The Smartest Man in Music

A friend of mine is of the belief that the band Train wrote four songs in 1997. They came together and wrote 'Meet Virginia,' 'Drops of Jupiter,' 'Calling All Angels' and 'Hey, Soul Sister' that year and calculatedly decided to release these four songs on four separate albums over the course of 15 years. Just enough to stay relevant. Just enough to have longevity.
___________________________________________________________________________
Ignorant people say they like all music but country music. Ignorant or boring people. Not that country music is some transcendent force that people should universally subscribe to, it's far from that, but it's a lazy argument to define your entire taste in music as a negative.

With the evolution of iTunes and iPods and Pandora and Turntable and Spotify asking what kind of music someone listens to seems a boring, idle, pickup question of sorts. No person is able to define what kind of music they listen to by stating genres. FM radio DJs do not control exposure to music. People are not pigeon holed by preset dials on a radio or the album they paid $14.99 for. That doesn't mean music has evolved, but it does mean that everyone has the capacity to have diverse tastes in music. It's not unique or interesting to align yourself against a particular type of music. It's lazy. But so is the question that would lead to that answer.
___________________________________________________________________________
In the last 20 years, there has been a formula for country music that, while not guaranteeing success, certainly puts you in the right direction. This doesn't define the entire genre, but when someone writes about America, a cheating spouse or an affinity for drinking/hunting/fishing you've got a head start to a hit. If you have all three you're at the finish line.
___________________________________________________________________________

The smartest person in music is not Ryan Adams, Common, Rihanna, Kanye West, Lady Gaga, Eminem, deadmau5 or even any member of Train. The smartest person in music is Flo Rida. The aforementioned people have their intelligence clouded by talent (marginal talent in Train's case). It's indiscernible what is talent and what is intelligence but they all appear to be the product of some innate, prodigal skill that they have crafted and refined over the course of their lifetime. This is of no concern for Flo Rida. Flo Rida's intelligence is readily apparent because he is without talent. He is only brains and packaging.

Last week Flo Rida released a single that will inevitably end up in the top 10 songs in the country. This is a follow up to his song 'Good Feeling' (currently #6 on iTunes), a song which simply took a hook from Pretty Lights, added some nonsensical lyrics (No trick plays, I'm Bill Gates. Take a genius to understand me) and released it to the mainstream music world.

Flo Rida has managed to take his new song 'Wild One' to another level, recreating his song with David Guetta from the Summer of 2010, 'Club Can't Handle Me.' It's like he was challenged to see how far he could push pop music. Not in a Michael Jackson, "Let me redefine the genre" way but instead moving from "Can I make a similar pop song?" a challenge perfected by countless artists, to "Can I make the identical song and rerelease it 18 months later to tremendous success?"

He convinced Sia to sing a new chorus to the same beat. He found a thesaurus and reworked his lyrics slightly ("Look like cash and they all just stare, bottles, models standing on chairs" versus "After bottle, we all get bit and again tomorrow...club shuts down, I heard you're super models") and produced a song that will be eaten up by clubs and DJs and teenage girls and frat guys alike.

Flo Rida has managed to craft his packaging and output to the point that hits are beyond formulaic; they are identical. He's the 5th Avenue Apple Store selling repackaged 1998 pod-shaped iMacs. And we all have goldfish memories.

Uber, Surge Pricing, Halloween and Analytics

If you want to, we can supply you / Got enough work to feed the whole town - Akon

Uber is an advantageous service for anyone that lives in a major metropolitan city. Everyone has been there; downpour, no cabs, need to get to x as soon as possible. And as it turns out there actually is a reason beyond perception that there seems to be a lack of cabs during periods of high demand. Behavioral economists have concluded at least part of the reason for the seemingly irrational mismatch of supply with taxis in periods of high demand is that cab drivers hit their target daily income quicker and in turn cut their days shorter. It doesn't just seem that there are less cabs, there actually are less cabs.

Uber (and recently launched Groundlink ) through both apps and SMS allow you to request a blackcar to your current location and automatically be billed to your credit card. "Uber takes GPS data from your ride and charges for distance or time depending on your speed. When your Uber is traveling over 11mph, we charge a distance fee. When your Uber is traveling at or below 11mph, we charge a time fee."

