kinds of rumor, dread (downturns) and wish (win Tech50, make a jillion). I think you’re correct in pointing out you cover more of the latter than the former.
Mike: Lost a fan? From one critical blog post? lol. Us startup guys get criticism every day and keep on trucking.
@Jason. You suck!
What is wrong with you? Are you on medication?
As a professional, I have no time and interest in readed every day articles just say who fired employees. *I don’t care*.
What I would like to know is *the why*. The crisis is PR bullshit.
This emphasis the fact that articles published on Techcrunch are more and more “data” (or emotional scoop)… and less and less “analysis” or “information”.
What?
What’s wrong with revealing the truth. If Techcrunch can stop a couple of people from making wrong decisions, I think it is great. Cheers to Techcrunch.
****************
http://www.PinkSlipping.com - Discuss layoffs, pink slips & other related topics.
Personally I appreciate the coverage. I want to hear about everything going on in the startup/tech space so I can plan accordingly.
I do not think that we or anybody should blame the VC companies or the VC partners for the problems. To some extent, maybe, but not that much. They were supposed to have some control and advice over the company management but it is not up to them to take the proper management decisions. For me it is each company’s management to be held responsible if the company has problems or the company is not prepared for this crisis.
Blame smame!
Have a startup and make money! Sure, some startups don’t make money for awhile but when I hear about startups “trying to figure out their revenue model” it strikes me as funny.
It is now time to turn your attention away from blame and show startups how to make it in the new economy. Quit the whining and bitching and get back to the business of reporting something useful. Screw the blame and give me needed knowledge of how to survive and make more money.
Time to pull it out and stop being sissys.
Thoughts,
Michael Kassing
MarkTend.com (decidedly un-sissy)
jason goldberg your debate and points are marred by your insulting behavior and lack of logic.
I really think dead-pool is an important information for entrupenurs. It is great that you can see what people try to do (and failed). I wish there was more of “the why” they fail - documented (at least how they explain the failure - personal, marketing , timing, competition, etc.)
@Ernstjan
Your comment
“Failure is a result of:
1) Bad Team
2) Bad Execution
3) Bad idea”
is simply naive. More or less like declaring
“Ships sinking is a result of
1) Bad Team
2) Bad Execution
3) Bad idea”
Tell that to the Captain of the Titanic. Sometimes an iceberg is just an iceberg. A recession is a recession. This “downturn” is global and it will be severe. Great Teams, Executing Great Ideas Brilliantly are going to go under. People who did everything right are going to be out of a job and down on their luck. And a lot of readers here who have drunk Ayn Rand Libertarian Kool Aid are going to be among them.
“Tell that to the Captain of the Titanic. Sometimes an iceberg is just an iceberg.”
Ok, let’s see:
They put too few lifeboats on the Titanic. I’d say that qualifies as “Bad idea”
The lifeboats were not used to capacity. That sounds like “bad execution”.
Some reports of icebergs didn’t get relayed from the radio room to the bridge. That sounds like “bad team”
And since when have we ever had a true libertarian economy?
I agree for people who are in their basements and burning mid night oils for the next fb or twitter kind of concepts its very important to know whats failing to keep their feet on the ground…
It is interesting that that article from more than a year ago has bubbled up again. That’s why there’s no statute of limitations to blog posts. I certainly don’t believe ignoring bad news is a good idea. What I was trying to get across last year was essentially it seemed the bad news was welcomed or celebrated, and I’ve tried to take a different approach in highlighting the entrepreneur, services, growth, etc. I’ve been at companies with layoffs, and down rounds, etc, as many of us here have, and it’s a tough road.
My grievance w/ the recent layoff postings on TC is that they all came in a wave after the market problems, after the Sequoia presentation, and were labeled as a pattern/theme. Surely there have been layoffs all along, but suddenly TechCrunch was reporting them all at once. That kind of “lensing in” certainly seemed to create more sudden ‘momentum’ around something that has always been there.
@Aaron White
TC is reporting layoffs all at once because there is a spike in layoffs because the economy sucks. Uderstanding that the economy sucks, that the suckation of said economy is global and that the global economic suckation is going to be with us for a long time is critical for TCers who need to come to grips with a wildly different economic outlook than any of us were anticipating even 3 months ago.
What has struck me has been how careful and thorough TechCrunch’s layoff coverage of layoffs has been. Nearly every post has been exceptionally empathetic to the startups involved in a layoff and to the startup employees who lost their jobs, which is a difficult balance to strike. Perhaps it’s surprising because entrepreneurs have always thought of TechCrunch as one of us, but “us” now includes people who lost their jobs. There has to be room on this blog for grief and hope, otherwise it’s all marketing baloney.
The good, the bad and the ugly. A journalist worth his/her salt reports it all with careful analysis. Keep reporting it all TechCrunch.
“A journalist worth his/her salt reports it all with careful analysis” What an idiotic statement… though very appropriate for intellectual laziness.
