Comments on: Monopoly or Infrastructure? http://www.sneakerheadVC.com/2009/11/17/monopoly-or-infrastructure/ Tech, entrepreneurship and sneaker culture served fresh Fri, 30 Jul 2010 06:42:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: phineasb http://www.sneakerheadVC.com/2009/11/17/monopoly-or-infrastructure/comment-page-1/#comment-191 phineasb Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:39:06 +0000 http://separatepiece.com/?p=295#comment-191 Console manufacturers took an apple iPhone app approval approach--and could decline a product at any point. Worse than web as the dev. Cycles were $MM and once you had gold disk there were no updates. On the web you can iterate or evolve out of dependency as long as you own the consumer relationship. <br>Phin Barnes<br>Principal, First Round Capital<br>215-327-0849 Console manufacturers took an apple iPhone app approval approach–and could decline a product at any point. Worse than web as the dev. Cycles were $MM and once you had gold disk there were no updates. On the web you can iterate or evolve out of dependency as long as you own the consumer relationship.
Phin Barnes
Principal, First Round Capital
215-327-0849

]]> By: Spencer Fry http://www.sneakerheadVC.com/2009/11/17/monopoly-or-infrastructure/comment-page-1/#comment-190 Spencer Fry Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:32:40 +0000 http://separatepiece.com/?p=295#comment-190 Was the console game start-up a Web based thing? I think this is mostly a concern for the Web. I think it's almost as big as important as the net neutrality issue. Was the console game start-up a Web based thing? I think this is mostly a concern for the Web. I think it's almost as big as important as the net neutrality issue.

]]> By: phineasb http://www.sneakerheadVC.com/2009/11/17/monopoly-or-infrastructure/comment-page-1/#comment-189 phineasb Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:29:38 +0000 http://separatepiece.com/?p=295#comment-189 Thanks Spencer. I had similar dependency worries in my console game start-up but had to live within the ecosystem that existed and focus on leveraging it better than the next guy. Ultimately it was non-market forces that brought us down.<br> Look forward to talking more in person.<br><br>Phin Barnes<br>Principal, First Round Capital<br>215-327-0849 Thanks Spencer. I had similar dependency worries in my console game start-up but had to live within the ecosystem that existed and focus on leveraging it better than the next guy. Ultimately it was non-market forces that brought us down.
Look forward to talking more in person.

Phin Barnes
Principal, First Round Capital
215-327-0849

]]> By: Spencer Fry http://www.sneakerheadVC.com/2009/11/17/monopoly-or-infrastructure/comment-page-1/#comment-188 Spencer Fry Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:23:48 +0000 http://separatepiece.com/?p=295#comment-188 Hmm. I would only recommend using something like Facebook or Twitter Connect for a website that has no intention of taking its users' billing information. I have no problem recommending those services for something like that, but if you have any intention in charging for your service (or building the NEXT big thing), I think there's a serious issue with doing it through Facebook Connect accounts or anything else under someone else's control.<br><br>The reason I have such scorn for this teleco like approach these large startups are taking is that I ran a company from 2002-2007 that I sold -- it's still around today -- where we licensed our core technology from a one person startup. The technology was amazing, but the longevity of our business solely relied on him updating and continuing to support the technology. If it failed, we failed. And for 5 years I went to sleep every day with anxiety that tomorrow he'd shut his company down and my business would be kaput. How can you ever sleep soundly at night knowing that Facebook or some other company will switch how they do things?<br><br>If you read the agreements that you sign, you basically are given no recourse if they change something. Look at app development for the iPhone. There's a reason why major developers (Joe Hewitt, etc.) are going ape sh*t over Apple's app store policy. They're quitting development because just can't handle having to bend at will to someone else. I think any true entrepreneur out there won't stand by and rely on someone else's technology to get them through.<br><br>Anyway, sorry for the rambling. We can go into more of this in person, but I feel strongly that any kind of tie in or major teleco like infrastructure that these big companies create only hurts the Web and doesn't help it. It's cool if you want to do a little side project on top of their infrastructure, but not if you're trying to build a game changer. Hmm. I would only recommend using something like Facebook or Twitter Connect for a website that has no intention of taking its users' billing information. I have no problem recommending those services for something like that, but if you have any intention in charging for your service (or building the NEXT big thing), I think there's a serious issue with doing it through Facebook Connect accounts or anything else under someone else's control.

