Live data from Hacker News

Graph of Foursquare's Popularity After Removing Check-Ins

junkyardsam.com

101–110 of 178 posts

Re: Graph of Foursquare's Popularity After Removing Check-Ins

#102
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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 .

Ah, you fell for it too. How much does it actually cost to run the foursquare that millions of users liked? Hint: not very much. If you can't make that "not very much" back from ads, you should sell to someone who can.

If you settle for barely breaking even, your investors will replace you with somebody who believes they can take your company and have a chance of making ridiculous money. They will do that even if it is a 20% of wild success and an 80% chance that you will drive away the millions of users.

Why? Because merely covering core operational costs doesn't do anything to pay back the investors who put in $160 million.

Re: Graph of Foursquare's Popularity After Removing Check-Ins

#105
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. If it's as easy as you believe they wouldn't have pivoted. Perhaps they know something you don't. Or perhaps there's still a massive opportunity there. I don't know. And how do you possibly convince yourself that movi…

If it's as easy as you believe they wouldn't have pivoted. I don't think that follows. People and organisations make mistakes all the time; it's equally possible that Foursquare made a bad decision here.

I would say it is not equally possible.

This kind of major decision would have been made with the full agreement of the board. They have some very impressive investors, including DFJ, Union Square, and A16Z. The theory that all of these people, people who collectively happened to have $160m on the line, just happened to miss easy monetization opportunities is implausible.

Re: Graph of Foursquare's Popularity After Removing Check-Ins

#106
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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 .

Ah, you fell for it too. How much does it actually cost to run the foursquare that millions of users liked? Hint: not very much. If you can't make that "not very much" back from ads, you should sell to someone who can.

Ha. Hahaha. How many apps at that scale have you run? Foursquare is on AWS[0] and serves 40 million users. Their monthly spend there is probably at least in the 10-20k range. And this is before even considering that they had 135 employees at the time[1] and swank offices in a hip neighborhood in NY. Making all that back with "ads", especially when your platform is almost completely on mobile, is not a cakewalk.

0: http://aws.amazon.com/solutions/case-studies/foursquare/ 1: http://www.businessinsider.com/what-exactly-do-foursquares-1...

Re: Graph of Foursquare's Popularity After Removing Check-Ins

#107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, you fell for it too. How much does it actually cost to run the foursquare that millions of users liked? Hint: not very much. If you can't make that "not very much" back from ads, you should sell to someone who can.

If you settle for barely breaking even, your investors will replace you with somebody who believes they can take your company and have a chance of making ridiculous money. They will do that even if it is a 20% of wild success and an 80% chance that you will drive away the millions of users. Why? Because merely covering core operational costs doesn't do anything to pay back the investors who put in $160 million.

Why do you have "investors" with a low-margin, low-cost business model?

Re: Graph of Foursquare's Popularity After Removing Check-Ins

#108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see this myth being repeated, but it's clear it comes from people not familiar with the platform I've never seen a place with an undeserved good/bad reputation. And I've seen a lot of reviews from those sites (and went to those places) As the number of reviews increase the "I'll never go back to this place" begins to show, but they're compensated by good reviews. Now, systematic bad reviews usually mean there is an…

Travel outside of NYC and SF sometime and you'll see plenty of undeserved reputations in either direction.

Funny, I haven't checked it in SF and in NYC only while visiting for a short time.

Re: Graph of Foursquare's Popularity After Removing Check-Ins

#110
post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The app isn't the product. The points-of-interest database they built from their apps' users is the product. And that is what they're now selling to companies like Twitter. Twitter's incorporation of the POI will give them much more "check-in" data than their own apps ever could. https://medium.com/@dens/six-years-in-a-few-thoughts-on-four...

Ah, yes, I've done broadcasting too. The app is not the product if it's free. But people mistake that: you still have to actually have an app people want, if you're going to make them the product.

The app doesn't matter anymore. Twitter is the app now (and whomever else they license their points-of-interest service to). Consumers of their service likely feed back check-in-equivalent data to foursquare, which allows them to do trending and bolsters their database further.

I lament the loss of the app too. Checking in and becoming the mayor was the fun of the old app, and Swarm just doesn't do it for me. At this point I use it mostly as a log of new places I've been to so I can visit them again in the future, particularly while traveling.

Post reply on HN