Disqus - Latest Comments for VC Dan

Re: The Ups and Downs of Entrepreneurship – smoothed by EXECUTION

VC Dan — Mon, 02 Oct 2006 11:44:05 -0000

nice post Howard and good advice!

Re: How To Go To The Gainesville Underground Technology Conference

VC Dan — Thu, 19 Apr 2007 22:37:04 -0000

Inaugural GUT was good stuff/peoples -- looking forward to our next GUT-check... ;-)

Re: Sponsored: Sears, Christmas And Granting Wishes

VC Dan — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 10:39:41 -0000

I love your take on this Steve -- thanks for helping so many daily and working with Sears/IZEA to help more this holiday!

Re: Techcrunch and Disclosure Policy (picking straws)

VC Dan — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 11:59:28 -0000

nice analysis Andy...

Re: Techcrunch and Disclosure Policy (picking straws)

VC Dan — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 11:59:28 -0000

nice analysis Andy...

Re: FTC | Word of Mouth and Affiliates

VC Dan — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:08:11 -0000

Nice Andy, really well done!

Re: FTC | Word of Mouth and Affiliates

VC Dan — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:08:11 -0000

Nice Andy, really well done!

Re: Is PayPerPost The Only Subject Nick Denton and Jason Calacanis Agree On?

VC Dan — Wed, 07 Mar 2007 16:09:31 -0000

That's correct Vlad. New Posties (PPP bloggers) can do the initial "Review My Post" (RMP) for $7.50, but they cannot keep doing them repeatedly after signup. But, don't worry, there is a diverse set of sponsors/opps at PPP with sponsorships far greater than $7.50.

Although you may want to confirm an official answer on what graphic to use for RMP, from an HTML standpoint, the image shown is distinct from the affiliate hyperlink -- suggesting you might be able to use a different graphic that integrates best with your blog design. If you want the reviews, I think you'd still want the button in your template after every post -- giving audiences the broadest set of post topics to review.

Andy: any feedback on RMP? I posted my take here: http://floridaventureblog.com/2007/02/market-yo...
It seems like a win-win, no-brainer to drive affiliate and marketing benefits for every blogger out there, Postie or not...

Re: Is PayPerPost The Only Subject Nick Denton and Jason Calacanis Agree On?

VC Dan — Wed, 07 Mar 2007 16:09:31 -0000

Re: Sponsored Reviews Now Live – In Depth Review

VC Dan — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 17:07:42 -0000

Nice review Andy.

As to your PayPerPost pricing question, your foggy memory may be partly due to terminology. SponsoredReviews and some others like to tout their "cut", a smaller % than discussing their "markup". For example, ReviewMe's "50% cut" is really a 100% markup from what the blogger gets. SR's "35% cut" is really 35/65 = 53.8% markup. PPP's 35% markup remains the best in the business, creating the interesting reality that advertisers can pay less AND bloggers earn more in PPP's structure.

It doesn't really matter whether "cut" or "markup" is used, but apples-to-apples comparisons are always best. That said, it's just great to see the growing interest in our space!

Re: Sponsored Reviews Now Live – In Depth Review

VC Dan — Mon, 12 Mar 2007 17:07:42 -0000

Re: Sponsored Reviews Now Live – In Depth Review

VC Dan — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 09:10:30 -0000

@Ado: Let me start by saying I think Jarrod has done a great job of watching the leaders and trying to be different. If he's anything like Patrick, it will be fun building this industry together.

To your request for more detail, I will use Andy's screenshot from above where an advertiser is willing to pay $150 for a sponsored post.

At RM, that $150 delivers $75 to the blogger and $75 to RM as a 50% "cut" (75/150) or a 100% "markup" (75/75).
At SR, that $150 delivers $98 to the blogger and $52 to SR as a 35% "cut" (52/150) or a 53% "markup" (52/98). (see "You Get" in first screenshot)
At PPP, that $150 delivers $111 to the blogger and $39 to PPP as a 26% "cut" (39/150) or a 35% "markup" (39/111). Assuming a sponsor wanted 50 such posts, you should also include PPP's $5 opp fee which would equate to $.10/post across those 50 posts -- a rounding error in these calcs.

The "interesting reality" I mention is that PPP's structure allows a sponsor to pay less, say $140 for posts on blogs that meet specific, scalable traffic/influence criteria, AND the blogger makes more $104 in the same transaction. Across a 50 post opp that means sponsors save $500 AND bloggers earn $300 more than with competing marketplaces.

As I said before, it doesn't matter whether you compare "cut" or "margin" -- you just want to compare apples-to-apples. The same holds true for sponsor goals. Therefore, if a sponsor is looking for one or two sponsored posts, the apples-to-apples comparison is RM and SR pricing for selecting a blogger -- although that might be easier accomplished by going direct. However, if a sponsor would like 20, 50 or 100+ sponsored posts, the apples-to-apples comparison is PPP and SR pricing for marketplace opps. If a sponsor wants that many sponsored posts, segmented by traffic/influence then PPP's segmentation interface is probably the way to go.

I hope this detail on pricing helps. I hesitated laying it out in an SR review because they deserve their time in the launch spotlight. At the same time, having this detail in the comments may actually drive Andy some additional traffic and SR some additional exposure.

Again, nice review Andy and good work Jarrod.

Re: Sponsored Reviews Now Live – In Depth Review

VC Dan — Tue, 13 Mar 2007 09:10:30 -0000

Re: WOMMA Should Watch Who They Quote And Especially Who They Link To!

VC Dan — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 00:30:29 -0000

Hey Jeff, We've discussed this before, but it would be great to have your "Disclosure Policy" labeled/linked with that exact phrase. Part of driving standards like Privacy or Disclosure Policies is that visitors need a common signal to look for.

I'd also note that a Disclosure Policy is somewhat different from a list of disclosed affiliations. The latter is basically a list; whereas the former informs the user what they can expect of the author such as whether they will take sponsorships inside or outside of content.

