11–20 of 70 posts
TechCrunch is not over. It's just that the great-stratups-are-everywhere environment matured. It's less novel. And the marketing playground is for non geeks = less tech blogs readers. These are all good news.
I worked for TC for a long time and lived and worked in the same house as Mike for almost 4 years, so I know how he works very well. First, Compete totally gets Techcrunch traffic wrong. Not only the numbers, but the trends would totally not match up with our own internal Google Analytics, and even the data such as top referrers etc. were way off. Compete should not be used as supporting evidence that Techcrunch is f…
I worked for TC for a long time and lived and worked in the same house as Mike for almost 4 years, so I know how he works very well. First, Compete totally gets Techcrunch traffic wrong. Not only the numbers, but the trends would totally not match up with our own internal Google Analytics, and even the data such as top referrers etc. were way off. Compete should not be used as supporting evidence that Techcrunch is f…
So which explanation did TC use for it's lack of reporting on Omnidrive? "Omnidrive - Is This The Sad End?" (technation: story now dead) ~ http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=309892
For the backstory cf: Gawker, Jackson West, "The Omnidrive story you won’t read on TechCrunch" ~ http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:p12eHH2...
I worked for TC for a long time and lived and worked in the same house as Mike for almost 4 years, so I know how he works very well. First, Compete totally gets Techcrunch traffic wrong. Not only the numbers, but the trends would totally not match up with our own internal Google Analytics, and even the data such as top referrers etc. were way off. Compete should not be used as supporting evidence that Techcrunch is f…
Insider trading is a legal a SEC definition..while selling stock on the 2nd market by itself is not insider trading..given Mike's caution in word use by your story something rings or smells real bad..about Mike using those words to describe something that might not approach that definition.
There are a lot of flaws in this analysis... 1. Yes Techcrunch's traffic is down according to Compete but so is the traffic from other sites that cover the same space. In the last 6 months Venturebeat for example is down 73%. ReadWriteWeb is down 38%. Even smaller sites are down. CenterNetworks covers relatively the same space and they're down 38%. By comparison Techcrunch is only down 29%. 2. The author states Micha…
The article argues the opposite: Arrington is shouting louder and louder in order to stop the traffic from hemorrhaging. Looks fairly true to me, too.
I worked for TC for a long time and lived and worked in the same house as Mike for almost 4 years, so I know how he works very well. First, Compete totally gets Techcrunch traffic wrong. Not only the numbers, but the trends would totally not match up with our own internal Google Analytics, and even the data such as top referrers etc. were way off. Compete should not be used as supporting evidence that Techcrunch is f…
"... There are a few different types of blogger. Those who don't get access to stories and rely on press releases, generally boring. Then there are those who get access to information, but refuse to post about it for fear of pissing somebody off, just as boring and probably worse than the first type. Then there is the type of blogger who gets access to information, and has no problem stepping on toes to get the infor…
I marked Omnidrive as deadpool in CrunchBase, and it isn't uncommon for Techcrunch to not cover a story that has been covered elsewhere, esp since Mike was an investor and was wary of conflicts
Techcrunch may be over because it has become irrelevant to the community of entrepreneurs/developers. Michael sometimes writes an interesting column. The rest is like a TMZ for the rich people of the silicon valley. There are real issues like these: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2291336 which they refuse to cover
I worked for TC for a long time and lived and worked in the same house as Mike for almost 4 years, so I know how he works very well. First, Compete totally gets Techcrunch traffic wrong. Not only the numbers, but the trends would totally not match up with our own internal Google Analytics, and even the data such as top referrers etc. were way off. Compete should not be used as supporting evidence that Techcrunch is f…
1) People who rewrite press releases
2) People who rewrite press releases
3) TechCrunch
Said like that, and given that you spent a good deal of time working with them - don't you think you could be revealing a wee bit of bias? (not that the original blog isn't)
I worked for TC for a long time and lived and worked in the same house as Mike for almost 4 years, so I know how he works very well. First, Compete totally gets Techcrunch traffic wrong. Not only the numbers, but the trends would totally not match up with our own internal Google Analytics, and even the data such as top referrers etc. were way off. Compete should not be used as supporting evidence that Techcrunch is f…
Forgive me if I've read you wrong, but it seems to me that you're saying there are three types of startup journalists out there: 1) People who rewrite press releases 2) People who rewrite press releases 3) TechCrunch Said like that, and given that you spent a good deal of time working with them - don't you think you could be revealing a wee bit of bias? (not that the original blog isn't)
If it read any other way, it wasn't my intention.
As an example, there was the Scamville[1] story about Offerpal and the offers in games on the Facebook platform and others. I was listening in to some of the calls Mike was making, and he told me about others, and it was apparent that another journalist had the same story a month earlier, but had been convinced not to publish it.
There were entire blogs dedicated to covering the space, but nobody said a word about users getting ripped off with misleading scams. Then when you visit these blogs you find the sponsor squares in the sidebar were the same companies that were involved with the bad offers.
That is definitely 'type 2'
[1] http://techcrunch.com/2009/10/31/scamville-the-social-gaming...
I hate how people cite Compete.com traffic graphs as "fact". Fact #1 is not a fact at all. Reference point: http://siteanalytics.compete.com/macrumors.com/ (estimated traffic, graph goes down) vs http://www.quantcast.com/macrumors.com (measured traffic, graph goes up) I also like how he cites Compete's numbers for TechCrunch (1 million uniques), but doesn't use Compete's numbers for his own site PostPost. Compete say…
Their data points are from 2 million people. In the U.S. alone, there are 230 million+ interet users: http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds=wb-wdi&met=it_net_us...
I only took basic stats courses in college, but I know enough to know that's nowhere close to a big enough sample size to be statistically significant.