Michael Arrington’s should Read before He Writes
I am a huge fan of the work Michael Arrington is doing at TechCrunch.com. He is documenting the rapid evolution of the technology and start-up space, and doing it well. I have no problem with the process he uses to determine which companies to cover, and I do appreciate his talents as a filter. I know I wouldn’t want to read a watered down site that mentioned the 20 or 30 new companies that launch every day, because if I did I would just read a press release aggregator.
My Problem with TechCrunch is that it often feels like Michael and his writers are only spending 10-20min reviewing a website and spouting uninformed opinions. If the point of filtering content is to deliver only quality postings, then he should do his homework and understand the companies he covers before writing praise or criticism.
Today Michael wrote about Tinbag and completely trashed it, saying “This is a model that flat out failed at Google” and “Normally we’d pass on writing about a startup like Tinbag, but I want to point out that if Google failed at a business model after 4 years of trying, there’s a good chance you’ll fail with a look alike service, too.”
I checked out Tinbag’s site and discovered a very different business than Google’s failed model. Google and Yahoo approached the Q&A market like they do the web, as a central depository of information. They see it as one big forum of answers. The Tinbag model however, allows “experts” to create mini e-commerce sites and charge for support. The site isn’t trying to help you find answers to single questions (heck from what I can see it doesn’t even let you pay by the answer – instead you have to buy a monthly pass), rather it’s trying to help consultants and experts formalize a way to charge for support they already give and monetize their time.
I am not saying I love what Tinbag is doing, but I do think it’s different enough from the other stuff that’s been tried to at least warrant that the Techcrunch team read and visit the website before writing such a scathing review.
Entry filed under: Start-up.