CrunchBase Has A New Mobile Site, Is Bigger Than Ever

CBase_01a_HomePage_1136

We have some updates today from the other side of the TechCrunch office. The growing team at CrunchBase, our free database of tech companies, has a new mobile site available for your browsing pleasure. The site basically didn’t work in mobile before, but the new one is great. Check it out at m.crunchbase.com.

The homepage is mainly a search box for that one hot startup you’re trying to look at, with links for trending companies, news and funding below. The top nav bar reveals a few more options like “newly funded.” When you click on a company, you’ll see a chronological list of all the main info you’d want — general info, people, acquisitions, investments, funding and competitors. If there’s a lot of info in any segment, like a long list of executives, just swipe to scroll through.

Here’s the kicker. This mobile site is temporary. Our growing team of engineers, designers, community managers and analysts (which we need to hire more of —  info here if you’re interested) has a big overhaul coming next year, and it’ll include a fully responsive site for any mobile device. Stay tuned for that.

Since this is iterative news, I also asked the CrunchBase team for some non-vanity stats about how they’re doing so far. Turns out August was its biggest traffic month ever, according to president Matt Kaufman, with 1.7 million monthly uniques, 2.5 million visits, and 6.6 million pageviews. Traffic has been growing well ever since the team got going at the beginning of the year, and with it hitting records this summer, we think it’ll be huge down the road.

Dots Implements Its First-Ever, In-Game, $ponsor$hip

v1.9 - 5 - gravity falling

betaworks-backed Dots has today announced its very first sponsorship/native advertising deal with GE. The terms of the deal were not disclosed.

As part of the sponsorship, Dots is releasing a special update with a new version of gameplay called Gravity Mode.

As it turns out, GE has created an entire week’s worth of science-related “holidays” (kind of like National Dance Day, or any other branded holiday). They’re calling it Brilliant Week, and the Dots sponsorship is meant to help promote Gravity Day, on September 8. (FYI, they chose 9/8 because 9.8m/s is the force of gravitational acceleration.)

According to co-founder Paul Murphy, Dots has passed up about half a dozen sponsorship opportunities before this one.

“We’ve politely (and graciously) filtered those out to narrow it down to brands like GE that enabled us to build functionality that’s accretive to Dots for players, said Murphy. “The player experience is and will always remain our focus.”

Murphy claims that there are between 25 million and 30 million Dots games played each day. The game is also available across multiple platforms including Android, iPhone, and iPad.

“We think that’s a pretty special opportunity for the right brand, assuming it aligns with Dots,” said Murphy. “For us, as long as we can create something with brands like GE that adds to the experience for our players, we think it’s important to experiment and learn as we grow.”

But is it too early? Dots was only launched in May, a few months ago, and has yet to add any sort of native advertising to the platform. The game continues to iterate over time, with things like Zen mode and multiplayer, but this is the first time that a brand is behind it. Will this scare off power users with an aversion to advertising or will they even notice?

More importantly, how does Gravity Mode Shuffler work?

Well, it’s a bit like Zen Mode in that there’s no time limits; you’re simply trying to connect as many dots into squares as possible.

However, if you get stuck, you have the option to press the Gravity Mode Shuffler button, which automatically shuffles and removes certain dots based on gravity and the angle of the phone. Clever, right?

As you progress, you level up which unlocks level cards. Each of these level cards wins you Dots which are stored permanently in your Dots bank, even after Gravity Mode is long gone. Gravity Mode Shuffler will be available all week.

This is hardly the first time we’ve seen mobile games partner with brands to deliver sponsored products. Remember Angry Birds Rio, Rovio’s first foray into animated content? The game matched up with a movie from 20th Century Fox, which inevitably opened up Rovio to a huge Angry Birds franchise, including animated shorts and merchandise.

Hasbro also took a majority stake in BackFlip studios to create Hasbro branded games, and Kabam has a strategic partnership with Warner Bros to create games around various films, like Lord of the Rings and Fast and the Furious.

However, unlike Rovio and Kabam, Dots isn’t necessarily pumping GE-branded content into the game. Instead, GE funded the development of a new form of gameplay with nary a mention of the brand itself within the game. It’s an interesting take on gaming sponsorships, but it’s still questionable how effective this is for the brand itself.

This Week On The TC Gadgets Podcast: Disrupt <3?s Hardware, Nokia Goes To The Mall, And Galaxy Gear

gadgets130906

TechCrunch Disrupt starts on Monday, so that’s on all our minds for this week’s TC Gadgets Podcast. Hardware Alley showcases gadget startups on September 11, and if you’re still looking for hardware fixes there have been plenty this week, including Microsoft acquiring Nokia’s devices wing, and Samsung’s new Galaxy Gear smartwatch.