Problem solved? Mostly. Anyone that has been through Halloween in New York City has a seen a few things that are indelibly imprinted in their brain and has also experienced how painful of an experience moving around is. Like a diet New Years Eve, people seem to come out of the woodwork, jam the streets and take every cab imaginable. Uber is attempting to solve this issue on Saturday night.

Uber will be using "Surge Pricing" from the hours of 7 PM on Saturday 10/29 to 3 AM. The company will use real time analytics to measure customer demand with pricing increasing up to 2x at points of high demand. Their goal is "more drivers will come out and stay on Uber with higher prices and [they] keep those cars full by adapting to changes in demand throughout the night."

Ultimately its a variable pricing model that uses real time analytics, allowing for (hopefully) an evening out of supply and demand. A really smart usage of data if done properly and not simply turned on for all 8 hours.

Uber should walk away from Saturday night with a. more satisfied customers b. more money c. more information about their users spending habits. Look for this to not just become an isolated Halloween occurrence  but instead expand to include various situations, from bar closings to weather issues all with the added benefit of more data for the company to mine.

BuyWithMe, please?

A post by BeatBeat today reflects an inevitable outcome that has been a long time coming for many of the companies receiving funding at tremendous valuations over the last few years. There have been a host of extremely scalable companies raising money at great valuations but distinguishing themselves only slightly. Some of the companies with potential to grow will never reach that potential and will ultimately stagnate, consolidate or simply die off.

BuyWithMe, a company in what was a red hot, daily deal industry, appears to not just have hit a speed bump but instead a wall at full speed. The company, which had acquired 6 companies in 6 months, has laid off a large portion of its work force (rumored at 75%) with scathing postings from disgruntled employees.

BuyWithMe had raised $21.5mm from Bain Capital Ventures and Matrix Partners and appears to be guilty of both mismanagement as well as being boxed out by the leaders in the space, but the point remains. The daily deals space will have few broad winners that emerge victorious, and a bunch of companies that fail to meet expectations. Similarly scalable industries will feature a similar landscape; broad success, niche players and failed companies.

Groupon just went out for their IPO roadshow after a few snags along the way, and ultimately the company will have their success. Differentiate or die is an old marketing phrase that translates quite nicely to companies failing to distinguish themselves enough from the market leaders. Competition breeds quality for consumers, but the right horse, not the right race ultimately wins the day.

Updated 10/21/2011: Trend continues with TheLadders laying off 30 people

Wahooly: Invest in startups for free

Launch posted on this earlier today, but Wahooly is a Minnesota based startup that allows you to invest in companies without actually providing capital. Founder Dana Serverson hopes to leverage users feedback to provide guidance to startups in exchange for equity. The hope is that the guidance will help the startups, and that the testers will be more likely to promote the companies they have ownership in.

140 characters vs. Sean Parker

bitly (formerly bit.ly) was the default URL shortening service for Twitter. The company:

- Received its Seed in January 2008 from betaworks
- Raised a Series A from a host of big name angels in March of 2009 (Ron Conway, Chris Sacca, Roger Ehrenberg to name a few)
- Issued debt in February 2010
- Raised $10mm in Series B in October 2010 from RRE Ventures, SV Angels, Mitch Kapor and AOL Ventures among others

Some big names in the venture space to say the least. And the company was going along great with one inherent issue: it was directly tied to Twitter. Then one day it wasn't. Inevitably Twitter created its own automatic shortener. It developed t.co to automatically shorten links. And then companies began to develop their own customizable shortened links. es.pn. goo.gl. huff.po.

And now link shortening has drawn the ire of he of Napster, he of Facebook, he of Justin Timberlake. Sean Parker would like to see it done away with altogther

sparker 7 Oct
The need for link shortening is idiotic, @jack -- links should be meta-data attachments to each tweet, not part of 140 char limit

Parker  joined Twitter and waited 4 days to start a campaign against link shortening. What will happen? Probably nothing and Parker is hardly the first to suggest this, maybe the most influential, but not the first. If @jack wakes up one morning and decides Sean Parker is right, will an industry vanish as quickly as it rose? 