If you like my suggestion to use "Disclosure Policy" -- give Jason a similar nudge. He has some historical info in his About page and, as the mood strikes him, tries to act like that's a disclosure policy. You and I know it's not and creating a specific "Disclosure Policy" injects a healthy level of accountability and expectation matching with audiences. It's the difference of staying silent vs. saying "here's what you can expect from me". Also, calling it About, About Me, Affiliations, Profile or a host of phrases that are not "Disclosure Policy" doesn't help drive a standard.

Can you help make "Disclosure Policy" a link audiences come to expect from their bloggers?

Re: WOMMA Should Watch Who They Quote And Especially Who They Link To!

VC Dan — Wed, 21 Mar 2007 00:30:29 -0000

Re: PayPerPost | Ted Murphy vs Jason Calacanis The Ultimate Showdown?

VC Dan — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 15:02:58 -0000

@Gordon: I will assume you are trying to do the right things in a fast moving space -- just as Ted at PayPerPost is. Unfortunately for you, Jason is a ThisNext board member and shareholder who neglects to disclose his ThisNext ownership in a Disclosure Policy or in the first sentence of his product reviews (at your site and his blog). That hypocricy brings added scrutiny for ThisNext that won't go away by pointing fingers at the affiliate networks.

If you watch Jason's interview with Ted you'll hear his multiple references to "enabling" bad behavior by others. You face the same issues and haven't taken a fraction of the steps PPP has to promote transparency. I'd encourage you to make Disclosure Policies a requirement for every ThisNext member -- unless you/they have something to hide...Disclosure Policies can have a lasting impact on blogosphere transparency, but it will take leadership and some tough decisions...

Re: PayPerPost | Ted Murphy vs Jason Calacanis The Ultimate Showdown?

VC Dan — Tue, 27 Mar 2007 15:02:58 -0000

Re: PayPerPost | Ted Murphy vs Jason Calacanis The Ultimate Showdown?

VC Dan — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 10:45:04 -0000

@Gordon: You're debating the wrong guys here. Your board member and shareholder Jason Calacanis is the one mandating first sentence disclosure in conflicted product reviews. ThisNext enables conflicted product reviews so either follow Jason's advice or debate him, not us -- watch the interview video again and you'll see his mention of "enabling" multiple times. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy the debate, but I hate seeing misguided energy by passionate entrepreneurs.

As for comment transparency, thanks for the support Andy, but there is a longstanding mechanism for audiences to understand the context/conflicts of any commenter and that is the siglink -- that's why anonymous commenters carry less credibility than transparently siglinked ones. I transparently siglinked to my blog here and at webomatica. The front page of my blog mentions payperpost no fewer than 8 times, including where I list my investments. PPP is also listed in my sitewide Disclosure Policy, linked from every page. Compare that approach to Jason's comment at http://thermalblog.co.uk/the-golden-donkeyp/#co... when he had no Disclosure Policy and zero ThisNext disclosure on his homepage and you'll realize you're debating the wrong guy.

That does, however, highlight another value of Disclosure Policies -- they provide a goto place for anyone to understand the biases of a commenter via siglink. As always, conflicts may be small or large, but a Disclosure Policy can cover the spectrum. I'd love to see you lead by example by adopting one at your blog and getting Jason to do the same

I understand you are in a tough position. You are trying to build a business that enables bloggers to make money from publishing their product reviews/recommendations. Your board member and shareholder, Jason Calacanis, is mandating disclosure in a manner that makes ThisNext appear hypocritical along with himself.

So what do you do? Publicly reject Jason's first sentence disclosure mandate, follow his mandate or separate him from your company/shares -- any of those moves can help ThisNext appear less hypocritical.

In the meantime, I'd love you to answer the question Jason has refused to answer: What is ThisNext's business model and what are all the ways it makes money?

Re: PayPerPost | Ted Murphy vs Jason Calacanis The Ultimate Showdown?

VC Dan — Wed, 28 Mar 2007 10:45:04 -0000

Re: PayPerPost | Ted Murphy vs Jason Calacanis The Ultimate Showdown?

VC Dan — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:10:27 -0000

Gordon? How do you make money from your member's conflicted product reviews?

Re: PayPerPost | Ted Murphy vs Jason Calacanis The Ultimate Showdown?

VC Dan — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 08:10:27 -0000

Gordon? How do you make money from your member's conflicted product reviews?

Re: PayPerPost Buys Zookoda – Maybe I Got The Jump On Techcrunch

VC Dan — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 16:15:14 -0000

You tempted me with your email...but I resisted. Maybe one of these days you'll catch me in a moment of weakness. Great investigative reporting to connect the dots!

Also, thanks for the feedback for improvement. I particularly liked the comment subscription angle.

Re: PayPerPost Buys Zookoda – Maybe I Got The Jump On Techcrunch

VC Dan — Tue, 24 Apr 2007 16:15:14 -0000

Re: Trackback Spider Review

VC Dan — Tue, 29 May 2007 14:23:12 -0000

But there would be value to a service that managed auto-trackback/pingback for references/links within a legitimate blogger's post, no? TOS could bar automated splogs etc. The time savings alone is almost worth paying for.

If we rely on existing clunky trackback tools, we miss 99% of the interconnected thought across posts. Unlocking those hidden references should accelerate knowledge/perspective exchange and probably increases commenting as well. Crazy?

Re: Trackback Spider Review

VC Dan — Tue, 29 May 2007 14:23:12 -0000

Re: Haloscan – How To Send a Trackback With Blogger (Part 1)

VC Dan — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 23:46:37 -0000

nice quick lesson Andy. I've been using HaloScan, but see room for more cross-platform automated options...

Re: Haloscan – How To Send a Trackback With Blogger (Part 1)

VC Dan — Mon, 04 Jun 2007 23:46:37 -0000

nice quick lesson Andy. I've been using HaloScan, but see room for more cross-platform automated options...

Re: PayPerPost Receives $7M Additional Funding & Launches Direct Marketplace

VC Dan — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:54:38 -0000

Great post Andy.

