Live data from Hacker News

Paul Graham's Letter to YC Companies

news.ycombinator.com

161–170 of 204 posts

Re: Paul Graham's Letter to YC Companies

#161
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think they've even tried to make money yet. They've just been focusing on growth. But they have so many users now that they could do whatever they want. Ideas that would entail a chicken and egg problem for anyone starting from scratch (e.g. marketplaces) do not for them. Plus Mark himself is such a fearsomely effective person. And so young; he's only a little older now than Larry and Sergey were when they st…

Agreed. Facebook could do everything. Any economical transaction involves a social transaction as well. Facebook, can be the underlying architecture of every economy. Facebook is at the core of a large, new economic ecosystem: apps, websites, ads, mobile, causes, almost everything you can think of. They can enter in any business, and for sure they are going to expand these below, to rich an enormous amount of revenue…

There are so many things wrong with your post that I don't know where to start..

> Agreed. Facebook could do everything.

no they can't. They can't turn to hot-dog seller. Sure they can try, but every time they try to do something other than social networking, they will be losing users.

> Ads: I don’t know about any platform that will be able to show ads to (soon) +1B people.

It doesn't matter to how many people they can show ads. What matters is that how much value out of ads the advertisers can get (conversion?). More and more of my friend try to advertise with FB once, and then stop. The bottom line: FB ads don't work! And its not Facebook fault! Its that they are in business of connecting people, not advertising products. By now, 99% of Facebook users' brains are automatically coded to ignore ads on the website, regardless how intrusive those ads get. At some point, one of my friend, totally non-tech-savvy actually searched for ad blocker, found it and successfully installed, because she was so annoyed with ads. The biggest FB Ads weapon, so called "likes" do not work either. I "like" Ferrari, but what does it means? I like fast cars? I like racing cars? I like Ferrari as a brand, or do I actually own Ferrari? Or am I planning to buy one. Because for advertisers, there is a huge difference. Google solves this problem via their core product: search. Wanna buy Ferrari? search "buy used Ferrari" or "Ferrari prices". Need parts for Ferrari? You search for parts. Facebook has no way of knowing any of these from simple "Ferrari like", which makes "likes" irrelevant to Advertisers. Even recently GM withdraw $10MM of Ads founds. You know, they have entire Ad department, so they know what they doing.

Bottom line: show me 10 successful advertisers on Facebook, but other than Zynga or "lose 20 pounds quickly" scams.

> Platform/Apps: They have built one of the biggest platforms with 9MM apps. Third-party apps integration and the entire FB platform is just one the most powerful things on the internet.

Well, I don't know about powerfullness, but the main reason behind FB connect is people's laziness to create another username/password. Other than that, there is not much value in connecting any Platform/App with your Facebook account. I have some friends that lost connections because they let SocialCam or other garbage to spam their wall without their direct knowledge of how this connection with FB will work. So more and more users trust less in connecting their FB with Platform Apps.

Further, Apps on Facebook do not make money. What was the last time you or anyone you know bought an Facebook app for 99cents, versus Apple App Store App? There will always be a higher quality of Apps on apple because guess what: surprise surprise! - developers like to be paid for their hard work. I won't even comment on your "facebook ecosystem may be more powerful than Apple". I know you were joking!

> Specific APIs: There is some sort of overlap between APIs and FB platform. As of today all FB APIs are free. But I don’t believe in giving for free additional value will last forever.

Well, there is not much money one can make on specific API. Sure, if an average developer makes $1,000 bucks on connecting with FB Api, then they will start charging. But as of now, there is no monetary value to use their API. That's why its free. They won't convert it to paid unless people will start benefiting off of it (make money); otherwise they would chop off the tree they sitting on.

> Coupons/Deals: They failed here, but they will not give up.

How do you know they will not give up? do you have any insights? Also, don't forget if Ads on mobile will get too intrusive with deals popping up every time I am around Verizon and simply want to check friends feed, people will start to disabling their location. Because - once again: Facebook main core product is social network, not apis, not deals and coupons, not credits! network of connected friends!

> Facebook Credits/Payments: I believe this is going to be a tremendous revenue stream over the years.

Ok, you believe in that. I believe in unicorns pooping out golden bricks. Yet you have not explain why you so strongly believe in that. With all those payment systems coming up (not to mention PayPal still strong?), but Stripe, Dwolla, even GumRoad, I think they will be in hot water here. And actually their FB connection api works against them. GumRoad adds Facebook Integration and viola! why on earth would I use Facebook Credits if all my friends are bragging how awesome GumRoad is, plus I can connect to it using my Facebook!

> Much more: there are a tons of things that they can do, from user subscriptions (imagine having just 10% of the users paying $9/month to access premium services);

Well, Imagine opening a shoe factory; there are 6B people and most wear shoes. If you only capture 1% of the market and sell 1 pair of shoes 1 times a year for $15, that's $900MM in revenues per year!! so how come I don't see shoe factories popping up everywhere?

> Facebook is basically becoming a new kind of telco.

uhm, you sound little late to the party. Where have you been for last 4 years?

