![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
VC funding for torrent clients ...
« previous entry | next entry »
May. 21st, 2006 | 06:40 pm
... is like using actual wads of currency to fuel a steam engine train.
I guess The Train will probably move a few metres after you shove in a couple of million dollars. But where's the cash flow? And where are the profits?
Did someone say 'ad-funded model'?
Ad-based programs are all fine, but one needs to remember that any business is as smart/profitable as the dumbest player in the market. In the absence of a significant differentiator, Pando is just as profitable (or unprofitable, as in this case) as every other Torrent player. Pando seems to have no differentiator today.
_________
Torrent is no doubt a great technology, but it is a zero-dollar business. Torrent is in the same league as other web technologies like social networks and blogging sites. The 'cash' flows in these businesses are mostly social - similar to a barter system.
"I link to your blog, you link to mine."
"I add you to my friends list, you add me to yours."
"I rate you 90% cool, and I expect that you return the favor."
"I share some files, and you share some too."
Currency exchange takes the form of notional goodwill. And you can't make money off that.
_________
After all the negative thoughts, let me tell you there is actually a way to make money from Torrent, but it is pretty long-drawn.
But well, the VCs 0wN their own money. Who am I to complain?
(no subject)
from:![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
satej_sirur
date: May. 21st, 2006 05:00 pm (UTC)
Link
2) What is the long-drawn way by which you can make money off this?
3) NO0ob VCs pwn their Pwn money!
Reply | Thread
(no subject)
from:![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
vinodkumarvc
date: May. 29th, 2006 04:02 pm (UTC)
Link
the unkindest cut for pando is the fact that they can't claim much IP on their technology, to help them protect their interests. there's no real differentiator that i can see yet.
Reply | Parent | Thread
(no subject)
from:![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
inthing
date: May. 21st, 2006 07:18 pm (UTC)
Link
There was a recent discussion on slashdot on a similar topic, which said the current current trend of funding is akin to the pre-bubble days and genuine players are really getting lost in the huge number of photo-sharing, blogging and such ventures. I am just crossing my fingers !
Reply | Thread
(no subject)
from:![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
vinodkumarvc
date: May. 29th, 2006 03:58 pm (UTC)
Link
that's an extremely interesting question. capitalism works well only in an environment that exhibits information asymmetry. patents etc are a way of maintaining artificial asymmetry.
the web is removing most of this asymmetry from our lives, enabling us to take more 'complete' decisions. so it wouldnt be surprising if the evolution of the web leads to a socialist (or more possibly, communist) society. but instead of communist governments, we'd probably have portals and search engines - some benevolent, some malevolent.
Reply | Parent | Thread
Pando -- definately different
from: anonymous
date: May. 22nd, 2006 03:39 pm (UTC)
Link
I use it. It works. Thats enough about that.
Reply | Thread
Re: Pando -- definately different
from:![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
vinodkumarvc
date: May. 22nd, 2006 03:47 pm (UTC)
Link
Reply | Parent | Thread
(no subject)
from:![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
ashwinne
date: May. 24th, 2006 01:57 am (UTC)
Link
Good analogy. But, every exciting technology that seems non-profitable, can be made profitable. The bulb has not been switched on yet, that's all.
Reply | Thread
(no subject)
from:![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
vinodkumarvc
date: May. 29th, 2006 03:50 pm (UTC)
Link
pango has no economic moat, and hence no competitive advantage.
this is where pango can get smart and get acquired. if it has single-digit number of employees, it is an easy option too.
Reply | Parent | Thread
(no subject)
from:![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
ashwinne
date: May. 30th, 2006 03:18 am (UTC)
Link
It is not a question of what the biggies can or cannot do. Goliath just didn't come up with the exciting idea that David did. And the public loves the underdog.
Premature optimization is the root of all evil. Create something that your customers love and find useful. The monetization can follow later.
Getting acquired is infact the primary objective of most startups. It is less painful and more profitable to the founders than an IPO.
PS: Pando, not pango ;-) If you can remember, Pango was the internationalization library of GTK+ back in our college days.
Reply | Parent | Thread
(no subject)
from:![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
vinodkumarvc
date: May. 30th, 2006 03:35 am (UTC)
Link
oops! pando .. somehow pango seemed to be more familiar. i guess it was this stuff from college.
getting acquired is not really easy. there are a lot of factors to be considered, not the least of which is the cost/employee and cost/customer that the acquiring company is paying.
Reply | Parent | Thread