Just a terminology suggestion. I believe PPP is using the term "directory" instead of "marketplace" for their advertiser-selects-blogger listings. The PPP Marketplace remains as the place full of advertiser opps; whereas the Directory is full of blogger descriptions. Make sense?

Thanks for the coverage!

Re: PayPerPost Receives $7M Additional Funding & Launches Direct Marketplace

VC Dan — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 23:54:38 -0000

Re: Exclusive: Share A Post Beta – Blog Post Syndication

VC Dan — Thu, 22 May 2008 07:59:43 -0000

great review Andy -- sounds familiar to our previous discussions. Adding "syndicated post of the day" would be nice semi-automated service (draft mode, allowing approval). Alwa

I look forward to trying it out...

Re: Exclusive: Share A Post Beta – Blog Post Syndication

VC Dan — Thu, 22 May 2008 07:59:43 -0000

Re: PayPerPost: a Web 2.0 witch-hunt

VC Dan — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 17:27:58 -0000

yep, you called it Mathew.

Interesting to see Rob's use of "elitism" here, something Scott and I were discussing over at BlogHerald

Re: Defamation?

VC Dan — Sun, 13 Aug 2006 22:31:12 -0000

Actually, as covered across the blogosphere, PPP seemed to relish the attention, negative or positive. Upon reading the various comments since then, it appears the mainstream bloggers didn't appreciate the hypocrisy of the elites.

In fact, I've seen a variety of great parody pictures like the one you created above with the phrase "All Our Blogs Are Belong to Us". I even tried one and donated any proceeds to Red Cross. The beauty of the platform is that PPP provided the parody picture idea, but left the tone up to the bloggers -- leaving it open for people to declare their support for the elite viewpoint. Interestingly, with the exception of those who are still waiting to see if the company pays off, the comment/blog support for PPP appears almost unanimous since the early preaching.

Re: Defamation?

VC Dan — Mon, 14 Aug 2006 09:20:42 -0000

Assuming there are more bloggers like you, who know how to balance quality, disclosure and quantity, I think PPP is really onto something. Like other elements of consumer generated media, the appropriate balance is a personal choice that works for the author /audience and won't be dictated from on-high.

There will always be spambloggers who abuse the system and PPP needs to continually innovate to keep that percentage low/manageable. PPP's recent Beta 2 release looks like a nice step in that direction with a ranking system for bloggers and advertisers. Given the awareness and advertiser/blogger adoption, it's amazing to think they only launched a month ago.

Keep up the good blogging...I'll check back often!

On the topic of people viewing your blog, you might want to check out MyBlogLog. They have an interesting community platform that allows you to actually see/share the faces of those stopping by. You can see an example on the left margin of http://www.floridaventureblog.com (see "I Want My FVB" table). They also provide nice stats on visits, referrals and outclicks.

Re: Am I a two-dollar whore?

VC Dan — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 23:46:10 -0000

nice post DnW!

Beyond demonstrating your quality, it highlights that the question is a personal one for each blogger to resolve with themself and their audience, not one that is PPP's to dictate.

The blogosphere is a world of many channels, not one big channel. Just as cable TV or ham radio provide a ton of channels, with each conveying its own message/content/ethics, every blogger is a media channel that needs to make decisions that work for its authors, advertisers and audiences.

Keep up the great blogging!

Re: Rhetorical Question

VC Dan — Sun, 15 Oct 2006 23:56:37 -0000

Good point DnW, as always!

Re: When Knights of the Realm Climb on Their High Horses

VC Dan — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 10:18:08 -0000

Terrific post, funny and intelligent -- who'da thunkit?

Re: Behold the Spirit of Scrooge

VC Dan — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 08:20:54 -0000

As always, great post Karoli!

Re: Government Stimulus and the Venture Industry: It's Not the Bankroll, But the Chip Size

VC Dan — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 13:47:57 -0000

Good points Roger & Matt...thanks for the data-driven perspective!

Re: Blogs, Splogs, Flogs?

VC Dan — Mon, 16 Oct 2006 06:50:24 -0000

"they'll only pay you for positive reviews?"

You might want to research the service, maybe even try it out (that'd be a great post), before getting things wrong -- publicly. PPP is a marketplace similar to eBay whereby consumer content creators and advertisers meet. Bloggers choose opportunities they like, that allow them to write as they like. Every bloggers relationship with their audience is different, ranging from purely personal chatty blogs to professionl journalist blogs.

As an example of that open marketplace, you might have made $5-10 for the post above and a link to PayPerPost.com because of its PPP review nature (yes, there are opps for reviewing PPP). Same work, same voice, just some of your expenses are covered for doing your thing...getting paid for doing something you love.

Re: Blogs, Splogs, Flogs?

VC Dan — Mon, 16 Oct 2006 14:28:27 -0000

Hey guys,

If you check my siglink (the standard way to understand a commenter's context/biases) you will see that I am both conflicted and informed, due to researching PayPerPost for months and investing in the company based upon my research results.

Although it wasn't intended as a challenge, I appreciate you being open to try the service so you can provide an experience-based review. In fact, that's something I recommend for all 'posties' (PPP fanatics) -- focus on what you know or can make informed opinions on, bring value to your audience, do quality posts, and get paid for doing the quality of selection/work you'd do anyway for your blog. The opportunities list also works well as an idea generator -- bloggers already scour the net for blogging inspiration hourly -- and only take the opportunities that you want.

Personally, I recommend disclosing, but bloggers own their page and the relationship with their audience. You know best what your readers expect of you, but don't think disclosure absolves you of honesty. Again, it all starts with choosing topics you find interesting and blogging the way you might otherwise.

Check out the PPP boards for other best practices and LMK how it goes!

Re: Blogs, Splogs, Flogs?

VC Dan — Mon, 16 Oct 2006 14:45:03 -0000

As for Robert Scoble's post, I agree with much of what he says. However, I stop short of his advice which assumes the elites play by different rules than mainstream bloggers. If SEs want to chase people getting compensated for influence/links, they can start with the most lucrative and nuanced transactions already employed by the elites. If you search Scoble's archives, you will find multiple instances of him even using 'payperpost' to describe a payback mention/link he authors. The reality is that most elites and mainstream bloggers provide a blended ROI (branding, endorsement, DM, links) to advertisers -- and that's a win-win-win for bloggers, advertisers and audiences.

