SILICON VALLEY & L.A. -- A TALE OF TWO (START-UP) CITIES?

Last night the good people over at Dealmaker Media L.A. hosted the latest installment of their strategy & mixer series last night at the William Morris offices in Beverly Hills. The event centered around a panel discussion moderated by Rich Wolpert, Managing Director of The Mailroom Fund discussing the similarities and differences between the start up and investment communities in Silicon Valley and Los Angeles. The panel was a good mix of investors (both angel and institutional) and entrepreneurs -- Mike Jones, newly minted COO of MySpace and former CEO of Tsavo Media, Joey Carson, President & CEO of Hollywood Interactive Group, Jason Oberfest, SVP, Business Development at MySpace and Mark Suster, Partner at GRP Partners.

Here are some of my take-aways from the event:

* In general, L.A.-based start ups are more monetization oriented while Silicon Valley start ups tend to place more emphasis on product development and technology.

* Due in part to geographical differences between the two areas, the L.A. start up and venture scene is more disparate and, save for Santa Monica, has no real nerve center (a la Sand Hill Road up north). And as an extension of this reality, there is also a common perception that L.A. does not have the depth and breadth of technology talent that Silicon Valley has, although there are members of the L.A. community (including the L.A. CTO Forum) that are actively working to change this perception.

* Those working in the start up community in Silicon Valley are much more pre-occupied with the equity portion of compensation packages than those in L.A., with one theory being that so many of them know and/or have heard of many others in their position making millions of dollars off of their options - which in turn leads to something along the lines of a sense of entitlement.

The topic of this event was of particular interest to me because I've spent the greater part of the last few months traveling to and from Silicon Valley and L.A. meeting with countless start ups and venture capitalists in both cities - in large part to get a sense of the general business and investment climate in both areas as I try and figure out what I want to do when I grow up. The main difference that I've noticed so far is that Silicon Valley operates in a micro-climate "bubble" environment that almost doesn't care or pay attention to the macro conditions that exist in the world (in this case the horrid economy). Entrepreneurship, progress and innovation are embedded in the fabric of the Valley - and that fabric is extremely strong and resilient.

While that's not to say that some of that doesn't exist here in L.A., the reality is that much of the climate is driven by the entertainment & media industry. And that industry is very much aware of, and adversely impacted by, the current economic conditions, not to mention the ongoing struggles many media companies are still having with figuring out how they are going to thrive in this new digital media ecosystem. And that fear and trepidation can't help but trickle down to the start ups and investors in the area, especially those whose businesses and investments are based in and around content. And from what I've heard from my friends and colleagues on the East Coast, this same dynamic exists between New York and Boston -- so at least we're not alone!

The good news is that L.A., despite its geographical challenges and ties to the entertainment industry tides, has a ton of great people across the business spectrum -- entrepreneurs, technologists, monetization experts and investors, and the sentiment coming out of last night is that the gap between L.A. and Silicon Valley - real or perceived - is closing every day.

T.A.P. SERIES #3 - MAKING VIRTUAL SCHEDULING EASIER

We all know how painful it can be sometimes to try and schedule things with other folks via email - especially those outside your office and/or company for work-related things like meetings, conference calls, lunches, etc. If your experience is anything like mine, it take at least 3-4 back and forth emails to settle on a date and time that works -- and that's just when trying to schedule something with just one other person that's in the same vicinity or time zone. Multiply that by 2 for every additional person involved in the process and you get the picture.

I recently came across a company by the name of TimeBridge that offers a consumer-friendly (and more importantly, free!) meeting schedule product that is entirely web-based and allows you to not only integrate it with office-based calendars like Outlook but, more importantly, with home-based calendars like Google or iCal. There's also a business version, which I assume has some kind of price tag associated with it.

The process is pretty simple -- sign up for an account, create a meeting proposal - which includes selecting/suggesting days and times for the event, send it out to your intended recipients and wait for them to get back to you. Once everyone is on board the invite can be integrated into your calendaring system of choice (assuming it's one of the three mentioned above) and you're all set.