> Facebook is speed. A new version of Facebook is released every Tuesday, there are 12,000 modifications per month, more than 1000 developers deliver code to be released each week. Facebook average employee is 26 years-old.

All those things are irrelevant to whether they can make money or not. How come you didn't comment on how CEO was scared of growing Instagram (competitor) and had to overtake it at any means necessary ($1B thats a lot, they can only make 15 more deals like that, given they would use all their money for acquisition).

And last but not least: they stock performance tells it all. I don't have to add much here, I hope.

Re: Paul Graham's Letter to YC Companies

#162
post #122
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Similarly, people will continue to go to the best search engine for searching for information. There is no reason why Facebook can't become that. If Apple can make phones and Google can make phone OS. If Microsoft can make gaming consoles. There is nothing stopping FB from doing it.

Yes, that's possible. But then it will be doing something new and different, isn't it? And it has to be more based on the spending power it has. And not related to its social network power. Google put G+ on its home page, with not much success. Similarly, why should FB get a leverage out of just putting search on its home page. Unless the search is really better than Google's. What advantage FB has over say blekko in…

They don't need to do anything new or different. The barrier to a user to use a new search is miniscule. It's even less if you're already spending 90% of your online time on that site to begin with. G+ didn't work out because there is a huge barrier to users to become active on it. The two are vastly different.

Re: Paul Graham's Letter to YC Companies

#163

I am not sure what will cool the investment climate more. The fact that facebook's IPO was a disaster or that PG sent this letter and recommends to be cautious.

I'm thinking that too. Reminds me of the "RIP Good Times" Sequoia effect. And now, other prominent investors are posting in agreement with this article, furthering the ripples.

Re: Paul Graham's Letter to YC Companies

#164
I note that BI is called a "cesspool" in these comments, and that this email has been posted here so that you don't have to send any traffic to us.

Just so everyone is aware, you'd not be reading this email right now if us cesspool-splashers hadn't done the hard work of getting a copy and posting it. Now, by not linking to us, you are essentially punishing us for that work. I suppose you'd prefer a world in which you hadn't read this email.

Re: Paul Graham's Letter to YC Companies

#166
Many of the people I know at Facebook are talking about getting into Angel investing or starting their own companies now that they have money. I'm most worried about all that seed money flooding the market, making it even harder for existing companies to find good talent.

Re: Paul Graham's Letter to YC Companies

#167
post #109
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many ebay users also use FB. And a lot of FB users use Paypal. Think about it. Ads, movies, music, even games aren't really what will help then make huge amounts of money. Transactions will.

Agree transactions will make money for somebody. Let me take just take one example of 'movies' from your sentence. Would you think of Youtube or Facebook as a natural choice for watching paid videos/movies? Likewise, IMO, there will be specific things for specific purposes. I will proffer that the specific purpose for FB usage are things like vanity and managing one's image (how one wants to be seen in their social c…

>Likewise, IMO, there will be specific things for specific purposes.

It would do techies a lot of good to realize this is not true for most people. People do not have "specific sites for specific purposes". To most people the web browser is the internet. The distinction between different pages is fuzzy at best. And at this point facebook itself is the internet to a lot people. If facebook offered a compelling X experience (X can be anything here), people absolutely will use it. Do not fool yourself into thinking most internet users compartmentalize their internet usage. They absolutely do not. That is the power of facebook.

Re: Paul Graham's Letter to YC Companies

#168
I spend so much time arguing and thinking critically about things that I've made a decision: I'm just not going to question Paul Graham. It's not worth my time, he's right enough where it's probably not dangerous and let's be honest: we all need something solid to lean on. I've realized I've leaned so heavily on his advice up to this point, so I'm just going all in.

Re: Paul Graham's Letter to YC Companies

#169
post #77

When I saw PG's email, I thought this was a self-fulfilling prophesy, even if it was only seen by YC founders. But now that every has seen it - it will be in Forbes and TechCrunch soon no doubt - it seems almost certain. If just YC founders see it, then they'll take less money, and get lower valuations, etc, leading the tone of the valley. But if everyone sees it, investors will close their wallets, people will decla…

Only the Social Network bubble is popped -- which is the majority of companies that YCombinator funds. Social network websites that can be built in 3 months and have zero paying customers or any potential profitability really shouldn't have existed in the first place.

Agreed with pbiggar about trolling. Most YC companies are by far not social network websites. You have not done your homework, or you're just trolling.

Re: Paul Graham's Letter to YC Companies

#170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the next few months Facebook will create over 1000 new millionaires. Is it to much too assume that many of them will get into inventing, which could actually cause the opposite affect of what you're suggesting where there is even more money available?

Not sure if you meant investing or inventing (or both). But either one of those could have interesting implications in the valley.

Whoops. Yea I meant investing. My assumption was that some part of a 1000 new millionaires would hopefully be putting some money back into the system through investments. I also think you'll see some people leave Facebook as they vest to go start companies of their own.
Post reply on HN