As for disclosure, I think we're close, unless he believes a private company (PPP) has the duty to dictate how bloggers engage their audience. I'm a market-forces guy and a firm believer that bloggers own their blogs and their audience relationship. If you believe in markets then you have to accept there will be outliers that abuse any system. With that in mind PPP has implemented a rating system (similar to eBay buyer/seller feedback) that will encourage quality and discourage abuse over time. I can see in his comments giving a free pass to himself and Jason (everyone should just know that Jason works for AOL and consider that blanket disclosure), that he embraces blogger choice -- but hasn't come out and said so yet.

Re: Blogs, Splogs, Flogs?

VC Dan — Mon, 16 Oct 2006 20:14:17 -0000

Awesome! I think covering being upfront about this stuff on your About page is a great idea -- the elites could take a lesson from your leading by example. Of course, they may not want to share their policy of hiding multiple modes of indirect compensation/influence. Stay tuned ;-)

BTW, I really like your layout!

Re: No More RMP Buttons On my Blog. No More Pay Per Post.

VC Dan — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 08:33:39 -0000

Vlad,

I'm curious whether this feedback is due to low RMP conversions (just one of PPP's affiliate programs) or because of quantity of opps available thru PPP's marketplace vs. elsewhere. There are plenty of ways RMP could improve, but I currently see 150+ opps in my qualified list (and 200+ overall). Are you seeing more elsewhere?

I also noticed you're not using PPP Direct on your Advertise page. Any feedback why you'd give up 100% markups for essentially a direct deal instead of PPP Direct's 10%?

All thoughts appreciated...

Re: No More RMP Buttons On my Blog. No More Pay Per Post.

VC Dan — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 12:53:11 -0000

yeah, sorry about that Vlad. I'm playing wih some other siglink anchor text periodically.

I will definitely share this feedback. Ted and I have discussed RMP many times and the conversions need to be streamlined. No arguments there. There is a lot of opportunity on the PPP affiliate side and feedback is being heard.

I was surprised about your take on the opps side though. PPP has the most advertisers in the industry, and even if you didn't like marketplace opps that's no reason to give away 100% markups on your Advertise page. PPP Direct doesn't require you to remove yourself from other marketplaces, but makes the process more trusted/efficient for you and sponsors. Give the PPP Direct widget a try, even if just side-by-side with others...

Re: No More RMP Buttons On my Blog. No More Pay Per Post.

VC Dan — Thu, 27 Sep 2007 16:51:25 -0000

Vlad & Aaron:

I've requested greater reporting beyond "pending" and I know the team is working on a variety of site/affiliate enhancements. At the end of the day PPP is paying for active referrals (not just curious signups), but just getting more granularity than "pending" would help understand status and allow affiliates to encourage conversion themselves.

I'm intrigued by your focus/expertise on referrals (as opposed to PPP's core business) and would love to get your prioritized top 5-10 suggestions for making PPP affiliate programs better. If interested, shoot me your thoughts at dan*at*inflexionvc*d0t*com. And, yes, Andy I'd love yours too for an affiliate expert triumverate of input. No promises, but I'm interested in the wisdom...

Re: ReviewMe.com Offers 50% Discount + PayPerPost Gets Disclosure Badges

VC Dan — Tue, 13 Feb 2007 07:26:21 -0000

Super Jim. PPP would be a great platform for getting multiple perspectives/mentions of BlogKits or your other projects. You already host a "PayPerPost is Awesome!" page the Posties would appreciate ;-)

Provide an entertaining topic and let bloggers run with it...

If you try writing some sponsored posts, keep your quality high. PPP segmentation incorporates your quality score (similar to ebay buywr/seller feedback). More segmentation/quality equals higher paying opps.

You're so creative elsewhere, I look forward to seeing how you leverage this platform...

Re: Jim Kukral To Speak At PayPerPost Conference With Robert Scoble

VC Dan — Fri, 16 Mar 2007 15:26:40 -0000

That's great news Jim. I look forward to your session!

Now, if I could just convince you to put a "Get Paid to Review My Post" viral affiliate badge at the bottom of all your posts...generating reviews/feedback/marketing of your blog AND affiliate comp. Come on, you know you like it ;-)

Re: Exclusive First Look At SocialSpark, Formerly PayPerPost, A “Social Network” For Advertisers & Publishers

VC Dan — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 18:49:15 -0000

this is big Jim...very big...the first social network for advertisers, for engagement across all social media, with real demographics and ROI built-in...

Re: Sponsored Post - Sears Shopping “A-Ok” With This Blue-Collar Guy

VC Dan — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 11:13:56 -0000

Hey Jim! You've got some catching up to do...I saw the comment glitch over the weekend. Your commenters/tweeters have pretty good odds of winning so far!

Thanks for taking part and giving back to your readers in the process...have a super holiday!!

Re: Announcing VCDB (Venture Capital Database)

VC Dan — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 14:02:58 -0000

great job Matt -- I like it and blogged it. LMK any ways I can help. We should prolly discuss VCFAQ idea sometime...

Re: PayPerPost Comes to Facebook

VC Dan — Mon, 30 Jul 2007 16:03:19 -0000

Thanks for the coverage Nick...keep up the great blogging!

Re: Should You Hire Workaholics For Your Startup?

VC Dan — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 11:43:11 -0000

great post Ben -- the distinction between taking steps to chain people to their chairs vs. reward/inspire them is an important one!

Re: Rant: PayPerPost is one of the worst online advertising tools around

VC Dan — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:30:35 -0000

I'm a blogger, advertiser and investor with PPP and I'm sorry to hear about your experience. It sounds like some of the bloggers you hired didn't follow the TOS and should have been flagged. I'm glad to hear PPP responded by giving you additional posts with new bloggers.