Gosh… Where to start. [my other post] This should be called now “whore-nalism” for obvious reasons.
The figure-heads we now know as “Journalists” or self-appointed “analysts” are, by and large, a bunch of hopelessly uneducated fools who truly believe that they are actually the ones who will elect the next President of The United States.
In fact, they believe that they have already done so.
Techcrunch is absolutely fine the way it is.
If you guys out there want “responsible press” and silence about failing/failed companies, “more data” or “analysis,” it seems that TC is not your destination. Move on.
Right on. I like TC the way it is: unpredictable, kind of whacky, useful, useless and dumb, entertaining, etc. Hey! we are all just flawed human beings!!!
Love the picture. Says it all.
I see a lot of similarities in some of these comments with real estate agents a year or two ago when things started to turn sour. They were all happy when the news was filled with (often over-exuberant) positive press, and then act as if there’s a conspiracy against them when the press reports data that goes against their wishes. Notice I say “wishes” because they are more interested in hearing vested propaganda than reality. Burying your head in the sand doesn’t help anybody, in fact I would argue it can hurt by not being aware of the climate we are in.
I do appreciate hearing the nitty gritty about layoffs, deadpools, and financing issues and it is very important someone keeps at least superficial data on cumulative totals and trends. It is important to know what the business climate is and who/what is being affected.
It should not be a surprise to anyone that regularly reads blogs such as this that some of these startups are failing. We have been talking about this for years, the low barrier to entry, the many people without any business plans, “me too” startups, “flip this startup”, and so on. There is light at the end of the tunnel. There will always be opportunities for startups who can execute with innovative ideas and viable business plans.
These critics can take a hike. Mike & co.. talking about startup failures is what drives me back to this site. You can learn a lot more from mistakes. I’m pretty sure I learned that back in grade 2.
I hope Techcrunch will go on reporting on the truth, just like the NYTimes and be responsible enough to separate news/fact from analysis/opinion… I for one find the layoffs and deadpool it to be an extremely useful (and unfortunate) economic indicator… this and other large blogs are effective at gauging the pulse of the industry as a whole. Yahoo reported 67% lower revenue today; yes there is a crisis, and i want to know the extent of it.
“I hope Techcrunch will go on reporting on the truth, just like the NYTimes”?
Mike, this is definitely an insult…
Your response?
sorry, I may not have expressed myself correctly, i meant to say that techcrunch is great and I would want it to report facts just as I would any other media outlet, and not filter info for fear it would affect markets/stock valuations… so if a company lays off employees or if a company goes out of business, i would like to know…
long live Mike
by the way, I may be wrong on that Yahoo figure, i could be confused…
i believe one of tech crunch’s popularity is its honesty; people don’t only want to see the successful side but the failures behind them
Journalism should be objective and should report the facts, good or bad.
Of course. Could you give us all an example now of unbiased, objective, sensible journalism, in the US?
Thank you.
Please do not mention the NY Times.
Comparing VC backed companies vs. non-funded start-ups is one thing. If VC backed comapnies were a bellweather of ALL start-ups then that might make more sense, but tracking funded companies shows that VCs in general tend to follow trends they self-perpetuate, so i wouldn’t lump VC backed start-ups and regular start-ups together as indicators of what’s going on in the start-up world as a whole. VC backed companies have a lot more resources. But non-funded companies might have more at stake (ie they don’t have the security of millions in the bank and thus try that much harder). And again VC backed companies only account for >1% of all start-up companies who actually seek funding.
Comparing layoffs at large companies is much diff than tracking layoffs of either (VC backed ofr non-funded start-ups) because it could be indicative the markets as a whole. Or - could be indicative of bad management & planning.
So while “deadpool” and “layoff trackers” might sound harsh, the data supplied in each, taken in context & relevancy, is helpful to all start-ups.
Mike-
And if someone hasn’t said it before, the coverage of layoffs is valuable to those of us who are actually hiring at the moment. It’s not as if every company in the world is only laying off. It gives us an opportunity to find some potentially great folks!
If you are affected by this downturn and you happen to be a great engineer still looking for a great startup to work at, please contact me!
Shan
shans ( a t ) docverse ( d o t ) com
From the article:
>> “We do not take pleasure in seeing companies fail.”
