Search
Chat

Powered by Squarespace
Archives
Navigation
Follow

This blog represents my own views, not those of my employer, Brooklyn Bridge Ventures.


Subscribe by Email


Preview | Powered by FeedBlitz


Community

« links for 2006-11-16 | Main | links for 2006-11-15 »

Web 2.0 Whac-a-Mole sucks

The great thing about being a Web 2.0 entpreneur is that you could build something usable and more importantly, noticeable, on your own dime (or a few friends and family dimes) and get it bought by confused old web media companies playing Whac-a-Mole with startups.

 
From what I can tell, Google actually has a vision for their acquisitions: Total digital domination from every angle.  Hey, at least it's a goal, or a loose collection of many goals.  Regardless, when they bought Writely and Jotspot, you could at least say, "Ah... I see, that makes sense.  They're building an office suite."   Or, when they bought Dmarc, you could say, "Ah... they want to dominate radio ads, too."  In fact, that strategy has so much logic, you could even make the connection and ask, "How long before they buy Spotrunner?" 

Try asking yourself who Yahoo! or NewsCorp will buy next... or CondeNast.  Who the hell knows, really?  There are a lot of acquisitive players out there that I think are making bad homes for startups.

What's worse is that, post-acquisition, some very good ideas are showing very little of the inginuity and continuous product development that made them great in the first place.  It's not surprising either.  If you are independent, you're trying to run for the gold, beat out your competitors, win the game.   Within a big company with a little money in the pockets of the founders, it's highly unlikely the push to innovate will continue.  Does anyone think Reddit is going to become any more disruptive or gamechanging at Wired?  Sure, it might be more users, but expect any innovation to slow to a crawl.

And that really sucks for users.  For some of these startups, we only got to see a taste of what they could have been with a little more development.  What ever happened to Konfabulator anyway?  Did the end users really fair much better with that company in the hands of Yahoo! than the would have had they gotten some VC funding and tried to build a bigger company?  The acquisition environment we have now is really killing innovation and cutting companies off at the pass before they have a chance to make a much bigger impact on the web.

Don't get me wrong.  It's hard to turn down these offers...   but I was talking to an entreprenuer the other day who said to me, "Listen, I've never had the check put in front of me, but to be honest, I want to do something bigger.  That's the reason why I got into this in the first place.  I sort of feel like I should go big or go home."  I'd like to think I'd have the same sentiment, especially seeing what seems to happen to these startups after acquisition. 

At what point does anyone start wondering whether or not some of these companies are acquiring just to crush these startups? 

What's your list of companies that are currently private that you hope take a shot at something bigger before getting assimmilated?

Reader Comments (4)

Charlie - great post...again. There are many reasons why companies are "acquisitive." What we may see in the digital media space is a "blocking" strategy used by the largest companies. Take out the companies that show promise or are extremely "hot" so that your competitors cannot acquire them. I've seen quite a bit in this space happen and still continue to think that the YouTube acquisition was about this.
November 15, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterDarren Herman
Very interesting post... you say "and that really sucks for the users" but it could also be fabulous opportunity for the entreprenuer, no?

I'd like to see my own company/website (http://www.JibberJobber.com) "take a shot at something bigger" before it is assimmilated - but who knows what human nature will dictate if presented a favorable check.

If that happens I have plenty of other ideas I'm dying to work on - so all would not be lost.
November 15, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterJibberJobber Guy
Some of these companies doing the acquiring no doubt are buying up potential competition, and some I tend to think buy them with the purpose of destroying them -- or at least the effect. Whether someone sells, I guess, depends on when something built as a passion becomes a property, psychologically. Great post though. It gave me the vision of a monopoly board expanding before my eyes.
November 30, 2006 | Unregistered CommenterCaptain Flumox

Thank you in requital for the substantive critique. I and my neighbour had been well-founded preparing to do some review close to this one. We got a seize a log from our limited library, but i handle I discovered additional from this set up. I'm totally ready and willing to view such wonderful facts enhancing shared hindrance available.

November 10, 2010 | Unregistered Commentermister pikalaina

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>