It's a marketing failure to not capitalize on such an opportunity.
Geez, we're supposed to think less of the guy for not milking his controversial history with Zuckerburg for cash? If there's ever a right time to refrain from marketing yourself, it's when you're accusing someone else of being an opportunistic sociopath.
This is such a big topic of discussion here because sections of the HN audience are self-styled entrepreneurs that are unable to see past the fact he's sacrificing sales (or ad impressions (whatever)).
And this is not the first time [1], either. I feel it's unethical to not disclose in the article that he's affiliated with the services he's advertising.
I don't see his online marketing savvy reflecting on the way he chose to promote his own skills in the market.
Especially that he's saying "In this case the product is me, Matthew Epstein.". You're calling yourself a _product_ and yet you don't market that product remarkably, IMO.
Best of luck anyway, hope you'll get a good offer out of this.
He is being used as a tool to do their marketing for free.
I don't know about you, but I find it extremely tacky to use friendships to sell stuff (and he is selling your time and attention to that company for an invite) even if it doesn't involve money directly.
And that causes me to lower my opinion of both him and (especially) the company. Use sleazily marketing => you are a sleazy company.
Seriously, this level of attention doesn't seem to be rational anymore.
The guy is trying to build a business that creates jobs, and hes putting some of his own capital on the line to do it. Thats the most important point here - he's making jobs.
The guy isnt selling blood diamonds or anything, at worst he's gaming a search engine. Sure, he's using some wikipedia content to run some tests. But, haven't the same people on here also run tests on their businesses - maybe incomplete features, bugs, overselling, trying to keep up. Thats all part of building something from nothing.
Give him a break - he's trying to create more jobs, but hes from a position where doesn't have to bother.
I don't believe one must label every self-promoter a sociopath. And Aaron's post is foremostly a promotion for his self-published 2008 book, Authoritas, whose sales are currently lagging (http://www.amazon.com/Authoritas-Students-Admissions-Foundin...)
I agree. Was it clever? Yes. Would I at least check the website? Yes, I'm curious. Would I do business with him? Probably not.
If I control a the marketing resources of a high profile brand (He mentions Pepsico, so I'm assuming the target is other large companies), I'm not sure I want to be associated with a business that pulls stunts like that.
Part of it would be avoiding guilt by association for being unprofessional. I also wouldn't want backlash if Virools methods turn out to be complete sleaze and something crazy like getting all of my Facebook likes or youtube views reset (viral equivalent of being Panda'd?)
If the AdSense was something, as he says on his site, that made him feel uncomfortable about his own website and his self-image, then that suggestion is dumb.
It's a bit like telling someone who's trying to stop being a prostitute: "Keep whoring, donate the proceeds to charity."
I guess there's another lesson here - don't let anyone you don't know do promotional work on your behalf. "Anthony" apparently let someone do some promotional efforts for socialpog thinking "what harm can it do?" and then found out it can do a lot of harm. He probably spent money with for that promotional effort too, which makes this all the more tragic.
Your whole argument about him doing this for promotional purposes hinges on the idea that he gets something out of it (e.g. sales). You have no real reason to believe that he takes a "contrarian" position to "get a rise out of others," other than your implication that he gains by "marketing opportunities."
In fact, your whole argument was a subtle way of saying "He doesn't really believe this, he's just peddling shit in order to make sales." None of which you can support, especially since the implied gain (the sales) doesn't exist.
You have no real reason to believe, much less state publicly, that Thomas is disingenuous in his opinions.
A comment from one of my Facebook friends: "No offense to the guy or his partners, but his whole story is like an advertisement not to invest with his next venture. Maybe the next one down the line."
>This man builds products people like and shares the story of his success for free to build an audience.
Maybe people are getting tired of 90% of social media content being about "building an audience". Everyone is trying to sell us something, all the time.
I think he mitigates that by NOT talking about his product. Just because he has a product doesn't mean he's a marketing dweeb. He probably made such a product as a climber scratching his own itch. If he isn't a climber he shouldn't do this as his posts won't add quality to the groups he joins and people won't pay attention to posters of low-quality advice so it won't work for him anyways.
I disagree. It’s not an ad hominem because I’m not attacking what he does for money, as a side hustle or otherwise, or him as a person. I hope he is successful.
What I am doing is pointing out the hypocrisy in an argument that puts all social media usage into two buckets (with zero nuance), with one of them being about validation, in a post and in a platform where the author is seeking validation himself. The critique is squarely at the argument, not the person.
Stop giving guys like Gurner what they want, which is for people like you to provide free marketing for him based on intentionally inflammatory comments.
It's incredible how people think this is "a rich guy revealing their true colors" as if they don't know what they are doing, which is manipulating you into linking more to him.
Good points and I do agree. I honestly think we're arguing from the same side. One of the points the case study makes is to not overthink and think about "marketing".
To quote the last line of the case study: "He isn't a marketer on Hacker News, he's a Hacker News user on Hacker News."
Geez, we're supposed to think less of the guy for not milking his controversial history with Zuckerburg for cash? If there's ever a right time to refrain from marketing yourself, it's when you're accusing someone else of being an opportunistic sociopath.
reply