Give me a break. TechCrunch loves reporting on failed companies. Of course it’s politically incorrect to say “we enjoy seeing companies fail”. No one will say it. But TechCrunch writers are human, and humans often take pleasure in others failures. It makes some people feel better about themselves, when others fail. I’m not saying TechCrunch likes all failures. But of course, they enjoy some.
first: mike isn’t the one doing the layoffs (afaik), others are. so i agree, it’s rather short-sighted to blame him / TC and “shoot the messenger”. they are simply reporting what is happening.
second: and “what is happening” in the startup scene is useful information that other entrepreneurs & investors should be aware of, in order to adjust their strategies accordingly.
third: personally i don’t think the “downturn” is as bad as most folks are making it out to be, at least for the smaller / newer end of the startup world. tho the rest of the economy may be in tough times (some might say catastrophic), overall e-commerce & internet advertising growth is likely still growing at ~20-30% annually, or flat at worst. display advertising will be hurt most, but PPC advertising won’t be affected that much, and it’s possible since it’s a more measurable form of advertising it could even benefit from a pullback in ‘traditional’ advertising.
lastly, i would say there’s a little bit of theater being created here by later-stage companies and investors who have troubled business models / portfolio companies. the churn & upheaval in *mostly* uncorrelated markets is excellent cover for people to dump and/or make excuses for their losers. while this is a bit of a head-fake, it’s not unusual or unexpected. it’s also probably not too much of an exaggeration to suggest that some investors may even be trying to use the bad news as leverage for future negotiations.
however, let me be clear about one thing — for companies that DO have their shit together and have solid business models & good prospects for growth & revenue — i would not suggest you get too frightened. in fact, one could argue that the few companies that have a clue should press for leverage themselves, since they may be few & far between.
so if you ARE executing & making money & know your metrics, don’t be fooled into raising capital on too disadvantageous terms. it’s fine to have some extra dry powder in a tough market, but set your own terms — the VCs are probably at least as desperate as anyone else out there to invest in good companies.
all that aside: layoffs & fucked companies do happen. SSDD.
Bravo Arrington, for standing your ground. If you’ll notice, that those critics are basically PR hype machines for boosting VC investments. I’m sure they’d disagree, but that’s what they are in essence.
A lot of these startups are absolute rubbish and when they fail, people can learn from those mistakes if they are aware of them.
Long Live the DEADPOOL!!!
Okay seriously. This is dumb.
Were ANY of you around for “The Bust”? Hell, at least Web 1.0 at left a pretty strong foundation behind. Web 2.0 will leave, at best: Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn and YouTube. The rest of it’s legacy? A bunch of the crappiest ideas that mainstream America never, ever bought. You think Twitter is changing the world? Not even close. Sure, it had it’s day in the sun, but nowadays it’s clogged with a bunch of self-obsessed morons who think the rest of us give a shit about the type of cappuchino they just drank. That, and PR people scrambling to add “Web 2.0″ to their resumes, since their agencies have just now realized that they’re more fucked than they were in 2001.
TechCrunch has actually provided a little value to the Web 2.0 disaster. They take a look at all your crappy ideas, and if they like it, you have a tiny shred of hope one of the Web 1.0 survivors might shell out $20 mil for you once everyone realizes you haven’t a prayer at positive revenue.
TechCrunch gets it, even if many of you are still living in a bubble.
99% of this last generation of start-ups, whether you’ve realized it or not, are now deadpools. Maybe that’s why you’re so offended by TC’s coverage. Even if you have money in the bank, even if you’ve slashed your workforce to “weather the downturn”, you’re dead. You will never regain the momentum lost. As soon as your uniques flatten off from the lack of marketing and innovation, your VCs will look at ways to minimize their losses. You think because you got the money that you absolutely get to keep it?? Think again.
TechCrunch is doing you a favor by giving you as much advance warning as possible. To reference Jack Nicholson,,,, “You want the truth? (Maybe) You can’t handle the truth.”
Web 2.0 will go down in tech history as a period of pure hype. So, so little substance. None of you are “changing the world,” as at least one commenter has claimed in this thread.
Yet, little do most of you know, there are now a few underground tech movements doing just that. There are things in the works that will make all you little Harvard MBAs run scared back to your midwestern hometowns. You don’t get tech. You were trying to sell ice to Eskimos, and for awhile you had Sand Hill snowed. But that’s changing fast.
The geeks are returning to the Valley en masse and have plans to retake control. The VCs know ‘em. They made them money before. They’ll make them money again. You all? Didn’t. Web 2.0 is dead. Thank God.
(Now, can y’all get the hell off the 101 please?)
I actually visited TechCrunch to read about any Tech companies doing layoffs. It helps me know how the market is reacting, and in being able to correctly adapt to it. Do keep it up as it’s very helpful!!
Don’t shoot the messenger? Hah! But this messenger gets paid lots of money to be the messenger.
Michael, keep up the good work.
I do not think that TC is sensationalizing the downturn, nor are you making the deadpool or layoff tracker any type of sport.
Other people, however, will enjoy the “sport” of tracking the downturn, but you cannot help that. As to why they see the sport in it I do not know, but I suspect it mostly comes from people who:
(a) worked at a startup and saw a lot of stupidity and arrogance in the 2.0 bubble
(b) never jumped into 2.0 and are experiencing schadenfreude looking at what’s happening to the “others” who went ahead and dove into 2.0
(c) never understood how AdSense could support and prosper as widespread VC-evenutually-IPO-or-acquisition opportunity . Most 2.0 sites seemed to be purely based on AdSense or some “future advertising opportunity”.