<![CDATA[Gawker: valleywag, stumbleupon]]> http://tags.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/gawker.com.png <![CDATA[Gawker: valleywag, stumbleupon]]> http://gawker.com/tag/valleywag/stumbleupon http://gawker.com/tag/valleywag/stumbleupon <![CDATA[How eBay Can Have $3 Billion in the Bank and Still Be Broke]]> Look at eBay's books and it wouldn't seem to have money problems. But it's running a garage, unloading would-be Digg competitor StumbleUpon, and hopes to sell Internet phone service Skype. Why?

The company ought to be swimming in cash from taking a cut of every auction it runs, right? Nope, according to the New York Times:

eBay had $3.19 billion in cash at the end of last year, but $2.8 billion of that money is overseas and would be subject to repatriation taxes if the company were to invest it in its ailing United States e-commerce marketplace, according to analysts.

Luckily, it's found some eager buyers: The founders of the startups it enriched through purchases. Garrett Camp and Geoff Smith (right) have just bought back StumbleUpon, a social-news startup it bought for $75 million two years ago, with the help of some venture capitalists. Janus Friis and Niklas Zennström, the founders of Skype, are hoping to buy Skype for considerably less than the $3.1 billion price eBay paid for the company in 2005.

$390 million in the kitty isn't exactly bankrupt. But it's hardly enough to fund eBay's efforts to fix its U.S. marketplace and efforts to expand into consumer credit with Bill Me Later, an online-lending startup it bought last year.

Silicon Valley venture capitalists and entrepreneurs like to think they're putting their resources behind innovation. But what are they doing here? Funding middle America's shopping habits.

(Photo of Zennstrom and Friis via Joost)

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5210518&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[How to get traffic with StumbleUpon]]> StumbleUpon-logo.jpgThe traffic boost from Digg-front-page glory only lasts a few hours. Getting an article picked up by eBay's StumbleUpon, however, can drive sweet, sweet traffic for weeks and months. So search-engine optimization expert Dharmesh Shah and social media marketer Lyndon Antcliff's "28 Tips to Make You a StumbleUpon Superstar" would be worth reading, if it weren't 1,400 words long. Here's a version you can read in less time than it takes for fanatical Digg users to bury your story.

  • (1-7) Your Avatar: have one. Use high contrast colours. Use a photo designed to be an avatar. Don't offend unnecessarily. Pay a graphic designer.
  • (8-14) Stumbleupon allows only 200 friends. Make sure each friends you back. Make sure they are active stumblers. Say get lost to your pal sending you spam. People know what you stumble and you will be judged. Some stumblers are more powerful than others, get them to friend you, submit your stuff.
  • (15-21)There is a specific culture on SU. Looking at those who stumble the hot stuff in your sector. Create similar content. People stumble ideas. Attract people into conversation. Stumble other people's stuff at least 5 times more than your own. Popurls.com can do a lot of the work for you. If it's hot on Digg it could be hot on SU.
  • (22-28)Be polite. Accept criticism. Do not submit front pages of e-commerce sites. See it as a mini blog.
]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=384873&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[How StumbleUpon's Garrett Camp rolls]]> A tipster — tipsy? — shares this information about StumbleUpon founder and The 250 member in good standing Garrett Camp: "If you meet Camp, get his business card. Get several, if you can." Whatever for? "The cards are prized in certain SoMa circles, but not for the information printed on the front: They're ideal for rolling roaches. True, any unlaminated card can suffice, but apparently the cardboard in Camp's cards is the 'perfect consistency' for joints." If you find yourself in immediate need, Camp's office is directly above the 111 Minna art gallery in San Francisco. Smoke 'em if you've got 'em. (Photo via Technology Review)

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=371670&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Forget news — Digg users in it for Lohan's latest nipple slip]]> DiggStumbleUponDownStream.jpgAs far as Digg users are concerned, Ron Paul, Steve Jobs and slobbering dogs have nothing on Britney's latest baby. Digg and StumbleUpon users click most on stories related to celebrity gossip, videogames, and online clips, according to clickstream data from metrics firm Hitwise. Digg accounts for half of all visits to to news aggregators. eBay's StumbleUpon comes in second with 24 percent of the market. Conde Nast-owned Reddit takes third place.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=363767&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[StumbleUpon trips over itself]]> Blogger Muhammad Saleem noticed that Stumbleupon has been down for over an hour. You can reach Stumbleupon.com, but if you click the "stumble" button on the service's downloadable toolbar, nothing happens. We would blame this on growing pains, but the company was bought by eBay earlier this year. Anyone else having trouble? Let us know.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=319152&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Website uncovers 73 most beautiful people on the Internet]]> Forget People. You want the 50 most beautiful people on the Internet? We'll give you 73. Start with, um, a guy (girl?) named Starspirit. Gorgeous. You too, Bunty. (Don't think we're forgetting you either, Spocko). Where'd we find them?

