Most returns on VC are negative, almost all are below-market versus standard investments.
EDIT: On the other hand, it's questionable the degree to which the market valuations of regular investments are being pumped up by our capitalism-and-bailouts-induced capital glut.
The social craze was clear with Groupon's blunders and Facebook's IPO. That there is a crash coming should have been--and was--clear then.
Ever since then it's only gotten clearer that there's a crash coming, even if those that say "It's soon" were repeatedly proven wrong.
In other words, it is asymptotically becoming "sooner" the more and more it's being proven that "soon" isn't actually that "soon."
(This is, of course, the nature of predicting events that throw up so many signals.)
---
What I mean to say, actually, is that you're asking a pointless question. The signals that indicate "Crash imminent!" have long been fired.
When I say it's "very, very close," did you think I mean it's within a year, or within days?
From a certain way of looking at it, it's at the moment of _least_ certainty how 'soon' an event will occur that the event becomes very, very likely to occur. Because that's when we're the _most_ certain that it's inevitable, but the least certain how it will happen!
---
The answer you probably wanted: Google Reader's collapse makes it devastatingly clear to the tech world that there's a giant gaping opportunity to displace social media. All of it. App.net thinks too small, and the start-up world's programmers--all of them--are sharpening knives.
> the start-up world's programmers--all of them--are sharpening knives.
This is an astute observation—that is what we're all doing. But we've become so comfortable creating and sharpening knives that no one has dared make the cut. We're sharpening knives, sure, but that's all we're doing.
There are big things out there waiting to be built. An integrated social system that actually works, and fits within people's lives in a natural way that Facebook and twitter simply don't. There's room to bring in all of our connected experiences in the same way a great chef creates a seven course meal. Artfully. Human. I don't personally believe software has seen the magnum opus of which it is capable, yet.
I loved this article because it's so right. We're all so spoiled that we haven't been able to build the Great Wonder of the Internet. We're just making stones in a disorganized fashion. I have this feeling of desperation that I can barely explain, but I think that like most people who can just see a glimmer of the wonders we could be building, I am too comfortable where I am to act on it and create something truly grand.
Sharpening knives, creating better knives, sorting our knives, admiring our collection of knives. Someday they'll be used for the great art that is bound to come, because it's possible, and like countless cultures before us, we feel compelled to complete what we know is possible.
Early on in the internet era, much less the social network era. Everything we've done so far has been just mapping out the territory. The actual building on it is yet to come.
And it's ok if you're too comfortable where you are to build it. Others aren't. They'll get it done.
Would you mind elaborating why you think App.net thinks too small, and where the market disruption is indicated by how Google Reader collapsed?
Understand that I primarily stare at a shell most of the day, so I'm not completely savvy on newer startups. Google Reader shutting down just made me check out newsbeuter sooner rather than later :). App.net just seems like a Twitter competitor with longer strings; what do you see?
Google Reader's demise is really strong proof that Larry Page is obsessed with Google Plus to the point of depravity. There are alternatives, but that doesn't distract from the point: _Google_, one of the bright centers of the Internet, is behaving with abject incompetence.
Google just made a huge mistake. It made that mistake because of a huger mistake in trying to compete with Facebook.
People don't like Facebook. The technically illiterate might allow it into their lives, but they have no loyalty to it.
However, Facebook is the center of mass for people's online selves. App.net _is_ just a Twitter competitor with longer strings.
And in a certain sense it only makes sense that the center of this social media nonsense gets shut down.
There'll be a new Facebook soon. Hopefully a better one.
I agree with there being a new Facebook. If you look at Internet companies, after about the 7-8 year mark, they either rebuild, rebrand, and get better...or someone else comes along and makes a better mouse trap.
Although I use Facebook extensively, I do see where someone could come in and make a better one. The only thing is we have never seen something with the tentacles that Facebook & twitter have. Go to almost any page on the Internet and I can guarantee you'll see a "share" button. Did MySpace have that? I mean 1 out of every 12 people on the planet uses Facebook.
I am not tying to pessimistic, and I hope someone will take them off their high horse, but how will a service displace something that has over 1 billion active users? Maybe that just adds to the point that it is past their prime. Humans like the latest, greatest, shiniest this and that...so maybe everyone is ready to move on.
Hopefully multiple services will displace Facebook. Facebook's 1 billion+ users use Facebook in so many different ways. I don't want to share a service with the "friends" who simply want to send me game invitations, show me the dinner they just cooked. . .or fight in public.
Why do you think this? What are the signals you're seeing?