Gary Rivlin, of the New York Times, has just written the best overview yet of the terrific bungle of social networking company, Friendster.
Jonathan Abrams, founder of Friendster, had a great initial vision, and sparked the social networking revolution by allowing friends to hook up with others. The company had an amazing lead, and potential.
But when he took money from high-profile venture capitalists, he paid a high price: These mostly “50-year-old white guys” had their own ideas about how to run the company, and they got more heavy-handed when they realized how much Abrams was “over his head.” In short, everyone was a fault, and it is a great lesson for entrepreneurs.
Here is the tragedy: Had one coherent vision won out, either Abrams’ initial vision for the more “closed” version limiting people to communicate with profiles of their friends, or the more open model adopted by MySpace, the company may have succeeded. Had it forcefully implemented the “closed” version, with conviction, it would have learned, like Facebook did, that gradual opening to others made sense. It could have evolved as it learned. Instead, it seems, the company was mired in indecision. Each executive change (happening every six months to a year) meant a new strategy, a change of course. And once Abrams was out — however arrogant he may have been — so was Friendster’s soul.
Aside from caution, the story also offers hope: If you’ve got a good idea and vision, you can succeed against a seeming formidable competitor that has all the money and best minds at its disposable.
7 Comments
-
Abigail Johnson said:
Matt, I found Gary’s article very interesting and well written — and always an opportunity to learn. But I fear that such pieces can have a chilling effect on entrepreneurism. I can’t comment on Friendster; but do think that entrepreneurs who try — and often don’t succeed grandly (unlike the oft told stories of Google, MySpace, YouTube, etc) should be encouraged, not disparaged. I’ve watched a lot of start ups and when it’s hard it take courage and dint of will that often gets overlooked. I actually think these kinds of entrepreneurs are titans; it’s because of them along with the more heralded stories that progress happens.
-
Steve Poland said:
Last month I wrote about who I think would be the perfect acquirer of Friendster — IAC (which owns Evite, among many other recognized web brands). IAC lacks a social networking website in their portfolio and this acquisition would make so much sense for Friendster (breathe new life into them and expose the company’s service to millions of daily users if integrated — or splashed — on IAC’s other property sites). As for IAC, it would allow them to create a user community around all of their properties. In my opinion, they take a chapter out of the pages of what MyBlogLog is doing and build out Friendster to become a distributed social networking website that any website could easily integrate, allowing any website to tap into Friendster’s userbase and easily create a community amongst their visitors.
-
Brian McConnell said:
The moral of the story is that a bad investor, no matter how big of a name they have, can ruin a company. I had to walk away from a deal in late summer that, while it would have solved our short-term cash needs, would have saddled us with an investor who would not have been a good fit for the company. I decided it was better to risk the business than deal with a backseat driver for years. It’s painful to say no to cash when you need it, but sometimes you have to do it.
I can understand why Abrams did what he did. Nobody predicted Myspace etc would happen so quickly, and he probably had a lot of reasons for thinking he’d need capital to ride things out for a few years, and that VCs would help him get to where he wanted to go.
-
Matt Marshall said:
Abigail,
I agree. I hope this is not taken to be disparagement. It is a piece that all should entrepreneurs should read, and take to heart.
-
Brooke Pilley said:
This was a wonderful insight into the negative side of VC and the repercussions of giving up control of your original vision.
As the sole-proprietor of a new web startup, I’m actually inspired by this article. I’m not working with a huge budget and I feel that it will help me keep focus, keep costs down, and keep innovating. Aside from marketing, I don’t see how an injection of millions of dollars into my startup will actually help me, and this article just proves it.
the irony of course is that VentureBeat aggregates into my RSS feed every day! :p
Thanks for sharing it with us!
-
Brooke Pilley said:
(wishes there was an edit function)
PS. I realize there is a wealth of expertise to be gained from VC assistance, but if the new board have a different vision from you (the creator) and steer your product in a new way, it won’t always work out for the best.
I guess the lesson is that the business owner should be as picky as the VC when choosing who the “marry,” so to speak.
-
DV Henkel-Wallace said:
Abigail,
Don’t forget that at least one of your examples, Google, was floundering until the VCs brought in a grownup. So it isn’t always clear-cut.
Plus there’s survivorship bias in that (or any) list of companies. I’ve generally seen it go both ways, and often it’s the companies in which the founders don’t want to let go that have problems.
Note that I’m _not_ a VC so this isn’t any sort of self-serving comment.
2 Trackbacks
8:23 pm
webvapors » The Moral of Frienster said:
[...] Nevertheless, it was a really good read and it will be interesting to see if Friendster can rise again. More on this here, here and here. These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages. [...]
9:28 am
The woeful story of Friendster, and lessons « Slice of Carnet said:
[...] The woeful story of Friendster, and lessons: “ [...]