On StumbleRank, which ranks StumbleUpon's top users. You know, the people who can singlehandedly drive massive amounts of traffic to a blog?

Digg used to have a similar list of top users, but it took it down after some, desperate for traffic, tried influence the top users with cash and flattery. Some of Digg's top users even took the bait. A disgusting practice, truly. One which we know these fine 73 would never sink to. They are each and all a beautiful human and a credit to their race. Starspirit, and all your kin, know that we cherish you.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=317747&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[What to use instead of Evite (and five other popular but terrible websites)]]> Oh god, Evite. It starts with an email about a party with no information about that party, and then it gets worse. But in many cases there's no reason you have to use the most popular site. Here's what to use instead of Evite, YouTube, Blogger, Twitter, Digg, and MapQuest.


Evite: Use Socializr or MyPunchbowl
The main problem with Evite is the uninformative email. "You are invited to Heather's Divorce Party," says Evite, with a personal message from the host but no actual information. To make a decision as a guest, I have to click over to Evite; that cramps my style if I'm trying to be at all productive with my inbox. Plus it's a pain when I'm en route to the party and need to double-check the address. If only I could just check my email on my phone, but no, all the info is trapped in Evite! The "send it to my phone" option is silly, as I probably won't remember to do that until I'm already away from my computer.

The site is also annoying to use: I can only export the event to iCal, RSVPing takes me to a useless page instead of back to the event, and the site is full of ads and unrelated links. Evite is the MySpace of invitations.

That's almost all fixed with Socializr and MyPunchbowl. Socializr sends a complete email with party time, location and information:

nick-socializr-party-test.jpg

But the event page only lets guests export info to Outlook, not iCal, Google Calendar, or Yahoo Calendar. MyPunchbowl allows all of that, but although it leaves guests a pretty informative email, it leaves out the event location. (It's also cluttered with more "features" than I care about.) Because of that, I'm using Socializr for my next party.

YouTube: Use Vimeo
Seriously, why put anything on YouTube when Vimeo exists? Of all the alternative video sites — Veoh, Blip.tv, Revver — Vimeo is the best option for the average video maker (people with professional shows should also consider Blip.tv or VideoEgg). Here are YouTube's failures and how Vimeo beats them:

  • Crap video quality: Remember the '90s, when online video was tiny and grainy? And then connections got faster and video was decently pretty again? And then YouTube made it all grainy again, with dissonant sound? Vimeo has better video quality, especially in its new HD format, which has 12 times the resolution of YouTube. (Those with pre-Intel Macs will have to watch the non-HD versions.) Viewers can also download the original video file.
  • Ugly site: And ugly embeds. Not with Vimeo, which has a freshly updated embedded-video style that matches its slick, uncluttered web site.
  • Horrible commenters: YouTube comments are spam and illiterate evaluations: "dis sux" or "lol." The video creator can either take hours to pick through all of them deleting bad comments, or ban comments altogether. Vimeo comments are not only readable, they're nearly all encouraging. Is the fantastic community only there because the site's so small? Who cares, it's not going to explode any time soon. It'll just steal the best creative users from YouTube.

An example of Vimeo's beauty:

Blogger: Use WordPress.com, Vox, or Tumblr
In its first few years, Blogger rocked; then like most Google acquisitions, it languished, until now it's a hive of spam blogs. Blogger isn't particularly heinous to use, it's just quite limiting. Now there are plenty of friendly blog interfaces for those of us who just want a simple blog with no mucking about in HTML.

WordPress.com is the most flexible, useful for people who want the power of WordPress without installing the whole thing on a server, or whatever people do to make their own WordPress blog (I've had a few, but I always needed someone else to set them up). There's room for HTML and custom CSS and stuff, so you can upgrade it. I Can Has Cheezburger is built on WordPress.com.

Vox is the new Blogger, as far as simplicity and friendliness. Pretty much no learning curve. It's designed to be the blog your mom can use. Lots of Vox blogs are happy and sunny; this one is also Warm 'n Fuzzy.

