Comments on: Flicker (No, Not That One) Bares Its Stats In An Attempt To Get Rich http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/ Startup and Technology News Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:09:59 -0800 hourly 1 By: dude http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2842252 dude Wed, 08 Jul 2009 03:44:56 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2842252 There is a very easy way for whoever owns this flicker.com domain name to force yahoo to buy it. Just put porn on the site. Then, when people mistakenly go there, they will see porn, and yahoo cannot allow that to happen as it would make them look very bad. There is a very easy way for whoever owns this flicker.com domain name to force yahoo to buy it. Just put porn on the site. Then, when people mistakenly go there, they will see porn, and yahoo cannot allow that to happen as it would make them look very bad.

]]> By: Domain Development: The Best Way To Ensure The Flow Of ROI | Internet Domain Name http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2838033 Domain Development: The Best Way To Ensure The Flow Of ROI | Internet Domain Name Mon, 06 Jul 2009 04:00:59 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2838033 [...] Flicker (No, Not That One) Bares Its Stats In An Attempt To Get Rich (techcrunch.com) [...] [...] Flicker (No, Not That One) Bares Its Stats In An Attempt To Get Rich (techcrunch.com) [...]

]]> By: Jonathan http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2828820 Jonathan Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:37:35 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2828820 Unlikely. Probably another way to get people to take about the site (while thinking it is flikr that has been hacked). Unlikely.

Probably another way to get people to take about the site (while thinking it is flikr that has been hacked).

]]> By: striatic http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2827929 striatic Mon, 29 Jun 2009 16:32:41 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2827929 umn, flickr *started* the web 2.0 deliberate misspelling craze, and they did so because as a young, innovative startup they didn't have the money to fork over to some domain squatter. "When they decided to create Flickr, I’m assuming they looked up the real Flicker.com. Why not just buy it then?" because it wasn't available, obviously, because someone was sitting on it, asking for money that flickr didn't have at the time. umn, flickr *started* the web 2.0 deliberate misspelling craze, and they did so because as a young, innovative startup they didn’t have the money to fork over to some domain squatter.

“When they decided to create Flickr, I’m assuming they looked up the real Flicker.com. Why not just buy it then?”

because it wasn’t available, obviously, because someone was sitting on it, asking for money that flickr didn’t have at the time.

]]> By: Orly? http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2827672 Orly? Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:27:26 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2827672 It could be that they are down for maintenance and planning to make other changes. How could they be trying to capitalize on Yahoo's site, when the word "flicker" is not only an English word, but the founders of the photo service knew the domain name was not available to them when they started it? There is nothing at flicker.com that suggests they are trying to make people think it is Yahoo's site, and they added a bird logo that clearly doesn't look like anything at Yahoo's site. It could be that they are down for maintenance and planning to make other changes.

How could they be trying to capitalize on Yahoo’s site, when the word “flicker” is not only an English word, but the founders of the photo service knew the domain name was not available to them when they started it?

There is nothing at flicker.com that suggests they are trying to make people think it is Yahoo’s site, and they added a bird logo that clearly doesn’t look like anything at Yahoo’s site.

]]> By: areyoukidding http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2826925 areyoukidding Sun, 28 Jun 2009 20:57:33 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2826925 The real Flickr should have picked a different name, but I doubt that they are rethinking their great success. Yes, Igniguy, if they were to tax the guy $15, which is 150% of the $10 annual registration fee, I am positive that this guy will give up right away. Your brilliant 150% tax is a surefire deterrent. The real Flickr should have picked a different name, but I doubt that they are rethinking their great success. Yes, Igniguy, if they were to tax the guy $15, which is 150% of the $10 annual registration fee, I am positive that this guy will give up right away. Your brilliant 150% tax is a surefire deterrent.

]]> By: Steve Castan http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2825840 Steve Castan Sat, 27 Jun 2009 21:17:18 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2825840 Is it possible that Flickr fans are attacking their site now? "Flicker is down for maintenance due to recent hacking attack. We will be back shortly." Is it possible that Flickr fans are attacking their site now?