Feel free to send any and all feedback about the product once you've given it a try - I think you'll find it worthwhile.

TAKING A PEEK AT THE PEEK

I'm sure some of you have already seen this new mobile communication device called The Peek - but for those of you who haven't, let me be the first to give you my two cents about it . . . don't bother.

What is it you ask? Quite simply, it's a portable device that is 100% dedicated to emailing and texting. According to their CEO Amol Sarva, there are a ton of people out there who want a simple to use (it only takes a few minutes to set up) and affordable ($49.95 for the device and $19.95 a month with no contracts) device that allows them to stay in touch on the go - but without having the ability to actually call and talk to people.

Don't get me wrong, it's a pretty slick looking device - and I'm sure that there will be folks out there for whom this is a perfect fit. But I personally think that there are a number of factors working against it, including:

1. Device Fatigue -- as we continue to be bombarded with more and more choices when it comes to portable devices (cell phones, smart phones, digital cameras, laptops, netbooks, etc.), at the end of the day most people want to simplify their lives and pare down on the number of devices (and power cords) they use and have with them at all times. And more likely than not, these same people will be willing to pay a premium for the convenience of less devices.

2. Email Is Becoming Less and Less Relevant -- we can't deny that we're in an age of immediacy that is being driven, in large part, by the continuing proliferation and use of telephony and texting functions associated with pretty much all cell phones these days - not to mention the meteoric rise of social communication tools like Twitter and Facebook. As a result, email is being used more and more as a third or fourth option when it comes to communication. So when faced with the choice of having a device that allows you to talk and text (in addition to a handful of other bells and whistles), or one that lets you just text and email, chances are you'll choose the former.

3. Price -- while 20 bucks a month is definitely a good deal, the reality is that most people are still willing to pay a bit more for a portable device that fits the criteria mentioned in #2, in addition to having other utilitarian features such as a camera and Internet access (through which, by the way, you can also access and use email). And it's safe to assume that pricing on mobile phone services from the carriers will only continue to go down.

Long story short -- extremely slick looking device with a price point and service that may appeal to an extremely small group of consumers, but at the end of the day, less is more when it comes to devices.

T.A.P. SERIES, #2 -- INTERNET THROUGH THE T.V. - THE FUTURE IS NOW!

For better or worse, I've been a loyal user of Yahoo! for a lot of my basic web services - email, photos (through Flickr) and RSS feeds (through My Yahoo!). Some people say that it's almost as passee as having an AOL account, and while there are times in the past that I've agreed with those folks, I'm here to tell you that I haven't been prouder to be a Yahoo! user than I am right now. And the reason for that is their newly launched Connected TV initiative, which made quite a splash earlier this year at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas.

As you'll quickly see, Connected TV is representative of the first real steps towards bringing a full Internet experience to a television set. Yahoo! is choosing to do this by integrating a now-common web product called "widgets" into the on-screen experience, all with just the touch of a button. Through the Yahoo! TV Widgets, users will be able to access an endless library of web services from not only Yahoo! but also from other services like Twitter, CBS, eBay, Netflix and the New York Times. For those of you interested, here is a video demo of the TV Widgets in action.

What I like about what Yahoo! is doing here is that they are creating a very simple and intuitive way to introduce the consumer public to the idea of having access to the Internet through a television using existing hardware -- basically the TV itself and the remote that comes with it. There are no additional set-top boxes to purchase, no keyboard to use and the user is in control of customizing the way the widgets are presented on the screen relative to the TV program that's on the screen.

The main drawback of the Yahoo! offering is that it's probably not something that you can add to your existing TV set. Having said that, there's no reason why your cable/satellite provider couldn't offer something similar through their service. My provider (Verizon FiOS) already has a widget offering in its menu, but it's pretty weak compared to what Yahoo! is offering, so hopefully they'll get their act together . . . and soon!

And for those of you that want a deeper dive on the subject of Internet on your TV and see what today's industry leaders are saying about the promise of tomorrow, a good place to start is this January New York Times article which covered the topic in the context of the CES show.

