No, Klue is a competitive intelligence tool for sellers. You use it to keep track of "battle cards" (i.e. if they are selling a deal vs. 1Password, sales rep would go into Klue to see what the advantages of LastPass are vs that specific competitor).
It's a purpose specific knowledge base, not a data broker or any sort. But it will surely have information of who you sold to or tried to sell to because of it.
Was the AT&T monopoly period of 2007-2011 have substantial social media adoption? Seems to me like the early iPhones were just a very capable phone & texting machinery.
I would have loved to be in the room when this decision was made, but my guess is that they decided that it was better to face some subtle nerd backlash now rather than having this quoted at the start of countless congressional hearings over the next decade.
You're confounding your subjective personal experience with the whole. Google can eat the cake and have it. They already are profitable, they already have scale, they already have market penetration, Google is already installed in 72% of mobile devices, they have cost efficiency due to TPUs, they probably have the best data, at least for serving ads. OpenAI has no chance in outcompeting Google, not in ad-based revenue.
Importantly: OpenAI doesn't need to outcompete Google, it just needs to show it can bleed.
As to the rest of Google's dominant position, it's an advantage for sure, but every leading vendor whose products turned to shit went the way of the dodo one way or another.
And it's important to mention that this includes GAds, not just the loss leader (Search). They have been so good at squeezing advertisers dry that ROI is barely there in many categories.
Who do you think will bleed when they race to enshitify their products? The company where users have lower expecations or the one where they have higher?
Both, but the cat is out of the box with LLMs and Google no longer monopolizes the firehose of consumer purchasing intent even if OpenAI disappears tomorrow. Someone else will come up. I can ask a local LLM that I download for free what's a good lawnmower and it will tell me.
Google is no longer in control and therefore I believe it won't be able to command the crazy premiums it used to squeeze out of advertisers.
Actually I believe Google is the one caught between a rock and a hard place here because their stock will reprice once the market realizes how much their position has weakened re: search ads.
They commanded an absurd premium on ads by virtue of being monopolistic leaders of search. They don't have a better product anymore, only a scale/distribution advantage.
They seem to have been actively making search worse for at least a decade. No surprise they made it worse, that's [seemingly] what they were trying to do.
They presumably were doing it to increase "engagement". More time spent getting infuriated with their worsening search meant more time seeing their ads.
They deserve to go under.
Meanwhile 1 minute unskippable ads on 30s YouTube videos, pop-ups on mobile that cover the video when you close an ad. I hope the UK TV ombudsman grows some balls and starts applying the law on advertising-to-tv-programming ratio. It needs to be applied when programs have ads in them too.
Given how nowadays the payoff of a stock seems to just be from selling it later rather than having any direct correlation to the companies finances, it's all just a Ponzi scheme based on vibes.
> When was the payoff of a stock not from selling it later?
This is such a funny comment, historically you bought stocks to extract profits, ie dividends. Now you make money from houses and stocks by value appreciation instead of rent and dividends, you can see how that leads to very different behaviours and how that is not very stable compared to buying based on rent and dividends.
You mean, other than describing 5 possible approaches to the "bootstrapping a marketplace" problem, including a specific solution that worked in the real world to get to 7 figures GMV for the exact marketplace the OP is describing?
Tell me who you think your customers might be? Or ask ChatGPT what's a good watering hole for them, it will definitely come up with some reasonable guesses.
Was largely asking for all the people looking for specifics, since people were asking, and vague advice isn't very helpful when first starting out with this stuff. Like broadly, I've had luck with Linkedin messages for b2b and SEO for consumer, but mostly after the product is in an ok place. The initial users can be tough to find.
But sure, I'm working on things for parents/students, home buyers, and DIY heat pump installers.
Off the top of my head (don't expect any revelations here, but mostly for people wondering how to approach this type of thing for the first time):
* Parents/students hang out at schools and are probably a good referral/recommendation crowd
* Home buyers are looking for mortgage comparisons on Google (but that's probably a terrible strategy, since this is a highly lucrative segment to market to, so you should expect high customer acquisition costs)
* DIY heat pump installers will probably look at ads on /r/DIYHeatPumps
How about this counter offer? I give you 50% of the revenue for any sale you make for https://seaquel.app. If you tell me we need a lifetime offer, consider it done.