“Flicker is down for maintenance due to recent hacking attack. We will be back shortly.”

]]> By: New Gadgets | Tech Crunch: Flicker (No, Not That One) Bares Its Stats In An http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2825814 New Gadgets | Tech Crunch: Flicker (No, Not That One) Bares Its Stats In An Sat, 27 Jun 2009 20:54:48 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2825814 [...] Original post by GadgetsArea.com [...] [...] Original post by GadgetsArea.com [...]

]]> By: Flicker... | Umberto Segnini: http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2825762 Flicker... | Umberto Segnini: Sat, 27 Jun 2009 20:07:43 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2825762 [...] For the complete story click here! [...] [...] For the complete story click here! [...]

]]> By: Jonathan http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2825145 Jonathan Sat, 27 Jun 2009 04:25:34 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2825145 The 'down for maintenance' message is clearly there to do the following: 1) Discredit Flikr by making them look bad so that yahoo feels pressured into buying the domain. 2) Make users go 'ahh, this is why the site looks weird/shit' as opposed to 'wtf, this aint flikr' 3) Draw traffic (as mentioned in the blog post). Without this message, I would say that they are dealing in a morally grey area but that they can't be blamed for capitalising on their ownership of the domain. This message however moves them into the very black area and shows that they have no ethics. The ‘down for maintenance’ message is clearly there to do the following:
1) Discredit Flikr by making them look bad so that yahoo feels pressured into buying the domain.
2) Make users go ‘ahh, this is why the site looks weird/shit’ as opposed to ‘wtf, this aint flikr’
3) Draw traffic (as mentioned in the blog post).

Without this message, I would say that they are dealing in a morally grey area but that they can’t be blamed for capitalising on their ownership of the domain. This message however moves them into the very black area and shows that they have no ethics.

]]> By: Flicker (No, Not That One) Bares Its Stats In An Attempt To Get Rich | zbTech http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824903 Flicker (No, Not That One) Bares Its Stats In An Attempt To Get Rich | zbTech Fri, 26 Jun 2009 23:37:34 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824903 [...] As commenter Noah points out, some of those Bit.ly links aren’t exactly bathing in traffic. This one has only 500 [...] [...] As commenter Noah points out, some of those Bit.ly links aren’t exactly bathing in traffic. This one has only 500 [...]

]]> By: New Gadgets | Tech Crunch: Flicker (No, Not That One) Bares Its Stats In An… http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824830 New Gadgets | Tech Crunch: Flicker (No, Not That One) Bares Its Stats In An… Fri, 26 Jun 2009 23:01:41 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824830 [...] Original post by GadgetsArea.com [...] [...] Original post by GadgetsArea.com [...]

]]> By: The Far Edge » Blog Archive » Flicker (No, Not That One) Bares Its Stats In An Attempt To Get Rich http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824639 The Far Edge » Blog Archive » Flicker (No, Not That One) Bares Its Stats In An Attempt To Get Rich Fri, 26 Jun 2009 21:45:03 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824639 [...] As commenter Noah points out, some of those Bit.ly links aren’t exactly bathing in traffic. This one has only 500 clicks [...] [...] As commenter Noah points out, some of those Bit.ly links aren’t exactly bathing in traffic. This one has only 500 clicks [...]

]]> By: joe http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824629 joe Fri, 26 Jun 2009 21:42:40 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824629 They should sell to MSN or Google out of spite They should sell to MSN or Google out of spite

]]> By: Alex F. http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824610 Alex F. Fri, 26 Jun 2009 21:35:01 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824610 B&H and other photo affiliate programs pay low rates (like 2 or 3%) but the size of orders of photo equipment can be quite good. B&H and other photo affiliate programs pay low rates (like 2 or 3%) but the size of orders of photo equipment can be quite good.

