http://deals.venturebeat.com/2007/01/22/kiptronic-raises-4m-for-podcast-ad-insertion-a-better-podbridge/ News About Tech, Money and Innovation Sun, 22 Nov 2009 19:46:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 http://deals.venturebeat.com/2007/01/22/kiptronic-raises-4m-for-podcast-ad-insertion-a-better-podbridge/comment-page-1/#comment-14967 Venture Midwest » Kneading 2.0 Dough… Mon, 22 Jan 2007 21:44:23 +0000 http://www.venturebeat.com/wire/2007/01/22/kiptronic-raises-4m-for-podcast-ad-insertion-a-better-podbridge/#comment-14967 [...] Lesen Sie dieses jetzt! I apologize to disgruntled readers searching for baking advice…Unless you are forming an online bakery start-up, this post is of no interest. A primary criticism of 2.0 companies surrounds the abundance of faulty business models focusing on free software and services. Elusive online advertising remains a proclaimed revenue generator for many capital seeking companies, but I struggle to justifying large investments in start-ups with advertisment- only revenue models. Can investors expect exborbitant returns on $15 Million online video investment? Not unless my good friend’s Time and Chance recommended involvement within infrastructure building companies such as MySpace and YouTube. Some investors and analysts link dismissal returns to SOX restrictions, dwindling IPO market, or debilitating Michael Arrington posts. However, the lack of Web 2.0 user fees and products deserve equal consideration - revenue is not usually synonymous with free. The aforementioned Arrington’s post on SmugMug illustrates the astonishing link existing between sales and revenue. SmugMug - a photo sharing site - utilizes typical Web 2.0 user- oriented elements like file sharing, community experience, tags. But unlike other companies, use of SmugMug is attached to varying users fees. The result: no institutional funding, 19 employees, and a reported $10 Million 2006 revenue from 100,000 users. While 100K is diminutive compared to YouTube traffic, 100K mutliplied by a minimum $40 annual fee is far more impressive than YouTube’s Million x Zero. Despite publicity of a revenue generating 2.0 start-up, the advertising bug is still crawling evidenced by the funding of ad-insertion start-up Kiptronic and Brazilian-based blogger tool, booBox. [...] [...] Lesen Sie dieses jetzt! I apologize to disgruntled readers searching for baking advice…Unless you are forming an online bakery start-up, this post is of no interest. A primary criticism of 2.0 companies surrounds the abundance of faulty business models focusing on free software and services. Elusive online advertising remains a proclaimed revenue generator for many capital seeking companies, but I struggle to justifying large investments in start-ups with advertisment- only revenue models. Can investors expect exborbitant returns on $15 Million online video investment? Not unless my good friend’s Time and Chance recommended involvement within infrastructure building companies such as MySpace and YouTube. Some investors and analysts link dismissal returns to SOX restrictions, dwindling IPO market, or debilitating Michael Arrington posts. However, the lack of Web 2.0 user fees and products deserve equal consideration – revenue is not usually synonymous with free. The aforementioned Arrington’s post on SmugMug illustrates the astonishing link existing between sales and revenue. SmugMug – a photo sharing site – utilizes typical Web 2.0 user- oriented elements like file sharing, community experience, tags. But unlike other companies, use of SmugMug is attached to varying users fees. The result: no institutional funding, 19 employees, and a reported $10 Million 2006 revenue from 100,000 users. While 100K is diminutive compared to YouTube traffic, 100K mutliplied by a minimum $40 annual fee is far more impressive than YouTube’s Million x Zero. Despite publicity of a revenue generating 2.0 start-up, the advertising bug is still crawling evidenced by the funding of ad-insertion start-up Kiptronic and Brazilian-based blogger tool, booBox. [...]

]]>