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

Tell HN: Thank you

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 65 posts

Re: Tell HN: Thank you

#41

Post by paraschopra »

mjfern wrote: post #36
staunch wrote: post #22

I may be way off base, but the cynic in me sees your post as related to the recent changes you made with Mixergy. I really liked Mixergy. I turned lots of people onto it. When you decided (almost out of the blue) to turn it into a strictly money making venture for yourself I felt burned. I thought you were following in the footsteps of Charlie Rose's interviews, Paul Graham's essays, or one of the dozens of great Pod…

Andrew Warner developed a product (Mixergy) that creates value for a number of people, and now he is looking to capture some of that value (in the form of profits). Isn't this the essence of entrepreneurship? Why would you feel burned?

Honestly, it is a personal choice to feel burned. People have different perception of different brands and when the essence changes people sometimes do feel cheated or burned.

Not that I am comparing (or know the technicalities), but hypothetically if tomorrow Ubuntu decide to charge for their linux distro - a lot of people will feel burned. And we can equally argue that they were building a fan base all along.

Such things work best if it is clear from the start that going forward you may seriously look into monetization. Kind of beta phases for most software, Mixergy could also have had some kind of beta phase.

Re: Tell HN: Thank you

#42

Post by mjfern »

paraschopra wrote: post #41
mjfern wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Andrew Warner developed a product (Mixergy) that creates value for a number of people, and now he is looking to capture some of that value (in the form of profits). Isn't this the essence of entrepreneurship? Why would you feel burned?

Honestly, it is a personal choice to feel burned. People have different perception of different brands and when the essence changes people sometimes do feel cheated or burned. Not that I am comparing (or know the technicalities), but hypothetically if tomorrow Ubuntu decide to charge for their linux distro - a lot of people will feel burned. And we can equally argue that they were building a fan base all along. Such…

Point well taken. But given most of us are here because we are involved with the start-up world, we shouldn't rail against a founder because he/she is trying to implement a revenue model. That said, if the revenue model doesn't sit right with some people, then some constructive criticism is probably in order.

Re: Tell HN: Thank you

#43

Post by mattmaroon »

staunch wrote: post #22

I may be way off base, but the cynic in me sees your post as related to the recent changes you made with Mixergy. I really liked Mixergy. I turned lots of people onto it. When you decided (almost out of the blue) to turn it into a strictly money making venture for yourself I felt burned. I thought you were following in the footsteps of Charlie Rose's interviews, Paul Graham's essays, or one of the dozens of great Pod…

This is a pretty common reaction you get whenever you first try to monetize anything on the net. People feel entitled to whatever you do at no cost to yourself. They always say "you could make money in other ways" but never suggest any specifically or show any evidence they would actually gain traction.

If you like what the guy does enough to shell out some $, fine. If you don't, also fine. But the guy has a right to try to make money from his work. It's not a "bait and switch" to add in a business model.

It's also sad when just charging for stuff is seen as "easy and lame".

Re: Tell HN: Thank you

#44

Post by danspodcast »

Andrew-- a heartfelt thank you for being the most compelling conduit for entrepreneurial information on the web. I love the show and truly savor the times I can I can sneak away and watch a few episodes. I'm interested to see how your business model evolves.

Re: Tell HN: Thank you

#45

Post by markjeee »

staunch wrote: post #22

I may be way off base, but the cynic in me sees your post as related to the recent changes you made with Mixergy. I really liked Mixergy. I turned lots of people onto it. When you decided (almost out of the blue) to turn it into a strictly money making venture for yourself I felt burned. I thought you were following in the footsteps of Charlie Rose's interviews, Paul Graham's essays, or one of the dozens of great Pod…

I think it's nice to have a sustainable revenue for a site like Mixergy. I find the content very useful and i like it to exist for a long time.

I can imagine it costs to maintain a site like Mixergy and to produce it's original content. So having a revenue stream means the founder can continue to focus on Mixergy, continue to improve it, continue to produce more contents and not have to worry about how to spend his time finding a living.

Of course, eventually it can lead to more income than he probably needs to operate the site, then i think that's also his choice how to spend the profits anyway he sees it. As far as i see it, i like Mixergy to continue, and if it starts to charge for some of the premium features, then i will evaluate if it's worth for me paying it.

With income i think there's always the concern if the motivation to move forward with Mixergy is only about money instead of about creating valuable content for it's users. For this concern, i think we can all evaluate for ourselves if we see it like this, and can decide not to use it anymore. And, as we all know on the web, it's very easy to switch to a different site.