I know from experience that segmentation by quality (tack rating) improves your results in PPP's marketplace -- just as buying from eBay sellers with high feedback scores in eBay's marketplace improves the buying experience. I'd recommend segmenting for 4-5 tacks, but like all market systems, there is a tradeoff between cost and segmentation.

Even better, any campaigns less than 20 posts should probably utilize PPP Direct -- a system that allows for direct selection of bloggers of your choosing (and it's even cheaper).

Thanks for trying PPP and I hope they can win you back...

Re: 2007/11/09/payperpost-not-evil/

VC Dan — Fri, 09 Nov 2007 18:14:00 -0000

I saw that panel as well and watching Cuban talk about blog monetization right now. Nice post...

Re: 2008/04/04/socialspark-invites/

VC Dan — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:43:31 -0000

Hey Mark,

Nice coverage. I'm in the alpha and have enjoyed the AJAXify you reference -- so long as it scales.

As a member of most of the sponsored blogging networks and someone who has blogged, advertised and invested in PayPerPost, I think your Google reference missed a critical differentiator in SocialSpark.

GOOG's stated concern was with paid, pagerank-passing links. That position affects text link ads, sponsored links, affiliate links and even blatant thank-my-sponsor posts like those only recently no-followed by TechCrunch to preserve TC pagerank.

SocialSpark, however, is the first and only sponsored blogging network to require/verify 100% no-follow on sponsored links and 100% in-post disclosure. SocialSpark doesn't just require disclosure, it actually provides the industry's only disclosure auditing platform to ensure disclosure happens every time. This is great news for bloggers who haven't considered sponsored blogging before due to Google/disclosure fears, bloggers who fear GOOG penalty with other sponsored blogging companies like SponsoredReview/ReviewMe/PayU2Blog and advertisers who were missing tools to implement corporate/industry disclosure guidelines such as those proposed by Dell or WOMMA.

SocialSpark is the only social marketing network offering Google-approved and WOMMA-approved guidelines to sponsored posts. In fact, SocialSpark has private alpha keys welcoming those organizations to verify compliance.

Re: 2008/04/20/six-apart-2/

VC Dan — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 12:39:00 -0000

@WelcomeBackRosenthal: Don't worry, IZEA is the pioneer as others come around to the vision. It's taken some time, but the http://www.SocialSpark.com/ advertiser social network is the right platform at the right time.

Re: 2008/06/25/facebook-commenting/

VC Dan — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 12:59:35 -0000

good move...

Re: The Future of Geekdom in Central Florida

VC Dan — Mon, 07 Apr 2008 15:09:29 -0000

even though I'm in Gainesville, I'd love to help however possible. Thanks for the summary Robert...Tara, I'll check out FloridasBigSecret...

Re: IZEA’s no worse than traditional advertising

VC Dan — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 13:20:05 -0000

Hey Tac, good commentary and thanks for the "good guy" nod.

I have so many posts stacked up on this topic as I work on FAS157 valuations. They'll prolly get published once it no longer matters -- that's fine, you and others are doing a great job of covering all sides.

You and I disagree on "Most bloggers are not journalist, but people have come to trust them like they are." I think a well-worded poll, delivered to a diverse group could put that concept to bed pretty quickly.

That said, there remains an opportunity to help audiences appreciate the goals/conflicts/context of any site they visit, whether publishers claim to be entertainer, journalist, free-pass conference promoter, enthusiast, loaner tech reviewer, photographer, affiliate marketer, personal diarist etc. It feels like a Disclosure Policy framework (like Privacy Policies; see IZEA's http://www.DisclosurePolicy.org/ ), could go a long way in that effort. When you have so many varied expectations between publishers and readers, such a system needs a framework to help everyone match expectations.

Any help you can provide improving that framework or spreading the word appreciated...things like only marketing with blogs that carry a Disclosure Policy, can go a long way to a long-term solution.

Re: My brother having moving sale

VC Dan — Tue, 08 Aug 2006 18:26:19 -0000

Heck, I was gonna buy some of your bro's stuff just to confirm how good a PPP model can be when communicated well. But, alas, it's cash only and onsite pickup stuff!

Good luck Alex!

Keep up the fun off the grid Robert!

Re: Video from Burning Man

VC Dan — Thu, 31 Aug 2006 13:53:39 -0000

SippinWhisky: what's the dealio? I'm trying to learn as much about the PayPerPost platform as possible. What exactly happened that you're unhappy about. I've seen 100:1 comments from happy PPP bloggers, paid and unpaid (see some digg comments at my link below) so I'm assuming your experience is in the minority -- still important from a customer service sense, but the minority. I could be wrong so let's connect on details. Thanks!

Re: Payperpost continues its “hit campaign” on Scoble

VC Dan — Wed, 06 Sep 2006 00:35:10 -0000

Hit campaign?? More like a lovefest.

The post you reference looks like it was driven by a PPP opportunity that made no mention of you. Rather, it asked for rumors about Ted or the company -- and somehow you still got some linklove.

Your concern is either paranoia or link-baiting ;-)

But, keep it up -- this soap opera adds a little flavor to the sea of Web2.0 reviews out there (thanks Arrington)!

Hey -- do I get some prize for commenting to Scoble, referencing PayPerPost, tweaking Arrington and linking to Digg in my sig all with one stone?!?!

Re: Gaming Google

VC Dan — Thu, 05 Oct 2006 13:57:20 -0000

Kamal: awesome analysis of the win-win-win PPP is developing. Admittedly they are young, but they see the mix as you do (with maybe different %) -- PPP must deliver value to publishers, audiences and advertisers. In researching the business, I found at least the following benefits for each:
- Publisher: diverse blog topic ideas, exposure to new businesses, money for the hear and now, money as an incentive for more disciplined blogging, a vibrant blogger community (the posties) that shares best practices
- Audiences: diverse blog topic ideas, a long-term blog improvement as publishers learn best practices and have incentive to get better, better aesthetics as publishers no longer need banners/skycrapers/AdSense to fund their blogging "habit"
- Advertisers: branding, direct marketing and some search engine benefit, efficiency versus trying to gain these benefits via blogs manually, product feedback from unhappy customers and public conversations with their happiest customers

The internet as a whole is the one that will benefit the most as a CGM revenue model drives more people to blog/photo/video/cast (unless you don't believe everyone is worthy of contributing), bringing more knowledge, experiences, perspectives and opinions to the world at large. That "change the world" stuff is how paid-search enabled all the other amazing free things Google/Yahoo/MSN provide -- it could happen with PPP's Consumer Generated Advertising as well...