It really is a brave new world!

MEMO TO THE INDUSTRY . . . DO AWAY WITH ALL MOBILE URLS!!!!

There are very few things that exist in the digital media space that I would put in the category of being a pet peeve of mine -- but this is definitely at the top of my list, and my rant on this has been a long time in coming.

In all the years that I've observed and been involved in the mobile web (aka WAP for you industry aficionados), I have never understood why any company/brand/publisher/media company would use anything other than the traditional ".com" top-level domain their mobile web destination URL. As we've all seen, there have been a whole host of mobile-specific top-level domains and URLs that have been, and continue to be, employed and marketed to consumers with web-enabled mobile phones -- for example:

* www.-------.mobi (e.g., CNNMoney.mobi)
* m.---------.com -- (e.g., m.myspace.com)
* wap.------.com -- (e.g., wap.aol.com)

For those of us in the mobile space, I ask you -- isn't the ultimate goal here to educate the consumer public that the web is the web is the web -- regardless of whether you use a PC, a mobile phone, a game console or a TV to access it? Doesn't the mere presence of different URLs just add to the confusion rather than address and remedy it? I definitely think it does. And from a business perspective, I'd prefer to funnel all my web traffic, regardless of where it comes from, through one domain so that I can get credit for the audience and also better monetize them.

Sure the visual experience for the consumer will be different across these screens, but as true convergence continues to become a reality through increased proliferation of smartphones with a more robust web experience as well as the promise of Internet to the TV screen, those differences will continue to diminish. And in the meantime, let's all agree that the K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple Stupid!) approach is probably the best one here. Just use your existing ".com" URL for your mobile web site -- and make sure to ask whoever is helping you develop it to make sure an put in that one line of code on your web server that automatically detects whether someone is trying to access your site from a mobile phone so that that the correct site is rendered. It's that simple!

So say YES to ".com" and NO to everything else -- who else is with me?!

T.A.P. SERIES, #1 -- THE ANSWER TO S***TY CELL RECEPTION IN YOUR HOUSE . . . MAYBE

I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that pretty much all of us have, at one time or another, wanted to throw our cell phones out the window after having a call drop for the 100th time while talking on it in our homes. Well have no fear, a technology called femtocells (don't ask me where they came up with that name!) is coming to a neighborhood store near you -- hopefully sooner rather than later.

So what exactly are femtocells? In a nutshell, they're super small versions of cell towers (also known as "access point base stations") that are housed in a piece of hardware that looks like your standard home Internet modem. In some cases they will come pre-installed with an Internet modem -- mostly in those cases where you have a provider (e.g., AT&T, Verizon, etc.) who your cell phone and home Internet service. If that's not the case, then you'll likely need to get a sepate box -- either way these femtocells use existing high speed Internet connection in your home. From what I can tell, the current versions that are in development will be able to support 2-4 cell phones in one location, and they'll operate much like a home Wi-Fi environment in that you'll be able to "lock" your network and limit access so that you don't have folks camped outside your house poaching your signal.

As of last year, Sprint was the first carrier here in the U.S. to make the service (called "Airave") available nationwide -- for those of you interested you can see get more info on their web site here. AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon are apparently in the trial phase and should be rolling out their femtocell services sometime this year. And since I haven't tried these services yet, I can't really vouch for how well (or not!) they work.

So if you haven't already chucked that cell phone out your living room window, you now have even more reason than ever to hold on to it!

If you have any suggestions on topics to be covered as part of this T.A.P. series, drop me a line at chris@bravenewmediaworld.com.

TECH FOR THE AVERAGE PERSON (T.A.P.) -- A NEW, SEMI-REGULAR SERIES

I don't know about you, but for years now I've been one of those people that family and friends call up with questions about pretty much anything and everything having to do with technology -- I guess the thinking is that since I've been in businesses involving computers, the Internet and cell phones for a while now, I must know a little something about any or all of those things. And they're right - with an emphasis on the word "little!"