Re: Tell HN: Thank you

#46

Post by staunch »

mattmaroon wrote: post #43
staunch wrote: post #22

I may be way off base, but the cynic in me sees your post as related to the recent changes you made with Mixergy. I really liked Mixergy. I turned lots of people onto it. When you decided (almost out of the blue) to turn it into a strictly money making venture for yourself I felt burned. I thought you were following in the footsteps of Charlie Rose's interviews, Paul Graham's essays, or one of the dozens of great Pod…

This is a pretty common reaction you get whenever you first try to monetize anything on the net. People feel entitled to whatever you do at no cost to yourself. They always say "you could make money in other ways" but never suggest any specifically or show any evidence they would actually gain traction. If you like what the guy does enough to shell out some $, fine. If you don't, also fine. But the guy has a right to…

Users are often upset about any change whatsoever. A certain percentage of people simply don't like the things they're familiar with changing at all. They will complain loudly. You have to ignore these people to succeed. If you let them convince you to remain static you will lose.

I don't think that's the case here though. It's hard for me to be objective, but I'm fairly certain this change was executed poorly and may have been an entirely mistaken course.

> ...[they] never suggest any specifically or show any evidence they would actually gain traction.

Leo Laporte makes $1.5MM/year on his podcasts with sponsorships. I doubt Mixergy will make that with paid subscriptions anytime soon, yet it has an even more valuable audience. TechCrunch makes a heck of a lot more than that. Imagine how much money Techcrunch would be making if it had gone subscription a year or two into its life.

Re: Tell HN: Thank you

#47

Post by gojomo »

Your transcripts are the key feature for me. Links to audio/video interviews without transcripts can be frustrating; I may want to know what the interviewee has to say, but not enough to lock up my ears for 30-60 minutes. Thanks for adding them.

Re: Tell HN: Thank you

#48

Post by gridspy »

minouye wrote: post #31
staunch wrote: post #22

I may be way off base, but the cynic in me sees your post as related to the recent changes you made with Mixergy. I really liked Mixergy. I turned lots of people onto it. When you decided (almost out of the blue) to turn it into a strictly money making venture for yourself I felt burned. I thought you were following in the footsteps of Charlie Rose's interviews, Paul Graham's essays, or one of the dozens of great Pod…

In the absence of a Charlie Rose that interviews entrepreneurs, an Andrew Warner will do just fine. Yes, a free program would be better, but given the amount of work that Andrew has already done (nearly 270 interviews by my count), and the benefit I've gotten from his guests, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. If pay-walling content means that he'll be able to do this longer, then I'm all for it.

Andrew has made it clear in his post about paywalling that making money from it isn't necessary. He has had a large exit in the past and is financially free.

Re: Tell HN: Thank you

#49

Post by gridspy »

staunch wrote: post #46
mattmaroon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a pretty common reaction you get whenever you first try to monetize anything on the net. People feel entitled to whatever you do at no cost to yourself. They always say "you could make money in other ways" but never suggest any specifically or show any evidence they would actually gain traction. If you like what the guy does enough to shell out some $, fine. If you don't, also fine. But the guy has a right to…

Users are often upset about any change whatsoever. A certain percentage of people simply don't like the things they're familiar with changing at all. They will complain loudly. You have to ignore these people to succeed. If you let them convince you to remain static you will lose . I don't think that's the case here though. It's hard for me to be objective, but I'm fairly certain this change was executed poorly and m…

Paul Graham made is essays for free. As a result he has a loyal following of hackers. Long after his essays were popular, he started tapping into that following with YC.

Joel Spolsky had a popular programming blog. He mentions a site that he is involved with (SO) and suddenly it has the attention of a large number of people.

We all know Andrew Warner, what a nice guy is his, how good he is at building relationships. We visit his page often.

Don't you think that this alone is an extremely valuable commodity?

If Andrew decided to start a venture, or to invest and promote a venture, he would have the eyes and ears of the HN community in short order.

That is worth far more than any paywall revenue.

Re: Tell HN: Thank you

#50

Post by mattmaroon »

staunch wrote: post #46
mattmaroon wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a pretty common reaction you get whenever you first try to monetize anything on the net. People feel entitled to whatever you do at no cost to yourself. They always say "you could make money in other ways" but never suggest any specifically or show any evidence they would actually gain traction. If you like what the guy does enough to shell out some $, fine. If you don't, also fine. But the guy has a right to…

Users are often upset about any change whatsoever. A certain percentage of people simply don't like the things they're familiar with changing at all. They will complain loudly. You have to ignore these people to succeed. If you let them convince you to remain static you will lose . I don't think that's the case here though. It's hard for me to be objective, but I'm fairly certain this change was executed poorly and m…

My guess is Mixergy's audience is a tiny fraction of Laporte's. Leo had his own TV show. You can't assume more value (in fact there's probably much less) and you can't simply say "Leo makes a fortune off of sponsorships therefore everyone online should go that route.

I'm not sure his business model is the right one by any means, but he has a right to try. It's not lame to do so. And I don't think the knee-jerk reaction against charging is healthy. My guess is that the reaction (seen every time someone starts charging) is usually caused by the desire to keep getting it for free, and then all of these illogical justifications rationalize them.

Post reply on HN