Wow, talk about forward looking statements. When companies start making comments like this, it's evidence of a loss of rationality. If MySpace had said this 4 years ago, they would have gotten press too and everyone would have believed it and it could have been possible.
But seriously folks, look around. The unpredictability of the internet is just too high to be making statements like this, I don't care how much evidence you have.
Andreessen told Reuters that the world's most popular online social network could pile up $1 billion in revenue this year if it pushed harder on selling advertising.
Seriously? Like how much harder? Putting more ads on the site? Charging more for them?
This is bubble talk if ever I heard it. He wants to get press for his new investment fund. He has to say big things so that people talk and want to give him money and want him to invest in their companies. So transparent.
They say: [Twitter] needs to focus on increasing its number of users and improve the features it offers so that no rival can swoop in.
Oh boy. Really? So no rival can swoop in? The more Twitter develops its features, the easier it is for a rival to swoop in. Just copy them. It really isn't that hard. Facebook could copy them. Google could copy them. Lots of people think Wave is a more advanced twitter already.
And then he says this: MySpace focused too much on selling advertisements
Isn't that exactly how he said Facebook could be making billions? So really what he is saying is, "If facebook sold more ads, they'd make more money, but then they'd lose their users, so they wouldn't make money, so really, facebook can't make much more money."
Read between the lines and you'll see that the whole scheme is faulty.
This. Anyone who is predicting specifics about the internet 5 years from now is selling something. This guys predictions are hedged-bet sensationalist double-speak. Boo.
I have a lot of respect for Andreesen as well, which is exactly why I find it hard to assume that he's making these statements simply because he's bored and had a journalist around to talk to.
I agree with pj - especially given how many times Andreesen and Horowitz are named in the article, this mainly reads like a PR piece for their new VC fund. (pg had a great essay about PR pieces, I can't find it right now).
But seriously folks, look around. The unpredictability of the internet is just too high to be making statements like this, I don't care how much evidence you have.
Andreessen told Reuters that the world's most popular online social network could pile up $1 billion in revenue this year if it pushed harder on selling advertising.
Seriously? Like how much harder? Putting more ads on the site? Charging more for them?
This is bubble talk if ever I heard it. He wants to get press for his new investment fund. He has to say big things so that people talk and want to give him money and want him to invest in their companies. So transparent.
They say: [Twitter] needs to focus on increasing its number of users and improve the features it offers so that no rival can swoop in.
Oh boy. Really? So no rival can swoop in? The more Twitter develops its features, the easier it is for a rival to swoop in. Just copy them. It really isn't that hard. Facebook could copy them. Google could copy them. Lots of people think Wave is a more advanced twitter already.
And then he says this: MySpace focused too much on selling advertisements
Isn't that exactly how he said Facebook could be making billions? So really what he is saying is, "If facebook sold more ads, they'd make more money, but then they'd lose their users, so they wouldn't make money, so really, facebook can't make much more money."
Read between the lines and you'll see that the whole scheme is faulty.