11–20 of 41 posts
I think the reason investors are so excited is that the users are. Experienced investors have seen this pattern before. Occasionally a startup will hit a previously undiscovered spot in the periodic table and just take off. The end result is almost always good, unless the startup commits suicide like Friendster or gets offed like Napster.
Good luck with the monetization. It's probably just me - but there is no way I'd want me face on every tweet as I wrote it. Must be a generational thing.
Faster growth than Twitter, and hiring php hacker. I would be knocking these guys' doors down.
Sorry ?
Questions for PG/ Jon: How many active users, and founders did DailyBooth have when it applied to YC?
http://siteanalytics.compete.com/dailybooth.com/
I just went back and looked at their application to figure out how we realized they were good. Their answers were very clear and concise; they obviously understood their users well. Plus they had both done interesting stuff before.
I think the reason investors are so excited is that the users are. Experienced investors have seen this pattern before. Occasionally a startup will hit a previously undiscovered spot in the periodic table and just take off. The end result is almost always good, unless the startup commits suicide like Friendster or gets offed like Napster.
Questions for PG/ Jon: How many active users, and founders did DailyBooth have when it applied to YC?
They had (and still have) two founders. According to Compete, they had on the order of 40-50k uniques a month, but that may be US only. http://siteanalytics.compete.com/dailybooth.com/ I just went back and looked at their application to figure out how we realized they were good. Their answers were very clear and concise; they obviously understood their users well. Plus they had both done interesting stuff before.
Questions for PG/ Jon: How many active users, and founders did DailyBooth have when it applied to YC?
They had (and still have) two founders. According to Compete, they had on the order of 40-50k uniques a month, but that may be US only. http://siteanalytics.compete.com/dailybooth.com/ I just went back and looked at their application to figure out how we realized they were good. Their answers were very clear and concise; they obviously understood their users well. Plus they had both done interesting stuff before.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They had (and still have) two founders. According to Compete, they had on the order of 40-50k uniques a month, but that may be US only. http://siteanalytics.compete.com/dailybooth.com/ I just went back and looked at their application to figure out how we realized they were good. Their answers were very clear and concise; they obviously understood their users well. Plus they had both done interesting stuff before.
The article said 6.5 million uniques. The URL you gave claims 150k. I have always been confused by the various rankings but that seems a big difference.
http://www.quantcast.com/dailybooth.com
Obviously the data on these sites is crap. Whatever number Jon is quoting is presumably the most accurate, since he has the actual logs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article said 6.5 million uniques. The URL you gave claims 150k. I have always been confused by the various rankings but that seems a big difference.
And Quantcast says they only have 9.2k US uniques! http://www.quantcast.com/dailybooth.com Obviously the data on these sites is crap. Whatever number Jon is quoting is presumably the most accurate, since he has the actual logs.
Alexa is pretty lousy in an absolute sense but if you can compare with known numbers it gets a lot more useable.