So it got me thinking that it may be useful every once in a while to write about a topic that, while it may be something that is on the minds of my family and friends (and by extension, maybe your family and friends), they haven't yet gotten around to asking me about it -- for now I'll call it the T.A.P. ("Tech for the Average Person") series. And unfortunately it's gonna be a bit more advanced than things like "how do I set my answering machine?" (sorry mom and dad. . .) or "what is this Facebook/LinkedIn thing all about?" (if you don't know already, don't bother) -- but not by much!

So if there's anything on your mind that you've been wondering about, feel free to drop me a line at chris@bravenewmediaworld.com and I'll see what helpful info I can come up with for you!

THE FACEBOOK DILEMMA - TO CHARGE OR NOT TO CHARGE? IT'S ALL IN THE STOOL

Over the last several months there's been a lot of chatter about this, both in the media/blogosphere as well as (more importantly!) within the Facebook community. Doing a quick search on Facebook for "Facebook charging" bring back 287 group results (many of which have few, if any, members) generally related to this topic. Two early articles include one from Farhad Manjoo at Slate and Mike Masnick from TechDirt.

Since it seems to be a slow brain day, I thought I'd revisit a somewhat old topic today, instead of coming up with a new one on my own, and give my two cents (after all - that's about all my opinion is worth these days!). I will admit right off the bat that my opinion is not 100% Facebook-user centric, but rather also looks at this also from the perspective of what makes sense from a business perspective. So you won't be seeing me join any of these groups anytime soon!

I've been fortunate enough to have worked at two companies -- Playboy and American Greetings -- that have demonstrated a certain measure of success with employing a multi-revenue stream model in their online businesses -- what I would call the "three-legged revenue stool" -- Advertising (banners, buttons, video ads, etc.); Access Fees (charging users a toll of some kind to access premium content and/or services) and E-Commerce (selling tangible products).

Based in part on my time spent at these companies, and also based in part on my feeling that diversification in one's portfolio -- whether it's your online business or your 401(k) -- is a good thing, I happen to be a fan of the multi-leg stool. It goes without saying that the more legs (within reason!) a stool has, the sturdier that stool will be. Too many online businesses of late have decided to put all their eggs in the single-leg stool model (advertising) and as a result, have been unable to develop a defensible/scalable business model for themselves.

By having multiple revenue streams, a business can manage these streams like levers, and throttle them up or down depending on factors like consumer behavior & feedback, market conditions, competitive landscape and effective ROI. These streams in turn act like a natural hedge, giving the company that much more to fall back on in case one of the legs of the stool starts to get a bit wobbly.

By all accounts, Facebook, for all its immense global popularity and usage is still not a profitable business and they're yet again looking to raise a ton of additional money (somewhere in the neighborhood of $1oo million) to help keep the lights on. Clearly the current models in place for generating revenue are not paying the bills, so as with any smart business, they should be (and likely are) looking at ways to generate enough cash to get to profitability and generate a respectible return for their investors -- after all, isn't that the basic goal of most companies?

It's safe to say that with around 200 million users worldwide and the distinction of being one of, if not the largest photo storage/sharing site on the Web, Facebook has evolved beyond simply a social network and into a social utility -- one that provides value to most, if not all, of its users. So why a valuable utility not charge its customers for some portion of its service? The questions then become -- what to charge for and how much? In terms of what to charge for, it could be anywhere from a flat fee for initial access to an advertising-free Facebook environment to tiered charges based on usage (consumer vs. commercial accounts, # of photos uploaded, # of friends in your friends list AKA address book, etc.).

For example, let's assume that Facebook charged a flat fee of $1 per month for consumer access to the service, and assuming that the majority of users (let's say 75% for the sake of argument) agreed to pay the toll, that would be a nice chunk of change for Facebook - $150 million dollars PER MONTH give or take. Of course nobody can predict what percentage of users would actually stop using Facebook and what effect an access fee ecosystem would have on new user sign ups, but if you're like me you wouldn't think twice about paying 12 bucks a year to service one of the most valuable social utilities ever invented. After all, we happily pay for other valuable services -- my roster includes the gym, Netflix, Flickr Pro -- that cost as much if not way more -- so why not Facebook?

