11–20 of 178 posts
It's kind of hard to make sense of that graph without a vertical axis scale. I can't even tell if it starts at 0. Is there a version with scale?
It seems to be a screenshot from google trends though, so it starts at 0 - http://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=foursquare
It's kind of hard to make sense of that graph without a vertical axis scale. I can't even tell if it starts at 0. Is there a version with scale?
It's a "relative" scale. It's the difference between the highest point and the lowest point. The highest point being when Obama checked in on Foursquare. The lowest being ,well, when Foursquare started.
Why on earth did they think this was a good idea? Checkins were the point of foursquare. Mildly annoying to other people on your social media, but that also informed them of its existence.
The lesson here is that you can build something amazing and still fail if you can't turn it in to a business.
Why on earth did they think this was a good idea? Checkins were the point of foursquare. Mildly annoying to other people on your social media, but that also informed them of its existence.
They built something that, while wildly popular for a while, was impossible to monetize successfully. Checkins just don't represent any value to anyone (at least, not that Foursquare could get anyone to pay for). The lesson here is that you can build something amazing and still fail if you can't turn it in to a business.
No excuse. If you have a timestamped record of people's interactions with physical businesses and can't find a way to monetize that, sell to one of the thousands of people who can connect those dots pretty easily. And how do you possibly convince yourself that moving into an already-saturated market like ratings is going to help?
This matches my real life observations. I personally stopped using both Foursquare and Swarm and I know a lot of people who did. However, this graph does not mention the popularity of Swarm. It's likely that some Foursquare users switched to Swarm and uninstalled Foursquare entirely.
Why on earth did they think this was a good idea? Checkins were the point of foursquare. Mildly annoying to other people on your social media, but that also informed them of its existence.
They built something that, while wildly popular for a while, was impossible to monetize successfully. Checkins just don't represent any value to anyone (at least, not that Foursquare could get anyone to pay for). The lesson here is that you can build something amazing and still fail if you can't turn it in to a business.
I'm still astounded by this. They had a #&$%ing verb . That is the #&$%ing gold standard of presence. "I'm going to foursquare this." I actually heard real human beings say this. If your app name has become a verb the last thing you ever want to do is refocus . If you want to go to a ratings app like they apparently did (because... uh... that's not a saturated space or anything?...) then you make another app and leav…
What? If you don't make money, you will go bankrupt. You can be a verb all you want, if it doesn't make money, it doesn't matter.
I'm still astounded by this. They had a #&$%ing verb . That is the #&$%ing gold standard of presence. "I'm going to foursquare this." I actually heard real human beings say this. If your app name has become a verb the last thing you ever want to do is refocus . If you want to go to a ratings app like they apparently did (because... uh... that's not a saturated space or anything?...) then you make another app and leav…
"If your app name has become a verb the last thing you ever want to do is refocus." What? If you don't make money, you will go bankrupt . You can be a verb all you want, if it doesn't make money, it doesn't matter .