Post-Web 2.0 Business Plan Tips
November 5, 2007
Tom Foremski of the Silicon Valley Watcher is reporting, “Web 2.0 is on the ropes… Kleiner Perkins has halted investments.” His thesis is that Web 2.0 ’start-ups’ are out. He suggests removing the term from your business plan alltogether. He also suggests removing the term ‘long tail’ as well. Tom quoted Randy Komisar, a Kleiner Perkins partner as saying, “We have absolutely NO interest in funding Web 2.0 companies.” Tom when on to explain,
“He mentioned this during an after dinner conversation last week. He said he had recently told John Battelle, one of the organizers of the rapidly growing Web 2.0 Summit conference, that the term no longer had the same positive cachet it once had. In the VC community it clearly has a negative one.”
Tom’s advice? Web 2.0 companies should ‘reinvent and redefine themselves.’ Use the ‘find and replace’ feature in Word and start replacing web 2.0 and long economics with something else. Tom jokingly suggests using ’social graph’, ’social platform’ and ‘attention economy’ as alternatives as those terms still have ‘legs’.

Local
November 5th, 2007 at 10:26 am
I love it. business plan Mad Libs
November 5th, 2007 at 6:40 pm
[...] check the full story here [...]
November 6th, 2007 at 2:42 am
I think it’s too early to say that web 2.0 is on the ropes.
I think it’s more appropriate to say that there are now too many web 2.0 sites and it’s now too crowded to join in.
November 6th, 2007 at 3:36 am
[...] Bryan Alexander wrote an interesting post today on Post-Web 2.0 Business Plan TipsHere’s a quick excerpt [...]
November 15th, 2007 at 2:04 am
The beauty of web 2.0 is that the best ideas have not yet been thought of. What is web 2.0 really? I could just as easily say that my new software QuickPlanner Plus is part of Web 3.0, whether it is or isn’t. Or is it web 4.0? 5.0 anyone? Most investors don’t really understand the web or why facebook, digg, or othe properties are worth so much.
December 8th, 2007 at 11:59 am
How To Start A Blog
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but it sounds interesting