Josh: how's it going big guy! I love the example Stowe provides because it proves that point that bloggers are in control -- choosing the opps they feel fit their style/tone/ethics, including ones that cover their expenses without requiring any specific opinion. I'm seeing a lot of bloggers "test" PPP on that front to see if they really get paid for sharing true opinions -- and realizing it's the real deal. PPP is an open marketplace giving bloggers that control and blogger/advertiser ranking to encourage quality over shilling -- not a governmental hammer defining what is right or wrong in the blogosphere.

I can see a definite improvement in tone since PPP's initial launch -- including people actually trying and sharing results before forming extreme opinions. I know PPP is listening and appreciates continued input to make their CGA marketplace a long-term win-win-win. Great commentary all around!

Re: Blog integrity is important

VC Dan — Sun, 15 Oct 2006 17:18:59 -0000

Robert: First, check my siglink for context. I'm curious whether you would include more lucrative, pervasive and subtle forms of compensation for exposure/links in your SE advice -- such as exlusive press releases, free passes, free panels, free product, party invites; all worth thousands and given with a combined goal of coverage and links?

Elite bloggers have developed a host of payback mechanisms that just aren't available to the mainstream bloggers across the world. Are you asking the SEs to make sure only their elite buddies have the opportunity to benefit from their blogging efforts/influence?

Re: Blog integrity is important

VC Dan — Mon, 16 Oct 2006 12:52:31 -0000

Robert,

I'm surprised you ducked question @11. Any thoughts on the more lucrative pay-for-exposure/link approaches currently employed by the elites daily? One example would be exclusive press releases, which are worth thousands in advertising/click-throughs and generate hundreds of backlinks for the company paying bloggers via an exclusive. Or maybe free products, or free passes, or direct employment, or panel positions -- all given with blended goals of exposure/buzz/linkage...

Also, @40 are you suggesting that a disclosure policy like Jason's that relies on people chasing down his background (via Wikipedia or other tools) is what you support?

On a more intellectually honest note, it sounds like you support disclosure at a blog level as you, Jason and other elites do? Is that true or do you believe disclosure is something better decided by the bloggers who know best their relationship with their audience (the way Jason knows his)? Or, is every blogger's disclosure policy best decided by you? ;-)

Direct answers, not redirects, appreciated...

Re: DisclosePerPost is my policy

VC Dan — Tue, 31 Oct 2006 10:20:28 -0000

Robert, I commend you on giving DisclosurePolicy.org a try. The DP Generator is far from perfect, but it gets people moving in the transparency direction by making it easier.

I'd recommend to all DP adopters that they cut/paste the output of the DP Generator but then add their voice and detail before posting. If today's language doesn't work for a specific blog, just change it, but don't let that be a reason for not adopting some Disclosure Policy that your audiences can always access.

Robert, is it OK for me to capture this post and comments over at dp.org so new visitors can learn from your input? For example, a DisclosePerPost policy makes a lot of sense, particularly for people syndicating content like you.

Although DisclosurePolicy.org was launched by PPP, it is intended as a CGM/blogosphere resource. We just wanted to move the topic from words to action. The current site is a base to build from. If you, PodTech or other associations have an interest in promoting long-term transparency, let's make a difference on this issue together. Shoot me an email or hit http://www.disclosurepolicy.org/generator/contact

Re: Wordpress.com doesn’t allow PayPerPost and other SEO gaming

VC Dan — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 06:53:42 -0000

WordPress.com is a free service that doesn't even allow AdSense on the free blogs it hosts -- and that has nothing to do with SEO. This is just a move to push growing traffic semi-pro bloggers to its $250/month VIP service or out. Personally, I don't think that's a smart business move (it will be awfully hard to cover their hosting costs if they are left with ad-phobic bloggers who can't afford $250/month).

The beauty is that Posties are earning more than enough now to take their blogs elsewhere and are doing so -- achieving the 'American Dream' of blogging: to own your own domain ;-)

Re: Wordpress.com doesn’t allow PayPerPost and other SEO gaming

VC Dan — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 07:15:58 -0000

Toni@37: I respect how you guys are building WordPress.com. My comments were mainly advice about potentially painting yourself in a corner with a "no-ads stance" because you will eventually need a revenue model to pay those hosting bills.

Keep up the great work and, give some thought to reserving your ad-blocking for models that don't involve blogger content freedom the way PayPerPost does -- I think WP.com needs to remain a champion of blogger content freedom. Blocking AdSense, TLA or other banner-like approaches doesn't get into censorship the way blocking user generated content would.

Also, thanks for clarifying this isn't related to SEO issues, but about blocking all commercial services, whether it be AdSense, PayPerPost or other monetization options for bloggers. I understand this takes time and you're trying to get the whole model right. Keep up the good work!

Re: “PayPerSpeech” disclosure

VC Dan — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 17:04:58 -0000

You sure know how to make a splash Robert ;-)

Feeling the need explain "I'm a capitalist" reminds me of Atlas Shrugged -- and scares me about the world we're living in right now. Maybe the conference should be called: Galt's Gulch!

Re: I’m not speaking at PostieCon

VC Dan — Sat, 05 May 2007 04:02:34 -0000

Robert,

I was really looking forward to seeing each other at PostieCon, but this is the right call. Your prior acceptance to speak solidified you as a leader instead of a follower, in my book.

We'll miss you in Vegas after BlogWorld/PostieCon/BloggersChoiceAwards, but hope to connect at a future gig. It sounds like you'll have plenty of fun on your hands in the Fall!