Would love to hear your thoughts on this.

BLACKBERRY APP WORLD STORE . . . A QUICK FIRST LOOK

Woke up this morning to find an email in my inbox (well, technically in my Spam folder -- good thing I check that once in a while) from Blackberry letting me know that their App World is open for business. Went ahead and downloaded it onto my Curve and gave it a test drive -- here are some initial observations and a snapshot of my user experience:

* The navigation is pretty straightforward but definitely highlights the inferiority of the track wheel based nav of the Blackberry versus the finger swipe nav of the iPhone. The home screen is mostly dedicated to a horizontal scrolling presentaton of "Featured" apps, of which there are 11 - and the first one is (big surprise!) the Facebook app. Below the scroll area are four icons that you can navigate to and click on -- Categories, Top Downloads, Search and My World.

* A couple of things that, at first blush, may be a little bit surprising if you believe that the vast majority of Blackberry users are "older" (30+) and use the device primarily, if not exclusively, for business reasons:

1. Of the 529 apps that available, over 40% (227 to be exact) are in the "Games" category. The category with the second most apps (90) is "Productivity & Utilities" -- now that's more like it!

2. The top paid download (#23 in a list of 25) is PhoneyFarts -- so much for the sophistication of Blackberry users!

* Tried to download a paid app (PhoneyFarts -- what else?!) so that I could check out their payment integration with PayPal. The log in and purchase part of the process was extremely pain-free, but as the transaction was finalizing I got an error message letting me know that there were problems completing the purchase because of the system's inability to "obtain a license key." Not sure what that means other than a lost opportunity to Blackberry to convert a paying customer. And oddly enough, I got an email from PayPal with the subject line "Receipt for Your Payment" - hmm, wonder whether they actually charged me!

* So it now keeps getting worse . . . the app store seems to have frozen my device. I'm in the My World section of the app where I'm staring at the icon of my failed app purchase, and I can't navigate away from it whatsoever. Looks like it's time to do the old pull out the battery thing -- UGH!

* Tried to download another paid app - this time got a different error message letting me know that they're having trouble conecting to the App World server - strike two!!

* Finally tried to download a free app (Vegas Pool Sharks Lite) - and as they say, third time is a charm! App downloaded with no issues and the full functionality is intact. I can only assume that my problems with the first two tries had to do with the fact that they were paid apps and had some issues reconciling with the PayPal authentication system.

VERDICT: Not the best customer experience out of the gate, but as with any newly launched product, there are hiccups and bugs that I'm sure will be addressed. As a longtime Blackberry user, I for one am glad to have access to a native app store so that I can finally move on from Brickbreaker!

BACK FROM A LONG HIATUS -- AND HOPEFULLY FOR GOOD!

I've been kicking myself for a while now about not getting back in the blogging saddle before now -- but life has a way of throwing a wrench in your plans!

And by "life" I mean the snowball effect that our current world economic state has caused. My most recent employer - a publicly traded, family owned, magazine-centric business (which some would consider three strikes right out of the gate) has been going through some challenging times for the better part of the last 12+ months, and recently informed its employees that it was taking some drastic measures in an effort to reduce expenses and "right the ship." Those measures included closing the posh NYC mid-town digs and centralization of its digital media operations to the company's HQ in Chicago (not exactly a digital media hotbed - but that's for another time!).

As a result of these moves, a decision was made that it was time for my employer and I to part ways -- an event which, to my surprise, got some press coverage - both on its own (http://tinyurl.com/dxlbrm) as well as part of subsequent moves at the company (http://tinyurl.com/dlfsmr).