Conversely, link shortening companies were able to successfully tie themselves to a growing giant in the industry. Tinyurl had won. Then bitly. Now who knows? But if Parker has his way it will be no one.

The interdependence rings similar to Zynga, online social gaming and Facebook. Although Zynga continues to work on Project Z, they and similar companies are at the alter with Facebook. If the marriage works, like it appears to have for Zynga, your prenup expires and are sitting pretty. Barnacles attach themselves to whales and do just fine.

bitly and other link shortening platforms cost virtually nothing and angels and VCs will have vastly different risk profiles. Some will want to spray singles and doubles all over the infield. The Ichiros. The three yards and a cloud of dust. And others will swing for the fences every time. Jason Heyward. The Raiders' vertical passing. And ultimately anyone that invested in the industry knew the risks involved in being a complimentary service to Twitter.

Even if they didn't count Sean Parker among them.



As I wrote this bitly released a predictive social search for their premium users

Thanks to Monster for help

Sooooo Netflix and Qwikster

Netflix (September 20) continued its string of missteps and corrections today, announcing that it will not be splitting off its two core businesses. The market has actually received the news fairly well with NFLX trading up 6.76% (with overall market up 2.55% so far today). This is the second time in the last month that CEO Reed Hastings has had to alter course/explain a decision he made previously, and both have been received fairly well by the market as a whole. As a public company your missteps are obviously magnified with a herd mentality often compounding losses. Hastings has been reactionary, which appears to have played out favorably in the short term but is concerning for the long term direction of the company.

If the eulogies and writings over the last week about the passing of Steve Jobs have had one consistent message, it's that often times people have no idea what they want (and analysts have no idea what's best for a company). It takes a visionary CEO to have the courage to trust their intuition and do things that go against public sentiment. Chris Dixon had a post the Michael Arrington just dug up about Jobs and Akio Morita and how they each led their companies above and around different focus groups. Each of these CEOs saw where they were going and created their own path to get there ('I drove by the fork in the road and went straight' - Jay-Z), something that Hastings has failed to do.

It takes a courageous person to admit their mistakes. It takes an even more courageous person to trust their gut when everyone else is telling them they are wrong. I spent 6 seasons of my life watching the television show Lost. It was revolutionary and through 3 of those seasons I thought it might end up being on a short list for the greatest show of all time. I realized this would not be the case when two characters, Nikki and Paulo, were written off the show due to fan backlash. It's admirable that the Lost writers heard their fans' voices and catered the show to them, but it ultimately showed the lack of a vision that the great TV shows, the great companies, the great CEOs have. David Simon had a vision for the Wire and its conclusion just like Steve Jobs had a vision for Apple. Neither would have ever compromised the path they were on because of the short term reaction of the masses. Hastings is giving the analyst and business community what they think they want, but appears to lack the vision to trust his intuition and tell them what they need.

Think Different

A few years back the prevalent term was the "Jobs' premium" when discussing Apple's valuation, referring to the extra value placed in Apple's stock with Steve Jobs leading the company. Rumors of cancer's remission or reemergence would cause the stock price to fluctuate violently. Investors were constantly wondering aloud what would happen when Jobs ultimately had to step away from the company for good.

Well that day came and passed on August 24 when Jobs announced he could "no longer meet [his] duties and expectations as Apple's CEO." He stepped away from Apple for the final time in August and passed away yesterday afternoon. The stock price moved a little then and a little today but the imprint of Jobs' vision for the company appear to have withstood the Jobs' premium.

Tim Cook has handled the responsibilities intermittently throughout Jobs' battle and should be more than capable going forward. The iPhone 5 will likely be released next year with Jobs' fingerprints all over it. The iPad 3 will also be released next year, likely the exact extension of what existed in Jobs' mind. And the culture he created will continue to manifest itself not just in Apple, but in all the companies and leaders he helped to inspire. There's a company and country full of Jobs' disciples; influenced by his vision and they will continue use his blueprint. They will continue to find the products we need but don't yet know we want.

