so i'm just re-arranging deck chairs here, i know... but there's at least 1 or 2 new slides. and a lot more funky colors, for those of you who enjoy my kidnapper-ransomnotefonts & unique style of raping the viewer's attention. Also moved the embed of the original Startup Metrics for Pirates video (from Ignite Seattle / Summer 2007) after slide 23.
ya know it's hard out here for a pimp when he tryin' to get his money for the rent.
for the cadillacs and gas money spent
cuz' a whole lot of bitches talkin' shit.
well for what it's worth, i did make rent this month, G.
but lemme tell you, it ain't easy being a Web2.0P-I-M-P.
...especially in these Good Times we got going on around here. banks going belly up, people losing their homes & jobs... damn. people so fucking scared they voted a brother into the white [sic] house. i guess that's progress, but now we got our asses in both hands worrying about credit card debt, mortgage foreclosures, and wondering whether we gonna get PAID. better go slap the shit out my startups and make sure they come up with the Cash-Money, G. damn straight.
now listen up bitches:
Most of the time, entrepreneurs think about 2 types of users:
Simply put, there are "HOs" who contribute content to your site (they give you their stuff, or "put out"). The rest of the people on your site are the "Johns" who visit & view the content... and might even pay you some cash money (if it's good shit).
However, typically a 3rd & very important audience is forgotten about, which is quite likely even more important than either of the two above. this is the group of people who promote & distribute existing content / refer new users, altho they might not ever contribute any original content themselves:
These folks help share, digg, tweet, email, & embed your content, promote it to new audiences, and bring users back to your site. They are the"Pimps" who distribute your content. And most likely, they are WAAAAAAyyyy more important (relatively speaking) than the Johns or the Hos.
(disclaimer & note to self: i'm pretty sure at this point i have now lost most of my female audience, and/or anyone with any shred of class or civilized sensibility. for those of you still with me, i hope you find the rest of this post worth the crass language & white-trash upbringing i am helpless to remove from my discourse)
See, most folks probably design their site audiences like this:
1) first, let's get people to contribute content, so i'll emphasize THEIR needs and orient the site & features around CONTRIBUTORS (HOs).
2) next, i need to make sure people who are just average VISITORS (Johns) can view the site well, so i'll build lots of ways to use & experience that content. and hopefully they're share some of it too, and maybe we'll "go viral"!
3) lastly, some of those folks who are contributors will probably help DISTRIBUTE content too, so i'll give them a few tools to help do that, but they should already be motivated to help distribute so we don't need to worry too much. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.
Now, there are already several errors in assumption/prioritization here:
people who DISTRIBUTE are not necessarily the same people who CONTRIBUTE (translation: "PIMPs ain't HOs")
even for those who do both, it's possible the higher-value action is to DISTRIBUTE, and yet most UI design emphasizes CONTRIBUTE features & actions higher. but Contributors need Distributors and/or Affiliates to help bring in Visitors. ("HOs need PIMPs to get JOHNs")
most of your VISITORS ain't gonna do shit except check out your content for free, jerk off on something they like, then skip town before paying you one goddamn cent. ("window shopping is free & easy, except in Amsterdam... but PIMPS help make sure JOHNs pay up de HOs")
thus, the way most people manage audience looks like this:
HOs
Johns
Pimps
however, the order you should REALLY use is THIS:
Pimps
Johns
HOs
that's right folks. The Internet works just like the Ghet-to.
Pimps go FIRST, bee-atch.
and if you don't like it, then Step OFF!...
cuz I'll beat your ass with my Pimp Cane and Cup and one mouse click tied behind my back.
we now return you to your regularly schedule SesameGhetto Street programming:
"...most of the companies that venture capitalists are funding today will find an exit through merger or acquisition. And if we expect to achieve a return in a reasonable time frame of three to five years, we are probably looking at a sale price of $20 million to $100 million. This is the valuation range where most young companies are being acquired.
To compensate for these lower gross return expectations, we must establish initial valuations, usually in the single digits, that can provide an adequate multiple return and internal rate of return..."
altho Patricof used to run Apax Partners, a $30B fund, Greycroft Partners is only a $75M fund. He could easily have raised a much larger fund if he wanted; the fact that he didn't speaks volumes about where he thinks venture capital is headed in the future (even before the recent downturn).