We talk about all these things, as well as the Galaxy Note 3 smartphone from Samsung and everyone’s suitably impressed with California, including Matt Burns, Jordan Crook, Chris Velazco, Romain Dillet and myself, Darrell Etherington.

We invite you to enjoy our weekly podcasts every Friday at 3pm Eastern and noon Pacific. And feel free to check out the TechCrunch Gadgets Flipboard magazine right here, as well as the TechCrunch Droidcast.

Click here to download an MP3 of this show.
You can subscribe to the show via RSS.
Subscribe in iTunes

Intro Music by Rick Barr.

Cory Booker Is Stepping Down From Waywire’s Board As The Company Seeks A New CEO

Cory_Booker_Twitter

Newark mayor and Senate candidate Cory Booker is announcing today that he will be stepping down from the board of the company that he founded last year, according to a source familiar with the campaign’s plans. The departure leaves just one of Waywire’s three co-founders at the company, which is still in private beta and in search of a new CEO.

The decision to step down from the Waywire board was widely expected, as some political opponents questioned Booker’s continued involvement in the startup. Booker had previously said he would step down from Waywire’s board if elected, but this accelerates those plans as he moves ahead with his political campaign. Along with his departure from the board, Booker will be donating his shares in the company to charity.

Booker’s decision comes at a difficult time for Waywire, which has yet to publicly launch its product. The announcement comes on the heels of Waywire co-founder and CEO Nathan Richardson leaving the company last month. Richardson, who had previously held executive positions at Content Next Media and Gilt Groupe, joined TechCrunch parent company AOL, where he will be leading the soon-to-be-launched AOL Live video channel.

According to a Waywire spokesperson, the company is very close to bringing on a new CEO who will likely be announced in the coming weeks. That’s good news, especially as the company is in the midst of a pivot from content creation to a platform for video curation. In the meantime, co-founder Sarah Ross has been running day-to-day operations.

Other good news for Waywire: the company has secured an extension of its seed round from four new investors, although it’s not yet ready to announce how much was raised or who participated. (Those details will probably come out at the same time that it announces the new CEO.) The company had originally raised $1.75 million from First Round Capital, Eric Schmidt’s Innovation Endeavors, Lady Gaga’s manager Troy Carter, and other angels.

All that said, Waywire has its work cut out for it, as it’s still in private beta 18 months after Booker, Richardson, and Ross founded the company together. That’s partly the result of a change in strategy at Waywire. Originally, the company had hoped to challenge traditional media outlets by creating and distributing its own videos and those of its users. But it’s pivoted to become more of a platform for collecting and curating videos from multiple sources.

We’ll see how Waywire fares when it’s ready to launch its product. With a new CEO and new funding, and without the questions about Booker’s involvement, that should happen in the coming months.

Online Travel Marketplace Vacatia Raises $5M To Simplify Buying And Selling Timeshares

vacatia

With Airbnb, HomeAway, Roomorama and plenty of others, there’s no shortage of vacation rental platforms for travelers to browse. Add to the list Vacatia, a secondary marketplace aimed at timeshare owners who want to sell their fractional interests to other travelers. The startup has raised $5 million in seed funding from investors, including Spencer Rascoff, CEO of Zillow; Erik Blachford, former CEO of Expedia; Greg Waldorf, Trulia board member; Thomas Byrne, former president of LoopNet and more.

The idea behind Vacatia is to provide an active, open and liquid marketplace for professionally managed resort rentals, CEO and founder Keith Cox tells me. While buying timeshares from developers is no problem for most people, owners who want to sell often have a hard time finding buyers, Cox says.

“If we could create a very strong platform where buyers and sellers could engage each other and make for a liquid marketplace … then if we can activate that secondary market, it would bring more equilibrium and efficiency to that market,” he tells me.

To list a property online, Vacatia users create a free account, upload information about the shares they are selling and publish the listing at the price they want. Vacatia will then add information about the resort to further simplify the listing process. Users can also elevate their listings by submitting additional information for Vacatia’s verification process.

Once a buyer and seller are connected, a seller can either accept, counter or reject a buyer’s offer. If the seller accepts, both parties are introduced to a title company to take then through the escrow and closing process. Vacatia then takes a cut of the profits from the seller based on the sale amount (if the timeshare sold for $10,000, Vacatia would take $1,000).

There are several other platforms for listing and selling timeshares, including Ebay, Redweek and Sellmytimesharenow.com. But Cox tells me Vacatia wants to differentiate itself by maintaining a free and open marketplace for all sellers, buyers, brokers and developers. Vacatia has implemented a preferred broker program, which discounts its sales fees by half for participating brokers.

Right now Vacatia only allows resale listings, but Cox says he wants to expand into listings from primary developers and homeowners associations so users can buy directly from developers.