Jobs' legacy is undoubtedly partially the products he created, but also the way he approached solutions for problems others could not see. Over the last 18 hours, he's been compared to Edison and Ford and other great minds of generations past. I've struggled with whether this is appropriate or if it is over (or under) stating his influence and it will take decades to fully comprehend his scope.

But beyond the product and the physical legacy, as a visionary, Edison and Ford feel about right as his peers. There certainly aren't any around today.


credit: Arik Hesseldahl for ideas incorporated

1955 - 2011

 

 

Few start ups

RelayRides allows customers without cars to borrow vehicles from neighbors. GM today announced that they would be partnering with RelayRides to allow access to OnStar. All peer to peer rentals, it differs from several of its nearest competitors. 15% of the fee goes to RelayRide, 20% go to car insurance and 65% go to the car owner.

Leaky is a new insurance search site that makes it easy and simple to compare auto-insurance prices. You input your information one time and then retrieve insurance prices for every major car insurance company. Y Combinator funded.

Breezy allows you to print and fax while on the go. Breezy has a mobile app that allows customers to print to printers around various cities around the globe (currently over 1,000 printers). Partners with copy stores and hotels to allow easy printing at various locations. Funded by Accel Partners among others.

It’s Good to Be Michael Lewis - New Yorker by Jessica Pressler

Collins Tuohy has told this story before, and by now her delivery is spot on. It was Thanksgiving morning, and her family were on their way to pick up breakfast. “Because in our household,” she says in her Memphis drawl, and pauses for emphasis. “My mother thinks that if we go and get food.” Dramatic pause. “And bring it back to our house.” Another pause. “Then it counts as home cooking.” Continued

Unintentionally funny music videos

The modern concept of the music video really began in 1964 with the Beatles' "feature film" A Hard Day's Night but began to appear in different forms throughout the 1970s with full length movies (like Tommy and The Wall) and various others. Music videos cemented their standing in popular culture with the launch of MTV in 1981and the iconic Thriller video a little over two years later. Thriller single handedly revolutionized the way music videos were thought of both by artists and by the general public. The video became more iconic than the song itself and videos became a new way to market and position songs for artist.

Music videos can be a very personal undertaking for an artist or it can be a slapped together product by a record company. Thriller cost half a million dollars in 1983, while some videos today appear to be shot on the Zapruder camera. Some have stood the test of time, while others come across as completely dated. But allowing musicians artistic freedom to produce a video, something nearly all are entirely unqualified to do, has left some relics of unintentional comedy over the years. Videos that appear to be nearly satirical now, but at the time weren't made in jest at all. Videos that probably were bad when made, and have come full circle to simply humorous now. 

Top 5 unintentionally funny videos

5. Tommy Seebach - Apache

 

Tough to beat the 22 second mark in this one. I had to search to make sure this wasn't meant to be as funny as it is. Tommy Seebach was in fact Danish which nearly disqualified him for the unintentionally funny category but was ultimately allowed to hang around because of the sheer absurdity of the video

4. Culture Club - Karma Chameleon

The video opens letting you know that this is Mississippi in 1870. It proceeds to show Boy George sitting on a mount of some sort wearing Rag Doll material in his hair surrounded by a host of dancing Mississippians.

3. 50 Cent feat. Justin Timberlake - Ayo Technology

 

Justin Timberlake and 50 Cent are in some futuristic world with spying technology fixed in on different girls. It proceeds to alternate between a night vision and a black room with Timberlake and 50 Cent dancing. They have some future technology that allows the protagonists to be 'with' the girls without being with them. It then pans to Timbaland doing his best Minority Report presentation, shifting screens around and shows blurred out images of naked women. Not sure who thought this was a good idea for a music video but the budget was clearly high, and was clearly wasted.

2. Johnny Cougar Mellencamp - Hurt So Good

It just needs to be watched. Mellencamp at his best

1. DMX - Ruff Ryders' Anthem

 

Dogs chained to tires. Shirtless lifting. The bar is set pretty high when the first shot is a motorcycle wheelie but DMX and the rest of Ruff Ryders are able to keep it going for the entirety of the video.

