Act Now! Own Your Very Own Web 2.0 Startup

December 13, 2007

Edgeio, in which Mike Arrington of TechCrunch was involved, shut down recently. The assets are up for auction for 250K. $5 million in funding, and so far: 0 bids.

Another shaky startup is PodTech which Robert Scoble has been creating video podcasts for. He’s reportedly leaving the company in 2008 for greener pastures. He’ll be fine, but PodTech speculation will surely continue.

But wait, there’s more:

I wonder if Web 2.0 shut-downs will accelerate in 2008. Recession seems right around the corner (if it’s not here already) and there is an excessive number of similar startups facing a slowing economy. But ultimately, this weeding out of the non-Facebooks and the shutting of easy credit may be good for all. I think the nerd term is “creative destruction.”

Anyhow, if you want to get in on the startup action, put in a bid for any of these companies. Your public mocking guaranteed to ensue via Valleywag or Techcrunch and around the tech blogosphere could be a really smart PR move.


  1. Dave says:

    I don’t doubt that there will be many failures. But that’s part of the game. No doubt most of these entrepreneurs will just dust off their coats and get back up and have another go at it. You can’t win if you don’t fail a lot too. And failure is just a cost of doing business for most of the startup investors anyway.

    I do find the blogosphere’s schadenfreude about these things somewhat amusing.

    Fwiw, a great Teddy Roosevelt quote that I’ve come across on a few occasions now. It’s not meant as a flame or anything, just an attempt to show the other side of the equation:
    “It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”

  2. Dave says:

    That being said, I think it’s right for the blogosphere to analyze and criticize. That’s part of the fun and the debate of ideas. And it’s a valid role. I’m just trying to inject the other side of the coin into the debate. Since I also mock the ridiculous ideas or failures at times but at the same time am impressed with the balls these guys had to do their own thing.

    Just my $.02

  3. I agree with Dave. Analysis is fine but the schadenfreude is misplaced.

    As an entrepreneur-turned-VC wrote in January: Failure IS an option

  4. webomatica says:

    Nice quote. I do have much admiration for the folks who enter the startup game to put the users first and the money second – the bootstrappers who love technology and want to build a cool product. I’d say that’s who Teddy Roosevelt is talking about.

    The key phrase is “worthy cause.” My “schadenfreude” is generally directed at those who pile in at the last moment after the easy innovation has taken place – those who are just trying to cash in when the money is flowing easy. The flippers, the VC money takers who blow the cash on who knows what and have little to show for. Think or Casey Serin at the tail end of the housing boom. These types certainly have big balls – but questionable integrity.

    I’m just voicing my personal opinion that there should be more Craigslists and less Facebooks. And a downturn in 2008 may be just the thing to get that to happen. One bright side is once the “me-toos” are cleared away, the startups with a genuine business and integrity will hopefully flourish.

  5. Dave says:

    Fair enough. Like I said, I engage in both — so it’s all fwiw and the above comments weren’t intended as a rip (they probably would’ve been more appropriate one on of those *other* sites, but yours is the only one I comment on!)

    Re:, that one is an interesting fish. I seem to remember seeing their adverts literally everywhere back in the late 90s early 00s so I checked on wikipedia and did you know they’ve been around since 1995?

    I wonder if they can lay claim to being one of the first web-based social networks? I’d also be curious to know how much they’ve spent marketing over the lifetime of the company.

  6. webomatica says:

    Yeah I have definitely seen the ads all over the place for ages now.