The reason I have such scorn for this teleco like approach these large startups are taking is that I ran a company from 2002-2007 that I sold — it's still around today — where we licensed our core technology from a one person startup. The technology was amazing, but the longevity of our business solely relied on him updating and continuing to support the technology. If it failed, we failed. And for 5 years I went to sleep every day with anxiety that tomorrow he'd shut his company down and my business would be kaput. How can you ever sleep soundly at night knowing that Facebook or some other company will switch how they do things?

If you read the agreements that you sign, you basically are given no recourse if they change something. Look at app development for the iPhone. There's a reason why major developers (Joe Hewitt, etc.) are going ape sh*t over Apple's app store policy. They're quitting development because just can't handle having to bend at will to someone else. I think any true entrepreneur out there won't stand by and rely on someone else's technology to get them through.

Anyway, sorry for the rambling. We can go into more of this in person, but I feel strongly that any kind of tie in or major teleco like infrastructure that these big companies create only hurts the Web and doesn't help it. It's cool if you want to do a little side project on top of their infrastructure, but not if you're trying to build a game changer.

]]> By: phineasb http://www.sneakerheadVC.com/2009/11/17/monopoly-or-infrastructure/comment-page-1/#comment-187 phineasb Wed, 18 Nov 2009 17:53:42 +0000 http://separatepiece.com/?p=295#comment-187 Spencer- thanks for laying out your perspective on this as someone who is making these calls each day for your business. I guess I see a time where it will be like the telcos but I don't think we will suffer the period of control that proceeds the "dumbpipe" stage. The hot points in the social web will be at the edges -- the large services that support the interactions must pull this content in to remain relevant. <br><br>There are basic things on the web, like identity, that I feel ok with Fb owning so long as it means I can more easily create a unified experience across the services I choose to use and so long as my identity on Fb is updated with my actions/accomplishments as a user of these services. <br><br>Would you say it is easier for a small guy to leverage the power of the social graph via Fb or for Fb to make a change that screws a small guy? Spencer- thanks for laying out your perspective on this as someone who is making these calls each day for your business. I guess I see a time where it will be like the telcos but I don't think we will suffer the period of control that proceeds the “dumbpipe” stage. The hot points in the social web will be at the edges — the large services that support the interactions must pull this content in to remain relevant.

There are basic things on the web, like identity, that I feel ok with Fb owning so long as it means I can more easily create a unified experience across the services I choose to use and so long as my identity on Fb is updated with my actions/accomplishments as a user of these services.

Would you say it is easier for a small guy to leverage the power of the social graph via Fb or for Fb to make a change that screws a small guy?

]]> By: phineasb http://www.sneakerheadVC.com/2009/11/17/monopoly-or-infrastructure/comment-page-1/#comment-130 phineasb Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:39:06 +0000 http://separatepiece.com/?p=295#comment-130 Console manufacturers took an apple iPhone app approval approach--and could decline a product at any point. Worse than web as the dev. Cycles were $MM and once you had gold disk there were no updates. On the web you can iterate or evolve out of dependency as long as you own the consumer relationship. <br>Phin Barnes<br>Principal, First Round Capital<br>215-327-0849 Console manufacturers took an apple iPhone app approval approach–and could decline a product at any point. Worse than web as the dev. Cycles were $MM and once you had gold disk there were no updates. On the web you can iterate or evolve out of dependency as long as you own the consumer relationship.
Phin Barnes
Principal, First Round Capital
215-327-0849

]]> By: Spencer Fry http://www.sneakerheadVC.com/2009/11/17/monopoly-or-infrastructure/comment-page-1/#comment-129 Spencer Fry Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:32:40 +0000 http://separatepiece.com/?p=295#comment-129 Was the console game start-up a Web based thing? I think this is mostly a concern for the Web. I think it's almost as big as important as the net neutrality issue. Was the console game start-up a Web based thing? I think this is mostly a concern for the Web. I think it's almost as big as important as the net neutrality issue.