It was a good 3+ year run but definitely time to move on . . . which in theory means I should have more time to dedicate to the business of writing a personal musings blog! The irony is that since I left, I've been busier than ever - a combination of enjoying the much-needed downtime with my family and talking to a ton of folks (VCs, industry headhunters, colleagues, companies, etc.) about the next potential gig. Needless to say it's been an interesting process - but I'll save that for the next post - so stay tuned!

MONETIZING ONLINE VIDEO AS AN INDEPENDENT PRODUCER -- IS IT POSSIBLE?

For a while now I've been searching far and wide for any kind of data that shows whether or not the monetization of video online, particularly by independent producers, is a sustainable and scalable business, but much to my chagrin it's been hard to come by. I guess it shouldn't be much of a surprise since the reality is that there really isn't any data out there that is compelling enough to make us all believers in this business.

Sure - there's a ton of information out there about traffic, video views, engagment, etc. - but that's all window dressing for the most part. What I want to know is pretty simple -- how is making money and how much.

I recently got some good intel from a small company (who shall remain nameless) that proclaims itself as one of the largest and most popular online video producers. In business for a little over 2 years with a total investment of about $1 million, this company recently surpassed 30 million videos served -- a great accomplishment to be sure. When asked how much revenue these 30+ million videos have generated, the answer was . . . . $500,000. This revenue has been generated through a combination of ad sales on its own site(s), rev share deals with its syndication partners and licensing deals with third parties who pay for access to this company's video library.

Doing the back-of-the-napkin math, and ignoring the licensing apsect of their business, the unofficial eCPM here is $15. And knowing how lean this company runs (including not having a fully built out internal sales force), this is a respectable accomplishment. But looking at it another way, the revenue does seem like a drop in the bucket when compared to the enormous volume of video views that have been generated. Also, the reality with this company is that the lion's share of their revenue to date is generated from the licensing side of their business, as they say that they're only now starting to generate revenue from advertising, and the CPM's on that side of the equation are "in the single digits."

So the question is -- is it possible to be wildly successful as an independent producer of online video content?

JOOST GOES WEB . . . TOO LITTLE TOO LATE

The news of Joost's move from desktop application to Flash-based web offering isn't causing all that much of a stir because, well . . . they're comin' to the party at the stroke of midnight - and we all know what happened to Sleeping Beauty!

As one of the early beta users of their desktop product, I quickly gave up using it because of the sheer number of issues I was having with it - from logging in to accessing and watching videos. And as a member of their database, I would have expected to get periodic emails keeping me updated about all the goings on there. The one saving grace is that my user name and password still work on the site -- but it's not really gonna do me much good 'cause I don't plan to visit Joost all that often going forward. Is the content really all that different than what we've been consuming from other sites (YouTube, Hulu, etc.) for over a year now? If it is, it sure wasn't obvious to me.

So my prediction is that Joost won't last through next year - or if it does it won't even come close to being profitable. If only I had $45 million to play with, I could pretty much guarantee that I'd be able to build a profitable business. Open checkbook anyone?!

THE END OF WEB 2.0 -- JUST ANOTHER PART OF THE ROLLER COASTER RIDE

So by now the news of Sequoia Capital ringing the alarm bell about the severity of market conditions and what that means for start-ups has spread like wildfire around the blogosphereand the follow-up commentary from both bloggers and readers is coming on fast and furious -- can't you just hear the keystrokes?!

As someone who was fortunate (or unfortunate!) enough to be part of the roller coaster ride that was the original Internet bubble, I can tell you that this definitely feels like deja vu all over again -- except that now there seems to be even more fear and loathing of what's to come, if for no other reason than because of the proliferation of blogs, forums and other digital media that helps spread the doomsday message. We're living in an age of the virtual water cooler except unlike the first go-around, where most of the chatter was happening between and among people that actually knew each other -- whether by email or at the fabled Internet World conference (remember those good 'ol days?!). Nowadays, our one-to-many missives are going global, with comments coming in from as far away as Israel and Russia.

We truly are a global village - so let's all try to act like it and agree to work together to ride out this economic maelstrom by practicing sound business principles, being smart with our money and building the next generation (dare we say Web 3.0?!) of killer digital products and services.