Additional investors include Robert Spottswood, Raymond L. Gellein, Jr., Barry Sternlicht, Steve Hankin, Egon Durban, Douglas Dillard, Jr., Gene Frantz and firms Maveron, Bee Partners, Peterson Ventures and Meyer Ventures.

The Death Of Nintendo Has Been Greatly Under-Exaggerated

supermariobrosgameover

I love Nintendo. I love Nintendo. I love Nintendo.

I feel the need to say that over and over again to begin with because this post will inevitably be read by some as some sort of anti-Nintendo screed. I know that because every single time I write anything mildly critical of Nintendo, groups of folks reveal themselves that make Android and iPhone diehards look like placid hippies. Those people are really going to hate this post.

But it needs to be written. Both because I do love Nintendo and because if they don’t change course — and fast — I’m ultimately going to be proven right. I wasted so much breath blowing on Nintendo cartridges as a kid, so now it’s time to waste some breath trying to jolt them out of the death spiral they now find themselves in.

And make no mistake, they are in the beginning of a death spiral.

“Nintendo is fine!” “They’re profitable!” The rhetoric out of the Nintendo apologists camp is as worrisome as it is predictable. See: Nokia and BlackBerry (né RIM) as prime recent examples of the problems with this mentality. See any number of companies throughout the history of ever for others. You’re profitable and a healthy business until you’re not. The mistake often made is to think that dramatic shifts in business can’t happen quickly. They can happen very quickly. And Nintendo is in a market that is experiencing such a shift.

As anticipated by some (cough cough), the Wii U is a dud. It’s actually much worse than a dud. As of right now, it’s a colossal failure. Maybe some key holiday releases alleviate the issue. But the fact is that it’s a poor concept accentuated by poor hardware. If Nintendo was smart, they’d write it off right now.

But they won’t. They’ll wait. And wait. And wait. They’ll cite history as their guide that their consoles can take a while to become profitable. But they’ll be wrong this time.

Meanwhile, the Nintendo 2DS will come out and will probably sell quite well at first thanks to a well-timed Pokemon release. But all the 2DS really is is an admission that the 3DS is ultimately a failure.

“But! But! But! Profitable!” Sure, a few years after release. Nintendo isn’t releasing the 2DS just for the hell of it. They realize the metrics that really matter: that the 3DS is tracking roughly 20 percent behind its predecessor in terms of sales. That’s not only not a good trend, it’s a devastating one (after a few early price cuts, to boot). A couple more of those and we have a company on the brink.

“But! Long-term thinking!” The concept of “long-term thinking” is what people always cite when something is failing right now. The issue here is that, again, Nintendo doesn’t actually have a lot of time to fix what ails them. Sure, no one likes the knee-jerk reaction, the quick fix. But sitting around and “waiting it out” is far worse in this case.

“But! But! Cash hoard!” Oh. Right. You know who else has a cash hoard? BlackBerry. It’s doing them a lot of good right now. It will help with their sale price, that’s about it. In other news, Steve Ballmer was sitting on his cash hoard when he was kicked out the door…

The excuses go on. The key here is that Nintendo is on the path of failure for a couple very simple reasons:

  • They have failed to make great products for a number of years now.
  • The market is rapidly changing around them.

It’s hard to say which is worse. I’ll go with number two because I do think Nintendo could weather number one — as they have in the past — for quite a long time.

Nintendo no longer is just competing with the others in their direct space — meaning gaming consoles and handhelds — meaning Sony and Microsoft. They are competing with every single smartphone and tablet currently on the market. And soon, they’ll likely be competing with a number of other set-top boxes as well entering the gaming space.

Nintendo’s greatest weakness is the illusion (bolstered by years of reality) that they have years to figure out their competition and outlast them. They do not. Apple and all the various Android OEMs release new hardware every single year — if not more often. This will ultimately end the successful runs of Sony and Microsoft in the gaming space as well, unless they change course.

For years now, Nintendo’s lone bright-spot has been handhelds. The DS was insanely popular. But the world has changed. Now the DS, the 3DS, and the 2DS are just another device a kid has to carry around (and that parents have to buy). Why do that when your smartphone plays games?

“Because those games suck.” Maybe. But they’re quickly getting better. And they’re far, far, far cheaper (both to make and to buy). And far, far, far more ubiquitous. As Benchmark Capital partner (and longtime video game executive) Mitch Lasky recently noted to Dean Takahashi:

To quote my six year old daughter, barely looking up from her iPad: ‘What’s a Nintendo?’”

There is no question that Nintendo’s strength is in its IP — its games. But that strength is being over-emphasized by those — like me — who grew up playing those amazing Nintendo games. Mario. Link. Donkey Kong. Icarus. Samus. The list goes on and on. But unless those characters are constantly updated in tales on relevant consoles, they will fade. It’s sad, but true. “What’s a Nintendo?”