]]> By: phineasb http://www.sneakerheadVC.com/2009/11/17/monopoly-or-infrastructure/comment-page-1/#comment-128 phineasb Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:29:38 +0000 http://separatepiece.com/?p=295#comment-128 Thanks Spencer. I had similar dependency worries in my console game start-up but had to live within the ecosystem that existed and focus on leveraging it better than the next guy. Ultimately it was non-market forces that brought us down.<br> Look forward to talking more in person.<br><br>Phin Barnes<br>Principal, First Round Capital<br>215-327-0849 Thanks Spencer. I had similar dependency worries in my console game start-up but had to live within the ecosystem that existed and focus on leveraging it better than the next guy. Ultimately it was non-market forces that brought us down.
Look forward to talking more in person.

Phin Barnes
Principal, First Round Capital
215-327-0849

]]> By: Spencer Fry http://www.sneakerheadVC.com/2009/11/17/monopoly-or-infrastructure/comment-page-1/#comment-127 Spencer Fry Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:23:48 +0000 http://separatepiece.com/?p=295#comment-127 Hmm. I would only recommend using something like Facebook or Twitter Connect for a website that has no intention of taking its users' billing information. I have no problem recommending those services for something like that, but if you have any intention in charging for your service (or building the NEXT big thing), I think there's a serious issue with doing it through Facebook Connect accounts or anything else under someone else's control.<br><br>The reason I have such scorn for this teleco like approach these large startups are taking is that I ran a company from 2002-2007 that I sold -- it's still around today -- where we licensed our core technology from a one person startup. The technology was amazing, but the longevity of our business solely relied on him updating and continuing to support the technology. If it failed, we failed. And for 5 years I went to sleep every day with anxiety that tomorrow he'd shut his company down and my business would be kaput. How can you ever sleep soundly at night knowing that Facebook or some other company will switch how they do things?<br><br>If you read the agreements that you sign, you basically are given no recourse if they change something. Look at app development for the iPhone. There's a reason why major developers (Joe Hewitt, etc.) are going ape sh*t over Apple's app store policy. They're quitting development because just can't handle having to bend at will to someone else. I think any true entrepreneur out there won't stand by and rely on someone else's technology to get them through.<br><br>Anyway, sorry for the rambling. We can go into more of this in person, but I feel strongly that any kind of tie in or major teleco like infrastructure that these big companies create only hurts the Web and doesn't help it. It's cool if you want to do a little side project on top of their infrastructure, but not if you're trying to build a game changer. Hmm. I would only recommend using something like Facebook or Twitter Connect for a website that has no intention of taking its users' billing information. I have no problem recommending those services for something like that, but if you have any intention in charging for your service (or building the NEXT big thing), I think there's a serious issue with doing it through Facebook Connect accounts or anything else under someone else's control.

The reason I have such scorn for this teleco like approach these large startups are taking is that I ran a company from 2002-2007 that I sold — it's still around today — where we licensed our core technology from a one person startup. The technology was amazing, but the longevity of our business solely relied on him updating and continuing to support the technology. If it failed, we failed. And for 5 years I went to sleep every day with anxiety that tomorrow he'd shut his company down and my business would be kaput. How can you ever sleep soundly at night knowing that Facebook or some other company will switch how they do things?

If you read the agreements that you sign, you basically are given no recourse if they change something. Look at app development for the iPhone. There's a reason why major developers (Joe Hewitt, etc.) are going ape sh*t over Apple's app store policy. They're quitting development because just can't handle having to bend at will to someone else. I think any true entrepreneur out there won't stand by and rely on someone else's technology to get them through.

Anyway, sorry for the rambling. We can go into more of this in person, but I feel strongly that any kind of tie in or major teleco like infrastructure that these big companies create only hurts the Web and doesn't help it. It's cool if you want to do a little side project on top of their infrastructure, but not if you're trying to build a game changer.

