Isn't this is just like a digital version of golf clubs? Who knows, maybe all you need a critical mass of rich and famous on the platform before others join on board to connect and try to do business.
Then again, golf is kinda fun, even though I suck at it, and I barely use social media anymore, so maybe it's a bad comparison.
One of things that's obvious about the modern social network is that Whatsapp is the model more than facebook . I would even argue with you more so than even Instagram. Whatsapp is the myspace of those tools and Signal and Telegram seem to have different goals. Social networks are going to be smaller and more tightly connected. So I'm completely convinced of that direction. I'm just unsure why if I'm someone with a mailing list 400k people why I'm talking to them and not Patreon? Why am I giving you 40% of my revenue? If I was working a Patreon or Twitter in product I would be really interested because (semi-)federated micro networks with interesting content are their business.
Leaving aside the deck and focusing on the business idea, do people really want to have a different social network (column) for every part of their life? And every influencer they follow? A paid social network option might be nice to avoid advertising but paying a subscription to every ‘column’ I want to follow seems a stretch. FWIW I avoid almost all social media, but know plenty of people who can’t live without their InstaFaceTwitReddit fix a few times each day and can’t imagine them paying for the privilege.
I have upwards of nine chat apps installed. Most adults I know use WhatsApp. My friends from out in China use WeChat. Line for friends in parts of Asia, slack, discord, Quassel (IRC), etc.
In each of these services I have distinct and separate peer groups. The topic is clear, the group is attractive to join, and the desire to remain connected keeps things civil. This is my current situation and likely to be the future for me. It certainly is quieter and more relevant than just about any other type of social interaction.
A true pioneer of our time. Out of millions of web developers who had been building websites for decades beforehand, not one of them had thought to create a button which allowed users to express their appreciation for a particular piece of content in such a succinct way. What an amazing invention.
What’s the point of slides with very small fonts? What’s the point of aesthetically pleasant slides when the UI it’s a drawing and looks horrible? But most importantly, what’s the point of this product? Quite simply, it will never work.
Actually, I think there is something there in selling out your contact lists explicitly rather than just having social media hoover them on each new signup.
It is a perfect case study in how product ideas can veer in completely opposite directions. On the surface, they both target "awesome celebs" who are accomplished and have a big presence. The core idea is a social network that strips away cruft and is more useful/impactful for famous people.
Ok, let's go through it.
First, the audience. Column doubles down on signing (or anticipates signing) the most influential people with big ideas about saving the world. People who sound impressive. Get 'em all in a room and Davos it up! Community focuses on a key metric, people who have a large following of devoted fans. They narrowed it further for launch, specifically focusing on popular musicians. The difference is in why. Column wants to sound impressive to VCs and to celebs themselves. Let's congratulate ourselves! Community focuses solely on the key metric that their product hinges on. It doesn't need explanation or reasoning, it is straightforward and intrinsic.
As for the product, what is it and why is useful to famous people? Column... well, here's the impressive team. You can mark comments as "truth" or "false" which is more impactful than "like". And most importantly you can chat with other awesome people and feel awesome. Everyone will give you money, not sure why. And maybe there will be a search engine someday where you can Google how to fix climate change which would be cool. Community's product is as simple as possible: direct text messaging between fans and celebs. Why bother even having an app? Community enhances the connection and gets the hell out of the way.
Ok, give me a use case. Why are famous people going to use it? They are super busy, you know.
Column's solution? Everybody has SOME down time. Hey, why not use our app while taking a shit? You can solve climate change with Thiel while waiting for your limo or taking a dump. Community's approach? Celebs control the dialog AND they control the audience. Their magic is in selective controls: Text only the fans in Toledo and let them know about a new concert date or pass them a secret coupon. Or ask everyone in Boston where you should go get a burrito. That gives celebs real marketing power AND provides individual and personal value. And fans are interested because hey, they might get to tell Beyonce where to stop for a burrito while she is in a car to get one. Real connections, real value. Community is an idea that improves the relationship for everyone involved and gets out of the way as much as possible. Column is grasping for reasons to exist and it shows.
Then again, golf is kinda fun, even though I suck at it, and I barely use social media anymore, so maybe it's a bad comparison.