Re: Why can Leo Laporte and Disney do it, but Mike Arrington and TechCrunch can’t?

VC Dan — Sun, 24 Jun 2007 03:28:21 -0000

Come on Robert. You know people pick their battles and Mike's abuse of Ted Murphy/PPP makes this an easy target for hypocrisy. Valleywag even put Arrington and PPP pictures at the header of this flip-flop post: http://valleywag.com/tech/flip-flop/michael-arr...

Throw in the fact that Mike doesn't take it as well as Murphy (see "pound sand", "I'm now pissed off" and even deleting comments about Battelle and Disclosure Policies here http://www.crunchnotes.com/?p=410 ) and you have an easy glass-house story.

Mike will live and learn from this. Battelle's agreement with you ( http://www.federatedmedia.net/blog/archives/200... ) could yield a good outcome for all conversation marketing audiences:

"But no matter what, I think the key, as Scoble says, is to disclose. Our draft principles say:

Appearing in Ads: If you lend your voice or name to copy in an ad unit (for instance, “My dream search engine would operate on my spoken word,”) disclose that fact and your relationship with the advertiser, if any, in a post or on a disclosure page. "

You know PPP has championed a Disclosure Policy framework via http://www.disclosurepolicy.org/ for some time now because it's so extensible for this changing/experimenting space.

Arrington's post for MS was on a site that encouraged user contributions, leaving organic and sponsored content unclear. For example, Mike's post ends with "Posted by Mike Arrington at 03:35:30 PM", looking very similar to Mike Watson's "Posted by Mike Watson at 12:04:01 PM".

That ambiguity could have been covered with a linked Disclosure Policy on Mike's site (as Battelle suggests) and a Disclosure Policy at the FM site. In fact, such DP detail is relevant for readers of the next Microsoft product review on TechCrunch.

I'm still hoping to see a "Disclosure Policy" link from every page of your blog...readers will benefit from such transparency and standard linking on the blogs they read (like "Privacy Policy" on ecommerce sites).

Re: For the record: I will not “Amway” my Facebook friends

VC Dan — Sun, 22 Jul 2007 19:40:22 -0000

I'm confused...I think PPP's F8 app provides functionality for existing/new PPP members. Are you already a Postie deciding whether to try the app or is this just linkbait? ;-)

Re: Google makes moves to protect organic relevancy

VC Dan — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 16:21:57 -0000

Robert:

I think you've missed the whole point of this content-based swipe (note that blogs without sponsored posts were impacted). GOOG's latest move isn't about disclosure or search relevance. IZEA's launch of http://www.SocialSpark.com (prior to this GOOG move) with mandatory disclosure, transparent RealRank, no-follow links, and face-based analytics positions IZEA to lead on transparency and convert even more bloggers from AdSense to sponsored social media.

Make no mistake Robert, this is about GOOGopoly power in search being applied to stifle competition in online advertising. Given your advocacy for transparency, I hope you will join IZEA's efforts to replace industry reliance upon secret, mysterious PageRank formulas with fully transparent, analytics-based RealRank. RealRank won't start perfect, but will be transparent and improve with your input and support. More detail here: http://community.izea.com/blog/2007/11/what-is-...

Thanks for the input to date and keep it coming...

Re: I’ve redesigned

VC Dan — Fri, 02 May 2008 10:17:32 -0000

Hey Robert,

Congrats on the redesign. It's a perfect opportunity to add a "Disclosure Policy" link to the bottom/side of your blog, linking to a brief statement of any conflicts and you policy of disclosing them for readers.

For example, if you blog about a Seagate competitor, do you plan to remind the reader that Seagate is a sponsor of yours? What if you blog about a competitor to FastCompany, who isn't a cash sponsor of yours but you definitely have the potential for financial gain from FastCompany success?

It's easy to think that everyone already knows your interests/conflicts/policy, but the reality is new people stumble across your blog daily and have no idea. Like Privacy Policy links, a Disclosure Policy link on every page provides old/new readers a standard phrase to look for and build trust with the publisher they are reading.

You can create a basic DP at http://www.disclosurepolicy.org/ or you can create your own. Whaddya say?

Re: I’ve redesigned

VC Dan — Tue, 06 May 2008 15:21:08 -0000

Glad to hear it Robert!

I just used the Seagate competitor as one example. There are a variety of scenarios where you might blog or converse with a spectrum of conflict involved, including financial and non-financial gain/loss. In fact, the Disclosure Policy at your blog is a great one-stop place for readers to learn about your conflicts and disclosure practices across a variety of services. Imagine including in your DP how you intend to disclose on your blog, comments elsewhere, Twitter, FriendFeed and others with less real estate involved -- the emergence of such a cross-service standard would move the whole transparency topic into the post-blog era.

I care less about what your specific policy is -- that's a personal decision. I do, however, believe that posting a DP and linking from every page with anchor text "Disclosure Policy" will help users -- and possibly encourage other social media early adopters to do the same.

Therefore, my follow-up question is: Did you intend your comment above "I plan to disclose every bias I have." to be your Disclosure Policy or do you plan to create a specific Disclosure Policy page, linking it from your footer or sidebars? My suggestion was the latter...

Given your integration of blogs, twitter, friendfeed and the like in this redesign; I'd love to highlight your Disclosure Policy as one example of how to increase transparency across services.

Re: Does Your Blog Have a Disclosure Policy?

VC Dan — Mon, 18 Dec 2006 13:20:00 -0000

Hey Andy,

Any chance you can include a "Disclosure Policy" link in your page template so audiences can always find it linked to your custom DP?

If done right, over time audiences will know that "Disclosure Policy" is a link they can look for just as they can find a Privacy Policy before giving personal info today. If such a DP framework becomes ubiquitous, the mere absence of a DP will communicate "reader beware" to audiences.

Re: Who Will Make Money with User-Generated Online Video?

VC Dan — Mon, 11 Sep 2006 15:56:33 -0000

Great post!