That’s why we keep hearing the calls for Nintendo to make games for iOS. It’s the OS behind at least three relevant gaming machines: iPhone, iPad, iPod touch (and soon, Apple TV as well?). The immediate reaction from the Nintendo crowd is that this is blasphemy, the equivalent of saying that Apple should license its software to third-parties.

Imagine this possibility: it’s a totally different situation.

As John Gruber wrote recently:

Also, Mathis’s analogy to 1990s Microsoft analysts seems inapt. He’s correct that it was common advice then for Apple to do what Microsoft was doing: license their operating system rather than make their own hardware. Microsoft is the most successful company in the industry, therefore Apple should do what Microsoft does and just license software to commodity hardware makers. But if we applied that line of thinking to Apple analysts giving advice to Nintendo today, would not the advice be for Nintendo to stay the course? Apple is the most successful company in the industry, therefore Nintendo should continue doing what Apple does by making its own hardware and software.

The advice isn’t the same because nothing is the same. It’s a sexy and seemingly straight-forward connection to make, but it’s deceiving. And by the way, Apple didn’t get to where it is today because of the Mac or their Mac OSes. It’s because of the iPod, the iPhone, and iPad.

Which is really the key for Nintendo too. On their current trajectory, I think that Nintendo will end up releasing games on smartphones. But I fear it will be more in the mold of Sega, when it’s already out of the game, so to speak. The only way Nintendo really thrives — and I agree with the Nintendo diehards here — is if they pull off something truly special.

Nintendo needs to make a case for why stand-alone gaming should still exist. I’m not sure this is possible, mind you. But I think this is the only way they exit our current era as a leader, rather than a has-been. The Wii seemed close, but ultimately turned out to be pretty much the definition of a fad. Still, that thinking-outside-the-box allowed them to — albeit briefly — surpass both Sony and Microsoft.

The Wii U is not thinking-outside-the-box. It’s trying to shove their IP into a box. It seems like they took one look at the touch-based landscape and figured they had to make a move. The issue here is that their product is so inferior to the products made by Apple and others that it’s just sort of sad. Nintendo not only swung for the fences with this product, they called their shot beforehand, swung-and-missed, and spun around and fell on their asses. Total disaster.

Nintendo needs to get back to the NES and SNES era. Hell, even N64 would do. They need to lead by being actually ahead in the gaming space, not by pretending they are because of their first-rate IP.

Unfortunately, I’m not sure that’s possible. Again, the competition is no longer just other console makers on their five, six, or seven year cycles. It’s Apple and Samsung with one year — or six month — cycles. It’s a whole new world.

So how does Nintendo compete in that world? I wish I knew. My best advice is to team up with a current tablet/smartphone manufacturer and make the best — and I do mean the best — hardware for gaming. Speed. Buttons. Responsiveness. Definition. Clarity. Etc. Ideally, they’d do this themselves, of course, but I no longer have faith in Nintendo being able to compete in this new era of hardware.

Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t — again, are kids going to carry around two devices? Or, even better, Nintendo needs to come up with something that neither I, nor anyone else reading this, could possibly come up with. The next wave of gaming. Think more: Oculus Rift. (Side note: immediate thought of Virtual Boy — the horror, the horror.)

Or they need to sell to Apple. I still believe Nintendo could thrive as a game studio allowed to run independently under a larger parent — think: Pixar inside of Disney. (Remember that Pixar once thought it had to make hardware too!) If Apple wants software to move hardware, it’s hard to imagine a better buy. And it would allow them to use a nice chunk of their overseas cash hoard to boot!

Yeah, yeah: “Nintendo will never sell.” “Never” has a funny way of morphing into “not yet” in certain situations — see: the point of this post.

All I know is that Nintendo’s current trajectory is one towards failure. The diehards refuse to believe it because they seem to mistake the company’s stubbornness for steadfastness. “Just you wait,” they say. Meanwhile, those diehard Nokia and BlackBerry supporters are still waiting.

Others seem to believe that the company has an Apple-like comeback in them in this new era of gaming. We all forget just how rare such a comeback actually is because we all just watched it happen.

Nintendo isn’t just failing because their hardware is sub-par. They’re failing because they continue to try to re-tool the Model T while the competition is building Ferraris. Meanwhile, those they don’t yet perceieve as competition are building Teslas. And others still are out there building rocketships. All the while, Nintendo is sleeping at night on their pillow of profits dreaming like Mario at the end of Super Mario Brothers 2.

This all adds up to a rude awakening. And — mark my words — it will happen.

The earliest memories I have of any electronics is of my first Nintendo. And that has made watching the company these past few years all the more frustrating. Even more frustrating than blowing on those old NES cartridges.

