Live data from Hacker News

Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

indiehackers.com

31–40 of 277 posts

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#31

    When the 2048 game came out, I quickly hacked
    up a 2 player version and placed it under the
    Instapainting.com domain for SEO purposes.
Does this really work? Does Google think you are a better site for ordering paintings because you host a game? I tend to think Google is smarter by now. In fact, I would expect that Google almost exclusively relies on real user behaviour these days.

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#32

Ug, is it just me, or does that he took money before actually having anyone to paint the pictures seem unethical? Would people have ordered if they had of known there were no artists as yet, or for that matter the artist were going to be friends of the website owner?

Many people are offering to paint a picture from a photo, initially he could have just gone to someone like that and get the product. If you resell a service that is reliably available it is ok in my mind. There was no real risk of the product being impossible to deliver, only of him loosing even more money on it.

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#33
post #14

Nothing like exploiting people to make a living. Maybe the people doing the actual paintings should get that $32/mo? Gross US imperialism at its finest. So embarrassed to be from this country. FYI: Exploiting artists isn't some kind of disruptive innovation. Ever wonder why the arts are much less likely to adopt open source licensing? People like this jerk. Oh wait, I forgot. They aren't real artists because they hap…

It's not like there is one artist who is doing all the work and is in the dark about how much their talents are worth. Painting is a skill, but it's not a super valuable one unless you're one in a million and create original pieces. Making a photo into a painting is valuable, but only to the person who has memories wrapped up in the photo.

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#34

I can answer any questions, whether about how to get a great Christmas present, or questions about the article!

I have a question about the concept of hiring artists and sourcing from factories in China.

What does Instapainting do—in terms of due diligence—to ensure safe working conditions and fair labor practices for workers in the factories that make the product?

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#35
post #31

When the 2048 game came out, I quickly hacked up a 2 player version and placed it under the Instapainting.com domain for SEO purposes. Does this really work? Does Google think you are a better site for ordering paintings because you host a game? I tend to think Google is smarter by now. In fact, I would expect that Google almost exclusively relies on real user behaviour these days.

I'm fairly certain it worked. It's more like the page gets lots of link, thus lots of clout, and I link to Instapainting from that page, which means I transfer some of that clout.

And Google can't classify Instapainting.com as a "photo to painting" site. It just knows it's a site that contains some content. Since Yahoo.com would get better rankings even with disparate topics under the domain.

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#36
post #31

When the 2048 game came out, I quickly hacked up a 2 player version and placed it under the Instapainting.com domain for SEO purposes. Does this really work? Does Google think you are a better site for ordering paintings because you host a game? I tend to think Google is smarter by now. In fact, I would expect that Google almost exclusively relies on real user behaviour these days.

But "real users" went to their website. That gives them more value in Google's eyes than websites that no one ever visits.

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#37
post #14

Nothing like exploiting people to make a living. Maybe the people doing the actual paintings should get that $32/mo? Gross US imperialism at its finest. So embarrassed to be from this country. FYI: Exploiting artists isn't some kind of disruptive innovation. Ever wonder why the arts are much less likely to adopt open source licensing? People like this jerk. Oh wait, I forgot. They aren't real artists because they hap…

Your view on this situation is a bit narrow.

This is a telling sentence. "Shortly after the launch I was contacted by many artists, mostly from China (they already saturate other marketplaces like eBay, Alibaba, and Etsy)."

He opened a new market with new demand supplying the artists in China with more work.

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#38
post #31

When the 2048 game came out, I quickly hacked up a 2 player version and placed it under the Instapainting.com domain for SEO purposes. Does this really work? Does Google think you are a better site for ordering paintings because you host a game? I tend to think Google is smarter by now. In fact, I would expect that Google almost exclusively relies on real user behaviour these days.

I'm fairly certain it worked. It's more like the page gets lots of link, thus lots of clout, and I link to Instapainting from that page, which means I transfer some of that clout. And Google can't classify Instapainting.com as a "photo to painting" site. It just knows it's a site that contains some content. Since Yahoo.com would get better rankings even with disparate topics under the domain.

What makes you certain?

I am fairly certain that the world's best search engine is not falling for that. How can we decide who is right?

Re: Instapainting – From $4k in debt to $32k/mo in passive revenue with no employees

#40

Ug, is it just me, or does that he took money before actually having anyone to paint the pictures seem unethical? Would people have ordered if they had of known there were no artists as yet, or for that matter the artist were going to be friends of the website owner?

You seem to have some VERY backwards ideas of ethics...
Post reply on HN