I've been thinking a ton about what business model will unlock consumer generated media long-term (not, the flavor of the week). Looking at the past's biggest winners online I see names like Google, Overture/Yahoo, and eBay -- all businesses that monetize content in a marketplace fashion. Although they are toying with a variety of hosted-content plays, their core revenue/profits flow from taking a cut of marketplace transactions for advertising or goods/services.

Therefore, I've been searching for THE marketplace for consumer generated media. It isn't hosting-centric players like YouTube, MySpace, Revver, Flickr, Blogger, TypePad, WordPress or FaceBook; but it should unlock value for users of all of those. The closest platform I've found is PayPerPost -- if you can get past the knee-jerk reaction that people are driven to post for money, not self-expression. I believe self-expression is the key to consumer generated advertising and allowing people to monetize what they already do. Interestingly, monetization may help increase the quality and quantity of self-expression, but the driver of CGM will always be sharing your opinions/experiences/talents.

Whether you agree or disagree, click my sig-digg and I'd love to hear whether the future of CGM includes organic and sponsored content; and whether the best positioned business model is NOT hosting-based, but instead leverages a marketplace for buyers and sellers of CGM to transact with each other.

Re: If You Can’t Tell Whether Something Is An Ad, That’s Deception

VC Dan — Mon, 30 Oct 2006 16:26:44 -0000

Good observation Scott.

I'd note that bloggers need to own their Disclosure Policy and input like this helps them reach best practices. Many bloggers are operating in a vacuum as they document what their Disclosure Policy might be. That's why we created DisclosurePolicy.org, to provide some tools and guidance to maximize the likelihood people will adopt. It all starts with telling your audience what to expect from you, then adhering to it.

If you feel strongly about it, I'd suggest bringing your guidance to boards.disclosurepolicy.org. The longer we keep good ideas like this dispersed, the longer it takes to arrive at guidance for everyone.

Re: If You Can’t Tell Whether Something Is An Ad, That’s Deception

VC Dan — Wed, 08 Nov 2006 01:09:46 -0000

Scott: the reality is that we ALL have a vested interest in driving a Disclosure Policy framework so audiences have a common method to understand the affiliations/disclosure practices of any blogger they find. The issue/solution mirrors data privacy and Privacy Policies -- and the diversity of sites/audiences to be considered.

Of course, the more critics refuse to try/share disclosure advice at DisclosurePolicy.org, the more this sounds like a blog-traffic-driving controversy rather than a real issue they want to help solve. It's hard to claim a Disclosure Policy framework isn't a helpful step towards blogosphere transparency.

Check out DisclosurePolicy.org, use the DP Generator, edit it to match your practices, link to it from every page and then share your DP advice so others can learn from your perspective/experience.

Re: Blog Herald Column: Should Bloggers Create Commercial Content?

VC Dan — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 08:34:45 -0000

Nice post Scott. I'm curious whether there is a price and disclosure structure that even you would consider for Publishing 2.0 -- your site design could ditch those clunky "Ads by Yahoo!", but more importantly, you'd be a great example of how it could be done right...

Re: Blog Herald Column: Should Bloggers Create Commercial Content?

VC Dan — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 13:53:41 -0000

What's clunky -- are you kidding? Imagine watching television within a frame around the content that included text/graphic links 24/7 and I think you'll realize what's clunky. Your site design could deliver a better viewer experience if a portion of your posts had sponsors and you ditched Yahoo ads. In fact, I'm guessing a single sponsored post per month in your own voice, on topics relevant to your audience could eclipse your Yahoo Ads income.

Thus, my other question about showing how sponsored posts could be done right. Let's call it a hypothetical. If you received $100,000 per sponsored post, could you do it the right way? How about $10,000? How about $1,000? How about $100? I'm guessing $10 is too low or else you'd already be a Postie ;-)

What $/post would be required to match your Yahoo Ads, TLAs and Feedburner advertisements? I'm also curious how many sponsored posts/month would allow the right ratio of organic::sponsored content and fund further growth of this blog.

Feel free to answer by email, but I was just curious and always trying to understand how sponsored posts can fit into a blended revenue model for different bloggers...

Re: Blog Herald Column: Should Bloggers Create Commercial Content?

VC Dan — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 17:08:34 -0000

Yep, the early days are always funny like that: unclear if something is going to be big/accepted or a historical footnote. Those who figure out the right answer the soonest reap the rewards.

Your answer prompts an interesting question for any of your readers of this comment thread: Would Scott lose you as a reader if he accepted post sponsorship for topics only relevant to Publishing2.0's audience, with full/clear disclosure and full control over tone (e.g. positive or negative commentary)? It's likely the volume of sponsored content would be the deciding factor, so what's OK: never, 1/year, 1/month, 1/week, 1/day, enough to cover his bills or replace his other ads?

Re: Inspiring Video-Buffalo Cuff Surviving Lion Attack

VC Dan — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 13:23:00 -0000

awesome video...thx for sharing!

Re: Business Trip To San Fransisco In Mid-Sept – Who Should I Meet?

VC Dan — Thu, 09 Aug 2007 13:27:16 -0000

Are you only doing west coast or are you touching down anywhere east? Multiply.com could be an interesting conversation for the customer base you describe -- I see them as the AOL/mass-market of social networks (and growing fast with that focus).

Re: Indie Music Tech: PayPerPost for Indie Musicians and Bands

VC Dan — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 07:10:00 -0000

I've blogged, advertised and invested with PayPerPost. I've thought about this music connection for awhile and like the way you described it. There is great potential for the artist and I think bloggers would really enjoy the topic. I know The Police used PPP for their recent CD launch and it was very well received in PPP's marketplace.

Given that PPP allows for video opps, there is also the potential of compensating people for creating/sharing videos for your songs. Interesting videos can be a boon for artists, but can be cost-prohibitive to create. However, PPP's marketplace allows for leveraging talent of the masses.

I wouldn't expect every video to be great, but some might be worth the whole campaign. Multiple videos for a song also harness the fact that songs can elicit different images and emotions for different segments of people. Instead of catering to a single video viewpoint, PPP allows you to multicast various perspectives...