[image via Kotaku]

Samsung’s Galaxy Gear Is Here And Better Than Expected

gearhandson1

The first time I caught wind of the Galaxy Gear, I laughed heartily. Of course Samsung was trying to make a smartwatch — what haven’t they tried to make over the past few years? It didn’t help that some preliminary reports may have done more harm than good for the Gear’s early reputation. Needless to say, I wasn’t expecting much.

But now, after spending a little time with one on my wrist, I’m convinced. I was wrong… but not entirely.

Credit where credit is due, Samsung knows how to put a gadget together. I was initially wary of the size, mostly because those leaked images from this weekend pointed to a totally gargantuan device that didn’t actually seem fit for human consumption. But, between the plastic wristband and a surprisingly light main body, I could easily imagine myself forgetting I was even wearing a Gear. It’s definitely heavier than my Pebble, but not nearly enough for me to complain about the difference. Rest easy, folks, your wrists will be well-tended to.

Still, the Gear is hardly the sleekest thing you’ll see on store shelves — its aesthetics have more in common with those bulky sports watches than something you’d wear to a nice dinner, a sense of style that only gets reinforced by the built-in pedometer and readily available fitness apps (but more on them later). It’s also worth noting that the camera jutting out of the Gear’s band looks ridiculous on certain colored devices, but it’s just a fashion risk you’re going to have to take if you want to be able to boss your phone around from your wrist.

And that 1.63-inch AMOLED screen is no slouch, either. It’s sufficiently readable under harsh event lighting, and that 300×300 panel is perfectly serviceable. Speaking of serviceable, the 1.9-megapixel camera seemed to work just fine — you snap commemorative shots by tapping the screen — but I wouldn’t hold out much hope for quality once you get them off the Gear.

There’s still the whole battery thing to worry about, too, though. Samsung says people can get about a day’s worth of “regular use” out of the thing, but no one I’ve spoken to has been able to give me a firm idea of what “regular use” actually means, and I spotted at least one dead Gear during that post-event scrum. Hopefully Samsung had the forethought to under-promise and over-deliver on that front or else this font of positivity will dry up real quick.

But, as always, hardware is only a part of the equation. Right now, the Galaxy Gear’s software is simultaneously its biggest liability and its greatest advantage.

For one, it’s sort of difficult to use. Navigating the Gear is all based around swipes and taps, and the units I messed around with didn’t always seem capable of keeping up with my commands. Transitions between pages could be sluggish and jerky unless you made it a point to move really slowly. S Voice too was similarly jerky, though in fairness we were in a crowded room full of gadget nerds clamoring for a turn with the thing. And, perhaps most troubling, the Gear didn’t always fire up that screen when I lifted my arm to peer at it.

I was ready to completely dismiss the Galaxy Gear as a fool’s errand

So yes, Samsung still has plenty of fine-tuning to do, and I’m willing to forgive some pre-release hiccups as long as they get sorted out before launch. So why the praise then? Because Samsung managed to coax more than a few developers into creating simplified versions of their apps for the Gear. There are the usual suspects like RunKeeper (which keeps a running tally of your time, among other things), and more curious fare like Path (which lets you create new moments for your feed instantly) and Vivino (I wish I had a wine bottle around to scan).

Samsung says it’ll have about 70 such apps ready in time for the Gear’s launch, but prolonged developer support is what’s ultimately going to make or break the Gear as a platform. But wouldn’t you know it, there’s a caveat there, too. You can only have 10 apps loaded onto the Gear at any one time, which is much more of a hassle than it seems.

I was ready to completely dismiss the Galaxy Gear as a fool’s errand, a knee-jerk reaction to some persistent rumors made by a company that sometimes seems to have more money than sense. And even now, I’m not completely convinced that Samsung is on the right track. Limiting compatibility to a single device (even one that’s probably going to sell in ridiculous quantities) seems awfully problematic given Samsung’s generally slow record for software updates.

But having said all that, I really think Samsung is onto something here. For the briefest of moments while playing with the Gear, I felt a pang of jealousy. My Pebble is pretty damned basic by smartwatch standards, and I thought what limited functionality it brought to the table was plenty for me. But now I can have a package that does much, much, much more for a negligible increase in weight. How is a strident dork like me supposed to pass that up? I probably can’t.

The bigger question is whether regular people latch onto this thing the way Samsung is hoping it does. For a gadget that, in exchange for $299, lets them accomplish a fraction of what they could if they had just pulled their phones out of their pockets? We’ll see.

Click to view slideshow.

BuzzFeed’s Jonah Peretti Says The Site Is Profitable, With 85M Uniques And 300+ Employees

buzzfeed_logo

BuzzFeed founder and CEO Jonah Peretti published a memo to employees today that laid out some details about the site’s growth, as well as its plans for the coming year.