Netflix: It wasn't you, it was me

Netflix's fall from grace has been swift and abrupt, today falling to a new 52 week low following an unusual apology email from CEO Reed Hastings yesterday and an announced restructuring of the business. Netflix will now be separated into two businesses; Qwikster, the traditional DVD rental business now including video game rental, and Netflix, now simply the online streaming business. The rationale behind the split according to Hastings is to let “each (business) grow and operate independently,” presumably allowing investors to value the higher trading streaming business completely separately from the lower trading DVD. Streaming only now represents 40% of subscriptions and this business appears likely to continue to quickly grow, while the DVD business' growth trails off.

The company's slide began in the middle of July when they changed their pricing from a $7.99 option to purchase just streaming and a $2 add on to get DVDs as well. The company then somewhat slipped in a new pricing structure that completely separated the streaming and DVD business with each costing $7.99. The slide furthered when Netflix cut their guidance for subscribers late last week as a result of a backlash to the new pricing structure.

There have been numerous missteps and oversights throughout the last 6 months that have led to Netflix rapid decline. Dividing the two businesses was the logical next step for the company, but the initial step to getting there (the pricing switch) and the timing was communicated so poorly that it may have done permanent damage. Ultimately, Hastings appears to have overestimated his customers' loyalty to Netflix at the wrong time. Being the first to do something endears substantial goodwill and trust, but that can be quickly evaporate and be irrevocably broken. Competitors were already gaining steam on Netflix's business model and with complimentary products being offered (and losing Starz), Netflix may be left with a great business that set itself up for cannibalization.

America is generally a fairly forgiving country when someone is quick to admit their mistakes. We'll forgive the Hugh Grants and the Bill Clintons because they apologized and didn't ultimately affect the pocket of their fans. Netflix's poor communication struck a nerve as less disappointing but more deceitful, causing a loss of confidence and loyalty that actually hit their supporters financially. The stock is probably undervalued at its current levels, an overreaction to the uncertainty, but the long term future seems bleak with fractured consumer confidence and a leader substantially underestimating customer loyalty.

Google Wallet Launches

After much fanfare, years of development and tons of attention, Google Wallet finally launched today albeit in a limited capacity. The only two ways to currently use the service is through Citi MasterCards, and a Google Pre-paid card but the company plans to expand the offering over the next few months. While certainly cool, the criticism of Google Wallet remains that it is a solution without a problem. Almost universally likely to take place at some point, it's still as of yet unclear at what point.

14 Most innovative, innovative startups

VentureWire released their FASTech 50: Most Innovative Start-Ups last week. Companies across the spectrum of the tech world are featured and below are the 14 I found to be most interesting:

 

 

SaaS company that helps tracks IT costs and expense allocation in virtualization and cloud computing. All-star list of investors include Andreessen Horowitz, Greylock and Ignition.

Authentic8 not only has a company name that teenage girls on AIM would love, it also operates as a web browser in the cloud that protects against threats of attacks, such as phishing, by offering a disposable browser on a virtual server that is trashed when a session is complete. 

A true Big Data player that monitors how a company's data is being used and shifts it around so that important stuff can be quickly retrieved.

Bluefin uses a technology to match social media commentary with what prompted them and offers the software as a service to advertisers, brands and TV networks attempting to target interested parties.

 

BranchOut allows for career networking on Facebook, leveraging the site to share job listings with friends and discover inside connections at companies.

Bump was originally designed as an easy way to transfer contact information, but has since moved into transferring almost anything. They have been particularly active in the mobile payments space and the transfer of money. Quite a few big names have bought into this bumping including Andreessen Horowitz, Sequoia, SV Angel and Y Combinator.

Corduro, a Google Ventures-backed mobile payments company, has built a cloud platform that allows it to offer a a variety of features namely for interaction with non-profits and charities. The company is wearing multiple hats allowing for cheap transfer of funds through a mobile device.

Couchbase is a NoSQL database software built off of an open-sourced platform used by many companies to cache data. The company focuses on social networking, gaming, advertising and delivering unstructured data quickly to users on couches everywhere.