The good news is that for every dip in the roller coaster ride, there's always an end which has a few people feeling sick to their stomach but most begging to go around again. I know I'm on board -- are you?!

IT'LL CHANGE YOUR LIFE!!

A disclaimer right out of the gate - this blog entry isn't exactly about new media, but it's kinda related in that it talks about technology . . . sorta! Well - it actually talks more about an invention and how it is guaranteed to change your life.

I came across this invention again yesterday inside the men's room of a boutique hotel in Manhattan Beach. It's actually been something I've wanted to talk about and share since my first encounter with it at LAX but just hadn't gotten around to it. But after yesterday I was determined to spread the "best thing since sliced bread" gospel about . . . (drumroll please!). . . . The Dyson Airblade!!

What is it you ask?! Quite simply, it is the fastest and all around best automatic hand dryer EVER CREATED!!! From the first time I used it, I knew that it would be just a matter of time before it rendered all of those other hand dryers obselete -- and mark my words - by the time 2009 rolls around you'll see this contraption everywhere. 12 seconds to completely dry your hands -- are you kidding me?! Does this mean no more hitting the button on those old hand dryers with my elbows and still looking for paper towels after they've run for full minute?!?

Laugh all you want now - but I guarantee you that you'll be one of the converted after the first time you use one.

Kudos to James Dyson - that guy is one smart Brit! Now if could only figure out the whole toaster thing . . .

AH THE GOOD OL' (WEB 1.0) DAYS!!!

Couldn't help but feel a little bit of net-stalgia while reading this Alley Insider article from Robin Kawakami giving us a "where-are-they-now" update of some of the most memorable stars of THE BUBBLE. After all, who can forget some of these these hall of famers:

1. Brian Pinkerton (WebCrawler)
2. Craig Kanarick and Jeffrey Dachis (Razorfish)
3. David Bohnett (GeoCities)
4. Deidre LaCarte Steenman (Hampsterdance)
5. Garrett Gruener and David Warthen (Ask Jeeves)
6. Graham Spencer, Joe Kraus, Ben Lutch, Mark Van Haren, Ryan McIntyre and Martin Reinfried (Excite)
7. James Hong and Jim Young (HOTorNOT)
8. Jason Olim and Matthew Olim (CDNOW)
9. John Romero (id Software)
10. Jonathan Gay (Flash)
11. Joseph Park and Yong Kang (Kozmo.com)
12. Kaleil Isaza Tuzman and Tom Herman (GovWorks, "Startup.com")
13. Mahir Çağrı
14. Michael “Fuzzy” Mauldin (Lycos)
15. Mike Burrows and Louis Monier (AltaVista)
16. Paul Gauthier and Eric Brewer (Inktomi)
17. Pets.com Sock Puppet
18. Philip J. Kaplan (FuckedCompany)
19. Randy Constan (the Internet’s Peter Pan)
20. Sabeer Bhatia (Hotmail)
21. Steve Madere (Deja News)
22. Toby Lenk (eToys)
23. Todd Krizelman and Stephan Paternot (TheGlobe.com)

Looking through this list, the first thing that comes to mind is how unfair it is to leave off so many other qualified candidates -- here are just a few to get those memories flowin'!:

• Digital Entertainment Network (DEN) -- this company had all the makings of a modern-day reality show - money, sex scandals . . . the works!
• DrKoop.com -- the namesake of the former surgeon general that raised almost $100 million through its IPO and was out of money within about a year
• UrbanFetch.com, Webvan.com and Kozmo.com -- the trifecta of home grocery delivery disaster
• Boo.com - fashion flop
• Flooz.com and Beenz.com -- a little before their time?! Can you say "Facebook Wallet?"
• Kibu.com and Snowball.com - good idea (target young women) bad . . . ?

Wonder what the Web 2.0 list will look like . . . any predictions?!?

A COMMERCIAL THAT I ACTUALLY DIDN'T SKIP THROUGH . . .