My favorite is Tumblr (which powers my personal site). This one's less about "dear diary" blogging and more "here's some stuff I found." The small input boxes encourage brevity, which is what your blog could use, isn't it?

nick-tumblr-valleywag.jpg

Twitter: Use Pownce
I haven't stopped using Twitter. But I used to use it to ask questions when I needed a whole bunch of ideas ("Anyone know some songs about transvestites?"). Now I use Pownce, which lets people reply within a thread. It's like a comment thread without a blog post at the top, or a quick and easy mini-forum. It's also a more rewarding place to pimp your boring blog posts link to entertaining webpages.

pownce-nick-valleywag.jpg

Digg: Use StumbleUpon
What if you could get Digg-like traffic without suffering the wrath of Digg commenters? Try StumbleUpon, which asks for "reviews" instead of a stream of comments, forcing users to actually think before posting about a site. That gives StumbleUpon the same community advantage Vimeo has over YouTube.

stumble-valleywag.jpg

Get your site "Stumbled" and you could get several thousand pageviews — not always as much as Digg, but without the "this sucks u suck LOOSER" commentary.


MapQuest: Use Google Maps
You already know Google Maps is the best, but apparently most folks still use MapQuest, despite its awkward input forms and such. But, well, those folks aren't you. So I guess we've got a little extra time here before the article runs out. Go spend it at Vimeo.

Nick Douglas writes at Valleywag, Too Much Nick, and Look Shiny. Seriously, Vimeo is like licking chocolate off the Venus de Milo.

]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=312169&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Ram Shriram made a mint, invests in Mint]]> Ram Shriram is No. 271 on the Forbes Billionaires list. He's a veteran of Netscape and Amazon, and an investor in StumbleUpon and Google. He owes his place on the list to the latter, where, as an angel investor, he had more shares than anyone besides the company's founders at the time of its IPO. Now he acts as a "sherpa" to young companies, helping guide them to success. He also participated in financial-planning startup Mint's latest round of financing. Mint CEO Aaron Patzer shares a story about Shriram's investing habits after the jump. If you want this guy as your startup sherpa, take notes.

Ram Shriram actually came in about a month after we closed our round. At the time we only had about $200k open in the round. Unlike most investors (who wait a week, talk to their friends, bring you back for multiple meetings), Ram said "Okay, I'm in" before I was done with the presentation. He then explained that he had no upper limit on what he could invest (good problem to have!), but that his accountants lose track if he doesn't invest at least $500k. So needless to say, we opened the round up a bit.
(Photo courtesy of Ram Shriram)]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=311462&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Game the system]]> We've dissected Time's list of the five worst websites. Now it's your turn to tweak their poll for the best ones to your satisfaction. (Time.com is still using the same weakly protected polling system as the heavily gamed People Who Matter Now poll from Business 2.0.) The kids from Y Combinator, entrepreneur Paul Graham's startup camp, have already admitted to artificially beefing up the votes for Weebly, a Y Combinator-backed startup — but why let them have all the fun? Here are Valleywag's picks on whose ballots to stuff.


  • Weebly: It has a head start, so let's see if we can push them back down!
  • ING Direct: A boring bank, but its fees are low, so vote it up.
  • StumbleUpon: Take pity on the StumbleUpon guys: They just got bought by eBay, so they could use some cheering up.
  • Bix: How meta — voting for Yahoo's online version of the American Idol vote-a-thon. We're betting this one doesn't come back next week.
]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=276893&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[Buzztracking "Wizards of Buzz"]]> In addition to sporting one of the most hilarious illustrations ever to appear in the Wall Street Journal, the "Wizards of Buzz" article trend piece on social media "influencers" really should be the reddest of red-meat linkbait, right? So how's the article doing on the sites it mentions?

Digg - 420 diggs as of this writing. Not bad, but not stellar. Reaction ranges from congratulatory to disappointment and getting interviewed but not quoted.

Reddit - 82 points. Much investigation into the identify of Reddit user "Adam Fuhrer," a supposed 12-year-old from Toronto. More here.

StumbleUpon - 435 stumbles. Little comment.

Del.icio.us - No sign of the WSJ article getting much bookmark love. 287 bookmarks actually.

Newsvine - 31 votes. Discussion is all citizen-journalish, of course.

Netscape - 95 votes. Commentary somehow devolves into a strange internecine squabble. Jason Calacanis present, though uninvolved in squabble.]]>
http://gawker.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=235981&view=rss&microfeed=true