Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why isn't there competition to LinkedIn yet?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 64 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't there competition to LinkedIn yet?

#11

Post by estimator7292 »

codingdave wrote: post #6

The core problem that LinkedIn solves has nothing to do with all the "social media" style content that plagues the platform. It is a long-term rolodex to be able to talk to former co-workers, while also getting contacted by recruiters (double-edged sword that that is), and for that purpose works just fine, even allowing you to ignore the other warts. So if you were going to build a competitor, you'd need to get every…

You've literally described every pitch for every social media platform.

This was THE one and only value proposition of Facebook back in the Paleolithic

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't there competition to LinkedIn yet?

#12

Post by brailsafe »

I think this question gets asked periodically, but in addition to all the other answers, it's worth noting that LinkedIn essentially "stole" everyone's address book by tricking people with dark patterns[0] before people were readily catching on, it's not like they grew organically on merit, although they've since sort of needed to find a plausible reason to exist. So a competing service would just have to do the same; trick people who sign up into importing their entire LinkedIn contact list, scrape all of the available secondary connections and tell each of them that ___ is already on the platform, and then make it seem like if they're not on this new one, their career will stall.

The question of an alternative to LinkedIn is like asking if there's a better hell with less satan (but that may be a bit cynical)

[0] https://time.com/4062519/linkedn-spam-settlement/

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't there competition to LinkedIn yet?

#13

Post by estimator7292 »

lifestyleguru wrote: post #8

Competition in... what? I fail to see what LinkedIn is and what their purpose is. The default feed is AI slop.

It's slop all the way down. If it's not AI slop it's human slop. If you have a LinkedIn account you must fill it with a constant stream of something. Way too many meaningless middle managers won't hire you if your LinkedIn profile doesn't have enough shit in it.

You shouldn't work for those asswipes but a job is a job, so the slop must flow

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't there competition to LinkedIn yet?

#14

Post by zeruch »

Network effects and an as-yet insufficient friction to leave en masse has kept LI in a semi-moated space.

There have been competitors, but they are either niche (Zerply) or more regionally specific (Xing, with its focus on following EU data sovereignty laws) or the latest trend, AI-enabled agentic recruitment, which as yet has no real track record.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't there competition to LinkedIn yet?

#15

Post by Aurornis »

codingdave wrote: post #6

The core problem that LinkedIn solves has nothing to do with all the "social media" style content that plagues the platform. It is a long-term rolodex to be able to talk to former co-workers, while also getting contacted by recruiters (double-edged sword that that is), and for that purpose works just fine, even allowing you to ignore the other warts. So if you were going to build a competitor, you'd need to get every…

> The core problem that LinkedIn solves has nothing to do with all the "social media" style content that plagues the platform.

I feel like a broken record explaining this to people.

The feed that appears when you go to LinkedIn.com is a sideshow. Almost nobody posts to it. Very few people read it. You can (and should!) ignore it and not miss out on anything.

Make a profile. Update it occasionally when you're job searching. Forget about the site until you need it. Hit the unsubscribe button when they e-mail you suggestions.

The exception is people who simply cannot resist getting pulled into a feed and scrolling it. If that's you, I understand why you'd stay off of the website. For everyone else, it's a set it and forget it until you need it kind of website.

That's also why a second website isn't appealing to anyone. They've already gotten past the set-and-forget part. Why would they want to set up a second profile somewhere in a smaller, less useful network? There would have to be some real benefit, not an imagined talking point that disappoints.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't there competition to LinkedIn yet?

#16

Post by punkbit »

Fear of missing out, network effect, etc.

I personally never opened an account, do remember seeing ex-colleagues exaggerating their job descriptions, titles, etc It looks quite fake to me. But I wonder what could have happened to me if I had an account 10, 15 and 18 years ago.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't there competition to LinkedIn yet?

#17

Post by mvkel »

Like any new social network, the first question to answer is: how do you make it useful -without- the social layer?

Instagram did photo filters.

LinkedIn did digital résumés.

Strava did activity tracking.

It's not zero sum. But if you're going to replace LinkedIn, you need to ask yourself: why would someone want a -new- digital résumé?

By the way, these things already exist, albeit in a more niche capacity, which is a good thing. GitHub is LinkedIn for programmers. Behance is LinkedIn for designers. X is LinkedIn for AI scientists :). Etc.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't there competition to LinkedIn yet?

#18

Post by w10-1 »

codingdave wrote: post #6

The core problem that LinkedIn solves has nothing to do with all the "social media" style content that plagues the platform. It is a long-term rolodex to be able to talk to former co-workers, while also getting contacted by recruiters (double-edged sword that that is), and for that purpose works just fine, even allowing you to ignore the other warts. So if you were going to build a competitor, you'd need to get every…

To emphasize the dynamics: (1) No person will migrate until most of their connectors migrate, and their connectors cannot migrate until everyone does. It's deadlock, for every thread you care about. (2) Automation in job applications and a declining job market have both made networking more essential, so there's no tolerance for lost connections, so you'd also have to solve those problems too before all would switch. (3) Even if users don't like it and could surmount the coordination costs of switching, if companies continue to rely on it, switching would be a career-limiting move; and because companies cannot signal their recruitment strategies without triggering a stampede to game their system, companies tend to keep quiet, so no company would lead an exodus.

Still, no one (outside influencers) likes how work networking and recruitment happens today, so user might do both linkedin and some new system if one created a more effective networking and recruitment mode (e.g., for some well-defined, high-value subset, like recent Stanford MBA's, YC alumni, FinTech, ...).

Post reply on HN