I don't know about you, but some of my early weekend mornings (brought about by our way-too-early-to-rise 6 month old daughter) are spent catching up on some of our recorded shows. This morning I was watching a show on The Food Network called "The Cooking Loft" hosted by a dear college friend of mine, Alex Guarnaschelli - who by the way is the executive chef at NYC restaurant/hotspot Butter -- I strongly encourage you to visit if you haven't already.

But I digress! The reason I bring up this show is because as I was going through my normal routine of skipping through the first commercial break, I saw something called "Short Stories" - which as it turns out was a "show within a show" occupying the three commercial slots for the 1/2 hour Cooking Loft segment. I haven't yet been able to find any info or video footage of it online (which in and of itself is somewhat surprising) but the premise of the three-party commercial was two sisters - one the owner of an L.A. based cooking school called HipCooks and the other a jewelry designer who was using the cooking school space as the venue for a launch party - preparing for this event -- the cook cooking and the jewelry designer decorating the space.

What got me to stop and watch all three segments of this commercial montage was not so much the story line as it was the fact that the brand and messaging of the show's sponsor -- SoyJoy -- was integrated in a tastefully subtle yet impactful way. It was one of the few "advertising as content" efforts in recent memory that was done well enough to appeal to my consumer side and make me not hit the fast forward button on the remote.

So to all agencies, brands and creative shops out there trying to figure out a way to keep the TV-watching audience engaged during commercial time, I would highly recommend taking a look at this effort for inspiration -- and to whoever produced this "Short Stories" idea-- bravo!

A BNMW SHOUT-OUT . . . SORTA!!

iMedia's Brand Summit wrapped up earlier this week in San Diego, and as part of Tuesday's keynote session they had Mark Kvamme, general partner at Sequoia Capital, speak.

Selfishly, we weren't as interested in what he had to say (although it is good stuff - a recap of which you can check out here: http://www.imediaconnection.com/summits/coverage/20574.asp), we were excited by the fact that one of his quotes was:

"We're in a brave new world. . ."

We'll forgive him (for now!) on forgetting to add the word "media" in there - but it's a good start!

Even better is the first sentence of this recap - which uses the whole phrase in saying:

"On Feb. 16, 2009 the switch will flip, and TV's conversion from an analog to a digital signal will usher in a brave new consumer-centric media world."

We're committed to having this phrase be part of the new media lexicon - so thanks to Mark and iMedia for helping us out.

THE BEST THING IN TRAVEL SINCE . . . HONEY ROASTED PEANUTS?!

So I know I'm a bit late in the game to comment on the fact that (partial) Internet access is quickly becoming a reality in the not-so-friendly skies, but it's really worth spending a few minutes riffing on because it is probably now the one and only thing to look forward to -- what with all the s**t we have to deal with from the airlines -- checked bag fees, no pillows or blankets, higher fares, less flights, longer lines, more connections, longer delays . . . shall I keep going?!

Yeah, yeah - I know there's those of you out there that are going to complain about the price for this in-flight Internet access, but I for one will be glad to pay it -- in part because when I'm traveling for business on American Airlines (not by choice - my company makes us use them -- and for once they did something right!) I'll just pass the cost on to my employer, who'll be grateful that I used what little down time I used to have while in the sky to get even more work done.

For those of you who haven't seen it yet, here's a commercial put together by the company (GoGo Inflight) that behind the Internet service on American - as well as on Virgin America and Delta Airlines.

And do yourself a favor -- sign up for an account with GoGo before you take your first flight -- that'll save you a few more minutes so that you can eek out that last snarky email.

What's that you say -- not another new media blog?!

Well - no need to worry. We're not gonna try and be all that and a bag of chips (we'll leave that to the really smart bloggers). Instead the plan is to put together for you, our soon-to-be loyal audience, a treasure trove of tasty snippets from the new media blogosphere and add our own toppings.

Our main goal here is to try and capture the essence of what is happening in our society to help create and define this Brave New (Media) World that we live in - and we welcome your thoughts and comments.

Now let's all enjoy the ride together!!