For one thing, Peretti said that BuzzFeed posted “record profit in August” and that the company has “gone from zero revenue four years ago to a profitable company with over 300 employees.” As far as I can tell, that’s the first time Peretti has acknowledged that BuzzFeed is profitable, aside from mentioning “accidental” profitability in summer 2011 that was followed by a period of aggressive hiring.

Profitability is particularly impressive since it all comes from custom ad campaigns (such as the Pepsi-sponsored Listiclock that I wrote about last month), rather than all the other stuff that online publications (including TechCrunch) do to make money. This year BuzzFeed will run between 600 and 700 programs, Peretti said, compared to 265 last year.

Regardless of whether you love, hate or love-hate BuzzFeed (I like it, and not just because my roommate works there), I think it’s a rare feat to build a profitable media business of this size purely online.

Traffic has been growing, as well, with 85 million unique visitors in August, which Peretti said is three times bigger than a year ago and eight times bigger than two years ago. (Just to double-check, I asked comScore for its numbers on BuzzFeed, and it reported that the site saw 31.9 million global unique visitors on desktop in July, up 133 percent from July 2012.)

Peretti added that even though BuzzFeed will continue to experiment, there are some avenues that it definitely won’t pursue:

We will NOT launch a BuzzFeed TV show, radio station, cable network, or movie franchise – we’ll leave that to the legacy media and Hollywood studios. We will NOT launch a white labeled version of BuzzFeed to power other sites or a BuzzFeed social network – we’ll leave that to pure tech companies in Silicon Valley. We will NOT launch a print edition or a paywall or a paid conference business – we’ll leave that to other publications.

TC Droidcast Episode 5: Samsung Galaxy Gear And Note 3, Sony’s Crazy Cameras And The KitKat Crunch Heard Round The World

droidcast5

We’re sure glad the weekly TechCrunch Droidcast falls on a Wednesday, because this was a big one for Android. Samsung and Sony both had events at IFA in Berlin and revealed new hardware, and we’re joined by none other than 9to5Google‘s Seth Weintraub as a special guest this week to break it all down.

The Galaxy Gear smartwatch is probably the most buzzed about news of the week, and the announcement held a few surprises despite early leaks. Samsung also revealed the Galaxy Note 3, with a bigger screen yet smaller footprint, and Sony showed off camera lens accessories for smartphones that make your pocket camera a pro shooter, along with a brand new flagship smartphone.

We also get into Google’s captivating decision to partner with Kit Kat (yes, the candy brand) to secure licensing rights for the name of the next version of Android (4.4), and everyone comes away hungrier than they were before.

We invite you to enjoy weekly Android podcasts every Wednesday at 5:30 p.m. Eastern and 2:30 p.m. Pacific, in addition to our weekly Gadgets podcast at 3 p.m. Eastern and noon Pacific on Fridays. Subscribe to the TechCrunch Droidcast in iTunes, too, if that’s your fancy.

Intro music by Kris Keyser.

Topsy, Now With Every Tweet From 2006 On, Has Other Social Media Indexes In The Works

Topsy-social

Twitter has established itself as top social networking destination, mentioned the same breath as sites like Facebook, LinkedIn, or YouTube, as well as a go-to destination for breaking news. But as a search engine that could be the Google for real-time media, Twitter still fails. For Twitter data partner Topsy, that was an opportunity.

If the web is now being cobbled together by status updates and hashtagged posts as much as it is by PageRanked websites, then a lot is being lost. In Twitter’s case, the company has only been scratching the surface of a history of tweets stretching back to 2006. An archive, to date, containing some 425 million tweets.

Topsy, one of only four Certified Resellers of Twitter’s data, says it has now indexed every tweet ever posted – something Twitter doesn’t do, and couldn’t easily reproduce due the infrastructure and costs involved. (Topsy has raised $35 million in venture capital since 2008 to get to this point, the company says.)

Meanwhile, today’s Twitter is more interested in the “now,” and the “recent,” not the distant past. A visit to search.twitter.com pulls up tweet results that only stretch back a matter of days, not months, and certainly not years. And with every passing season, that time frame compresses even more. Twitter’s index currently only goes back a week, it states. In 2009, it stretched back a week and a half. Before that, it was a month.

Topsy was able to dig into Twitter’s archive all the way back to 2010, with an expansion announced in August. Now, it can go back the full seven years. That makes it the largest and most comprehensive archive of Twitter’s data that has ever existed for free, public access. Outside of Twitter, only data partners like Gnip and The Library of Congress have had access to this data before – but it was not in a format everyday users could access and search. And it definitely wasn’t free.