Factual structures and verifies data across a spectrum of verticals, from CEO compensation to number of bottle beers consumed, to conceivably number of bottled beers consumed by CEOs. Factual uses both public and private sources and making the information available to mobile and web app developers.

A search engine that ranks data based on what is important to the seacher, determined by Facebook, Twitter, Gmail and other aggregates of data. Founded by an 18 year old last year. Kids today.



Mobile advertising that isn't annoying. Kiip is built into games and provides ad-based offers based on when players reach certain milestones.

Oblong Industries have created real life Minority Report screens that can move information based on hand gestures.





Social Shield helps parents identify and monitor their children's activity on social-networking sites, identifying risky online behavior and verifying their friends are actually their friends





TayKey monitors what people are talking about on over 150 social media sources and puts relevant ads in front of them in seconds

 

Do we deserve -- or even want -- more jobs?

An article discussing the state of employment in the country by Jason Calacanis was forwarded to me by a friend last week. I finally took the time to sit down and read the slightly jarring piece discussing the state of youth in the work force, again that Where Have the Good Men Gone? group, and the attitude towards work. I fit squarely into the age demographic Calacanis discusses and its nearly impossible to not nod to an alarmingly number of the points.

The old theory around inheritance is that the first generation will work their ass off and make the money, the next generation works because of guilt from witnessing their parents and then the third generation ultimately ruins the nest egg. Calacanis highlights this but instead of taking it to privileged estates, turns it on society as a whole and addresses the implications of this shift.

Cam Newton (22 years old; squarely in this generation) threw for 400 yards yesterday and seemingly shut a lot of his critics up, but his quote that he views himself as "an icon and an entertainer" remains frightening to people around the NFL. It's a single quote that summarizes a lot of attitudes towards work. "I see myself not only as a football player, but an entertainer and icon;" a qualification as if winning both the Heisman Trophy and National Championship was limiting to an extent. That being the top in his profession wasn't fulfilling enough.

In a Grantland article a few weeks back, Hua Hsu wrote, "To be a king nowadays, as Wayne, Jay-Z, and Kanye West have shown, is to comprehend the limitless uses of your image — to circulate beyond the music." Lil Wayne was bored with being the best mixtape freestyler and expanded into autotune and guitars. Jay-Z was bored with his position atop of the rap game and became not a businessman but a business, man. Kanye West was bored in the DJ booth and became a rapper.

These are people challenging themselves to do more than what originally made them great and a relentless pursuit of success is admirable. People at the top of their profession appearing to lose interest in being the best at one thing and instead challenging themselves to expand across a spectrum. Vertical integration vs. horizontal. Obviously different than what Calacanis highlights, but with an undoubted trickle down effect reflecting our generation that reveres Newton, Wayne, Jay and Kayne.

What defines you is something people in a quarter life (don't think that's an actual a term, but appears a more and more common occurence) crisis seem to struggle with disproportionately. Not being pigeon holed by your profession is commendable, but the implications in aggregate may threaten the economy in a deeper and more culturally driven manner than inflation or a jobs bill ever will.

9/12/2011

 

Groupon, Grouper and the intuitive company

Despite their successes, some companies seem to not make sense no matter how many times they are explained to me or their markets are outlined or they are championed by VCs or Wall Street or whoever. One of my buddies described Groupon (or Living Social etc) as "voluntary spam," and not only do I not know anyone that has purchased a Groupon, I don't know anyone who enjoys getting their emails. I'm technically a subscriber to their mailing list, but it's the first email I delete in the morning and I don't look at any of the offers. The company is obviously doing something right, despite pulling their IPO, but I simply do not understand how the product itself has proven to be a hit when it seems to be a novelty at best and annoying at worst.

Grouper on the other hand is a company that is almost too intuitive to not have been created already. A friend originally introduced me to the concept a couple months ago and instantly it seemed like a company that, if done properly, would achieve tremendous scale. Early results are that it has been done properly.

The basic way it works is as follows:
1. You log into Grouper through your Facebook
2. Grouper looks for people of the opposite sex “taking into account age / education / personalities / interests / attractiveness”
3. Sets you and a group of two friends up with another group of three with similar interests for a dinner / night out

Conceptually it tries to pair you with friends you don't yet know.