]]> By: phineasb http://www.sneakerheadVC.com/2009/11/17/monopoly-or-infrastructure/comment-page-1/#comment-126 phineasb Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:53:42 +0000 http://separatepiece.com/?p=295#comment-126 Spencer- thanks for laying out your perspective on this as someone who is making these calls each day for your business. I guess I see a time where it will be like the telcos but I don't think we will suffer the period of control that proceeds the "dumbpipe" stage. The hot points in the social web will be at the edges -- the large services that support the interactions must pull this content in to remain relevant. <br><br>There are basic things on the web, like identity, that I feel ok with Fb owning so long as it means I can more easily create a unified experience across the services I choose to use and so long as my identity on Fb is updated with my actions/accomplishments as a user of these services. <br><br>Would you say it is easier for a small guy to leverage the power of the social graph via Fb or for Fb to make a change that screws a small guy? Spencer- thanks for laying out your perspective on this as someone who is making these calls each day for your business. I guess I see a time where it will be like the telcos but I don't think we will suffer the period of control that proceeds the “dumbpipe” stage. The hot points in the social web will be at the edges — the large services that support the interactions must pull this content in to remain relevant.

There are basic things on the web, like identity, that I feel ok with Fb owning so long as it means I can more easily create a unified experience across the services I choose to use and so long as my identity on Fb is updated with my actions/accomplishments as a user of these services.

Would you say it is easier for a small guy to leverage the power of the social graph via Fb or for Fb to make a change that screws a small guy?

]]> By: Spencer Fry http://www.sneakerheadVC.com/2009/11/17/monopoly-or-infrastructure/comment-page-1/#comment-125 Spencer Fry Tue, 17 Nov 2009 21:33:34 +0000 http://separatepiece.com/?p=295#comment-125 I'll never ever build a business on top of someone else's platform. I don't like not being in complete control of my company's outcome. I don't want to wake up one morning and find Apple or Google switching off/changing something that affects my business. How could you ever sleep at night?<br><br>In that sense, it makes me nervous that these dominate players are taking over the Web. I'm all for open APIs -- we even hope to have one with Carbonmade -- but relying on another company is just asking for it (Facebook Connect for logging in? Hell no.). I really don't like the idea of these companies having such control. It's like telco's all over again. I'll never ever build a business on top of someone else's platform. I don't like not being in complete control of my company's outcome. I don't want to wake up one morning and find Apple or Google switching off/changing something that affects my business. How could you ever sleep at night?

In that sense, it makes me nervous that these dominate players are taking over the Web. I'm all for open APIs — we even hope to have one with Carbonmade — but relying on another company is just asking for it (Facebook Connect for logging in? Hell no.). I really don't like the idea of these companies having such control. It's like telco's all over again.

]]> By: phineasb http://www.sneakerheadVC.com/2009/11/17/monopoly-or-infrastructure/comment-page-1/#comment-124 phineasb Tue, 17 Nov 2009 19:01:13 +0000 http://separatepiece.com/?p=295#comment-124 Jon-<br>I also think this means the few dominant players have to run faster to stay ahead (or buy faster/sooner)<br>Phin Jon-
I also think this means the few dominant players have to run faster to stay ahead (or buy faster/sooner)
Phin

]]> By: jonsteinberg http://www.sneakerheadVC.com/2009/11/17/monopoly-or-infrastructure/comment-page-1/#comment-123 jonsteinberg Tue, 17 Nov 2009 18:52:53 +0000 http://separatepiece.com/?p=295#comment-123 Phin - I agree with you. There are a few dominant players but never before have the switching costs been lower than in the digital realm. The Internet has freed up more "lock-in," i.e. OS no longer matters, than it has created.<br><br>For every Facebook or Google, there are tons of Myspaces and Friendsters... Phin – I agree with you. There are a few dominant players but never before have the switching costs been lower than in the digital realm. The Internet has freed up more “lock-in,” i.e. OS no longer matters, than it has created.

For every Facebook or Google, there are tons of Myspaces and Friendsters…

]]>