According to Topsy co-founder and CTO Vipul Ved Prakash, the ability to index every tweet from Twitter’s beginning onwards – now 425 billion items across 3,500 servers – was a big data feat. “The third generation of our indexing technology has increased the density of the number of documents we can index on a server, so that means we can now run a massive index that includes every tweet,” and, he adds, Topsy will eventually be able to scale that to trillions of documents. Topsy’s competitors not building infrastructure-based businesses, Prakash challenges, won’t be able to keep up.

Though companies often like to make bold claims such as this, there is some truth to that statement. Today’s web is changing. Twitter, for example, is now pumping out some 400 million to 600 million new tweets daily, each of which becomes indexed on Topsy within 150 milliseconds. Put another way: the amount of data that Twitter will produce between now and this time next year is more than every tweet it has ever produced to date.

The amount of data being created on Twitter plus Facebook today is more than the data being created on the rest of the web.

And when you also take Facebook into account, you realize the web Google understands is now just a slice. “The amount of data being created on Twitter plus Facebook today is more than the data being created on the rest of the web” Prakash explains. “Social data has become the bigger public corpus.” (There’s your answer to “why does Google+ exist?”)

And if the social web is now the larger web, then it’s not surprising that Topsy’s ambitions expand beyond Twitter. The company’s technology is already capable of indexing every public page on other social media sites, like Facebook, in addition to links users tweet. It also has an archive of all of Google+ public posts.

“We’re building some indexes in the background that will be available in the future,” Prakash hints regarding Topsy’s future plans. However, he declined to talk in detail about what the company had built in terms of a Facebook index, saying it was “unreleased,” noting that “public pages are accessible publicly” and that ”if we’re creating value for a social network – if it makes good business sense – then we will have deeper access to data.”

Topsy’s value to social media networks, like Twitter (or potentially others), is about the opportunity of what can be done with the data after collection, like offering detailed stats around the data, similar to what it does now for tweets. Topsy can count how many times a term like “Obama” was ever mentioned on the network, or inform hedge funds how users really feel about the new iPhone. Brands can monitor their social media presence, to figure out how to better target ads or influencers. Journalists can do story research. And so on.

“Processing the exhaust of social networks is a different kind of business that the business the social networks are in,” Prakash says. Twitter is concerned with building a publishing platform, and monetizing engagement around tweets, not necessarily in providing analysis of its archives. Though it has a history of moving into businesses its ecosystem partners once led, Prakash is not concerned that Twitter will do so with it because it complements Twitter, but doesn’t replace it.

Still, Topsy has ended up in a symbiotic relationship with Twitter – it pays an undisclosed fee for API access (the “firehose” of Twitter data), but Twitter also pays Topsy through a separate contractual agreement in order to build special tools like its presidential election index or Oscars index, for example. Meanwhile, Topsy’s analytics customers pay $1,000/month per seat for access to Topsy, and API customers pay based on the amount of data that’s returned.

Maybe one day Twitter will think that’s an interesting business it would like to be in itself? And if Topsy’s infrastructure can’t be easily duplicated, would Twitter like to just acquire Topsy, then? “There’s some possibility of that happening,” Prakash admits, but claims the two companies haven’t discussed this possibility. For now, Topsy is burning capital as it scales, while declining to talk customer numbers, revenues or even percentage growth.

Longer term, a historical archive of social media is valuable may be value to specific businesses and marketers, but whether or not everyday, mainstream users will feel the same is still in question. That could change over time, though. “In the next 10 years, social media could start looking like the internet…it’s a different ecosystem, where you have big silos of data, but a new market is forming here,” says Prakash. “Our ambition is to have every public social post in our index.”

Blogging!

— TechCrunch (@TechCrunch) March 7, 2007

I’ve got a secret dream to one day be a Startup Battlefield judge #tcdisrupt

— Alexia Tsotsis (@alexia) May 26, 2010

Jaiku? What did twitter ever do to you? One addiction is enough for me anyway!

— Sarah Perez (@sarahintampa) April 10, 2007

not using twitter, foo’

— Eric Rosser Eldon (@eldon) August 22, 2007

Skout Borks Its Code, Spams Its Users, Cops To The Error And Apologizes

2013-09-04_13h16_41

Skout is a mobile app that wants to help you find fine folks around you. It’s raised $22 million from Andreessen Horowitz and is more than half a decade old. It also had a recent spate of spamming-the-hell-out-of-its-users that it has now publicly apologized for. It’s an episode worth digging into.

A friend of mine over for dinner complained that Skout had sent a message, using her name and such, to a friend of hers, who had asked about it. She hadn’t sent the note herself, making the situation odd. Was Skout sending out messages under the names of its users to drive engagement?

Ironically, her friend sent her the same note, also unwittingly. Something was afoot. My friend’s inbox had a problem that was now familiar: It contained dozens of the same message that she had “sent” her friend and that he had sent to her. The same note, again and again, from other users.