Grouper tries not to position its offering as a date, but it's just that. It's a date masked as a group hangout, and it is perfect for the socially networked generation where everyone seems to know everyone through someone. The generation directly out of college, the Where Have the Good Men Gone? generation, it's a logical leveraging of social networks. Online dating for people in their early 20s still has a stigma as weird, but a group hangout seems much safer. Much more acceptable. There are obvious logistical issues to the actual night out (like friends boxing each other out, jockeying for the attractive girl in the group) but the concept itself remains novel and should prove to be extremely successful, because it's not online dating. It's a group hangout. A group hangout that will ultimately make the founders a lot of money.

9/7/2011

50 most innovative startups
http://blogs.wsj.com/venturecapital/2011/09/07/introducing-venturewires-fastech-50-most-innovative-start-ups/?mod=wsj_share_twitter

Erksine Bowles named to Facebook board
http://vator.tv/news/2011-09-07-facebook-names-a-new-board-member-erskine-bowles-0

Toasting Timbo 7 - Casino Night

Timbofund is a charity in honor of my buddy's friend Tim McWilliams, or "Timbo", who passed away in '05 due to complications from a Traumatic Brain Injury he sustained three years earlier.  All proceeds from the event will go to patients and families going through a TBI recovery process. 

The Foundation’s only fund raiser of the year will be on Friday, September 23, 2011 from 8:00 pm - 1:00 am at Pier Sixty in New York City. Toasting Timbo 7 (TT7) will be a "Casino Night" with Blackjack, Texas Hold 'Em, Craps and Rouletter.  We hope you'll join us for a night of great food, drinks, music and friendship to support the Large and Small Grant Programs  that are the heart and soul of the Foundation.
 

Always a blast, tickets below

http://www.timbofund.org/toasting-timbo/tickets/

David Carr, TechCrunch, the Red Sox and CrunchFund

The short version of the long story in what has transpired within TechCrunch is their editor Michael Arrington announced CrunchFund to invest in startups, originally with AOLs full support (and $$$). There was a public outcry with one of the largest personalities in the startup world having the potential to influence the companies he invests in. Earlier this year, Arrington announced he would invest in certain companies that he writes about (with disclosure of his investment) but a full fund has created a larger issue.

David Carr wrote a long article hashing out his opinion on the conflict of interest, which was followed up by two rebuttals (one and two) from writers on the TechCrunch staff. Paul Carr from TechCrunch (in article number two) writes, "In particular, Mike (Arrington) is delighting in the irony of a New York Times writer attacking TechCrunch for a lack of disclosure when the Times regularly covers the Boston Red Sox without disclosing that they have a minority stake in the team." It seems unusual for Arrington to delight in this supposed irony. The comparision between the coverage of a sports team and a partial ownership of a team to the coverage of startups and a partial ownership of a company falls flat upon any real analysis. Conceivably the only way a company like the New York Times could influence a team is by increasing their coverage and therefore awareness and then potentially valuation. The issue with this in terms of the Red Sox is 1. NYT maintains little to no power in the world of sports coverage and 2. Fan size, TV market, wins and losses are the ultimate drivers of valuation for a team. Conversely TechCrunch has an enormous amount of power and influence over public perception of small companies (I called a company for a meeting last week based on exposure from a TechCrunch article) and valuation for these companies is initially driven in large part by perception of potential and less on wins and losses (P/L).

It appears likely that Arrington will officially stepdown soon and I admittedly know nothing about the TechCrunch culture, how their specific editorial process works or more generally about working at a news organization. The rebuttal articles do, however, come across as myopic and naive.

Pete Rose claims he only gambled on his own teams to win. It didn't matter. Rose broke a sacred rule in baseball by having a financially vested stake in the outcome of a game beyond his employment. In the AJ Daulerio/TMZ world, journalistic standards have obviously shifted quite a bit but regardless of the editorial process at TechCrunch and the autonomy their writers have, it does seem too conflicted to have the head of TechCrunch betting on his own teams.