]]> By: sanchez http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824553 sanchez Fri, 26 Jun 2009 21:11:24 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824553 They also cover 404 errors www.flicker.com/nothing-here They also cover 404 errors http://www.flic...om/nothing-here

]]> By: sanchez http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824530 sanchez Fri, 26 Jun 2009 21:02:22 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824530 Try to follow Flickerdotcom on twitter, you get autotweet notice site is down. These guys are good!!! Try to follow Flickerdotcom on twitter, you get autotweet notice site is down. These guys are good!!!

]]> By: sanchez http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824514 sanchez Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:55:00 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824514 Earlier today someone wrote about Flicker/Flickr too http://www.thedomains.com/2009/06/26/should-yahoos-flickrcom-buy-flickercom/ Earlier today someone wrote about Flicker/Flickr too

http://www.thed...buy-flickercom/

]]> By: sanchez http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824510 sanchez Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:52:01 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824510 stats screenshots from their twitterstream http://bit.ly/1awZ5F, http://bit.ly/KMviO stats screenshots from their twitterstream

http://bit.ly/1awZ5F, http://bit.ly/KMviO

]]> By: Wes Johnson http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824507 Wes Johnson Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:49:44 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824507 I would do the same exact thing. Like Chris Desouza said "Always finding a way to chastise the little guy." When they decided to create Flickr, I'm assuming they looked up the real Flicker.com. Why not just buy it then? Instead, they opted to capitalize on the web 2.0 deliberate misspelling craze and now this guy is capitalizing on that in the opposite direction. More power to him, why should he fold over for the big guys. I would do the same exact thing. Like Chris Desouza said “Always finding a way to chastise the little guy.”

When they decided to create Flickr, I’m assuming they looked up the real Flicker.com. Why not just buy it then? Instead, they opted to capitalize on the web 2.0 deliberate misspelling craze and now this guy is capitalizing on that in the opposite direction. More power to him, why should he fold over for the big guys.

]]> By: Alexander http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824470 Alexander Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:27:59 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824470 I will agree on the post being a bit weird for TC but I think what Mr. Siegler didn't include is the missing link of making it a great post actually. The reason they are asking for people to retweet is to damage the real Flickr and make Yahoo buy the domain to silence their propaganda! I will agree on the post being a bit weird for TC but I think what Mr. Siegler didn’t include is the missing link of making it a great post actually. The reason they are asking for people to retweet is to damage the real Flickr and make Yahoo buy the domain to silence their propaganda!

]]> By: Martin http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824469 Martin Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:27:55 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824469 The top link 'B&H Photo Video' has 6,351 clicks in the last 30 days There are 21 links on that page, the 20,000-30,000 clicks they seem to be getting a month doesn't seem bad for a site that requires no work. I don't know who much they are getting per click but should be enough to give a nice income for someone. The top link ‘B&H Photo Video’ has 6,351 clicks in the last 30 days

There are 21 links on that page, the 20,000-30,000 clicks they seem to be getting a month doesn’t seem bad for a site that requires no work. I don’t know who much they are getting per click but should be enough to give a nice income for someone.

]]> By: Chris Desouza http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824450 Chris Desouza Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:16:46 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824450 Why is it a "Blatant attempt?" It is their property. Let them market it. Always finding a way to chastise the little guy. Why is it a “Blatant attempt?”

It is their property. Let them market it.

Always finding a way to chastise the little guy.

]]> By: jim http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824424 jim Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:03:54 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824424 Good for Flicker. I wish I owned that site. Good for Flicker. I wish I owned that site.

]]> By: Some http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/26/flicker-no-not-that-one-bares-its-stats-in-an-attempt-to-get-rich/comment-page-1/#comment-2824422 Some Fri, 26 Jun 2009 20:02:34 +0000 http://www.techcrunch.com/?p=77191#comment-2824422 Exactly! Judging by the comments to this article, there are a lot of domain squatters among TC readers. Exactly! Judging by the comments to this article, there are a lot of domain squatters among TC readers.

]]>