This had the appearance of Skout essentially spamming its users using other user profiles to drive activity. We’ll get to intent and cause in a moment, but whatever the case, the situation did drive engagement. My friend logged back in, as did her compatriot, and here we are now writing about Skout. So, what happened?

According to Skout, this is an episode of the Honest Fuckup. Following a bit of email, Skout today blogged that it had noticed the episode via my comments, and had essentially just screwed up quite publicly:

What’s up with the What’s up messages? Turns out we had shipped the wrong code from our internal testing environment. This has now been corrected [..]

The message that actually got sent out was “What’s up!”. We understand this was confusing and have corrected the message today. It was never meant to say “What’s up!”, and is a total SNAFU on our end. We work hard and long hours to make Skout better, faster and more fun — for you guys. Sometimes moving fast introduces bugs, such as this one. And I’m glad we were able to correct it fast.

Harumph. Some of this feels off. A company with Skout’s scale certainly tracks its metrics. It must have noticed the spike in messages being sent. Surely it saw that they were all the same. It claims to have not noticed until I emailed them: “Big thanks to Alex Wilhelm who notified us about this!” Odd.

Whatever the case, Skout has copped to a large public mistake, which should be commended in a small sense, even if we perhaps lack the full story behind the incident.

Why does Skout matter? I haven’t used the product except in the context of this story, but Andreessen Horowitz is perhaps the smartest money in tech at the moment: Companies attached to it are frankly more interesting by association. Also, with $22 million from the crew at a16z, you would probably think that this sort of mistake would not occur.

Asleep at the wheel or mendacious, I can’t tell you, but if you do Skout, you probably won’t get any more spam of this ilk again.

Top Image Credit: waferboard

Groopt Revamps Its Collaboration Tools As It Shifts Focus To Nonprofits

groopt logo

Startup Groopt is hoping to become the platform that nonprofits and member-based organizations use to both build their websites and communicate/collaborate with members.

I actually covered the company about a year ago, and the vision wasn’t all that different. It started out as a collaboration tool for fraternities and sororities, and at the time it was trying to expand to serve any large group. However, CEO Patrick Allen told me recently that the team soon realized, “We need to figure out our niche. We can’t just be a group platform for everybody.”

So Allen said the company cut back its spending and shut down the existing product (it continued to operate a website development business to bring in revenue) to focus on a new version of the product built specifically for nonprofits. Why nonprofits and similar organizations? Allen elaborated via email:

Our nonprofit clients told us how painful their database solutions were and how it was impacting their ability to grow; they’re too complex, they cost too much and they deliver far too little. If the non-profit sector can snag even 1% of GDP from the for profit sector… that’s $150 billion extra dollars flowing where it’s needed most.

Groopt currently offers two main products — Groopt Communicate and Groopt Websites. Groopt Communicate allows organizations to send targeted messages to their members via text or email, schedule events and send reminders, conduct polls, and more. (Allen seemed particularly proud of the iPhone and Android apps, which now include a full mobile calendar for groups.) Groopt Websites, meanwhile, allows users to work with the Groopt design team to build their own website, no coding required.

Groopt Communicate from Groopt Videos on Vimeo.

There’s a free version of the service, then the paid plans start at $4.95 per month. Groopt is also offering TechCrunch readers 25 percent off on websites.

The company’s next step is to launch a new database product to help organizations manage their membership, events, and fundraising — Allen said that’s coming soon.

Update: The wording of this post has been tweaked to more accurately reflect the features of Groopt’s products. Also, I incorrectly described Groopt as being solely focused on nonprofits — Allen said it’s actually trying to serve nonprofits and other member-based organizations.

Party At Disrupt

afterparties-disrupt-sf13d

As a man named R. Kelly once said, “After the show, it’s the after party. And after the party, it’s the hotel lobby.”

So goes the story of this year’s TechCrunch Disrupt SF from September 9 – September 11, where for the very first time we’ll be offering standalone tickets to the Disrupt after-parties which are available to the general public.

In the past, Disrupt after-parties were only available to Disrupt attendees. A ticket to Disrupt costs anywhere between $2,000 and $3,000, and grants attendees access to the Hackathon demoes, the full three-day conference as well as each night’s party.

However, if you can’t make it out to the whole conference and simply want to hang out at one (or all) of the parties, you can purchase tickets to each.

Or you can head over here and buy full conference tickets.

In either case, there will be booze, good conversation, and a high concentration of geeks in one place.

The choice is yours.

September 9th @ Mighty hosted by New Relic
September 10th @ Temple hosted by SAP
September 11th @ 1015 Folsom hosted by Auction.com


Monday

Tuesday

Wednesday