Among the many Obama mashups, I found my recent favorite: http://obamiconme.pastemagazine.com/. Have some fun, make one of your own, make one for someone you love…

I don’t know if it has anything to do with anything, but this, I think, is pretty amazing.

I got a call today from the San Francisco Chronicle. The number has shown up at least once a day for the past week. I never answered it and today, I decided to put an end to this. As a side note, to telemarketers, please, either leave a message or don’t call back. Calling me once or twice a day for a week really doesn’t put me in the right mood if you ever get through to me.

Back to the story. The Chronicle offered me a six month deal for 4 days a week (including the big Sunday paper). $10 dollars for 6 months. Some quick numbers:

- At 26 weeks that’s $0.38 per week
- At 4 days a week, that’s just under $0.10 a day

I said no. My reasons:

1) I already get a daily New York Times and Wall Street Journal. For global, financial and national news, I barely can justify needing both.
2) For local news, I only need to check in at a local site, and I do that at sfgate, the Chronicle’s online version.
3) Despite the side of me that can’t pass up a good deal (and no matter what you think of the Chronicle’s editorial issues, less than a dime a day is a SCREAMING deal), I can’t see the need to have more resources put towards bringing another paper to my door.

Why the Times and the Journal? Because they have the only thing that will save any newspaper in the long term: Strong editorial content that you can’t get anywhere else. Without that, papers large and small, are doomed. Doomed I say!

Less than a dime a day and I said no.

Did I mention I used to work at the Chronicle…

There is a saying about some people that they cannot “get out of their own way”. Socially this refers to someone’s one personal issues preventing them from having that which they want most. In sports, it’s usually a reference to a person who’s ability is so low, that they are a risk to themselves, in addition to those around them. In cycling it’s the guy/girl who you never, ever want to ride too close behind…

Yesterday eBay bent to it’s Powersellers (who make up over 80% of it’s revenue) and lowered fees a second time in the past month. Yahoo is being wooed (threatened?) by Microsoft and it looks like regardless of Microsoft’s pursuit, they will be challenged to do anything other than continue to lose market share to Google.

So the question bears asking…can a company, however once powerful it may have been, get out of it’s own way as it grows? Is Google destined for the same destiny in 5, 10, 20 years?

Daddy, Buy Me a Lift Ticket!

Originally uploaded by Telstar Logistics

Already starting with the “Daddy buy me’s…”

Brad Stone of the New York Times wrote yesterday about the recent changes in the algorithm at Digg. The core of his article, along with comments from Slashdot founder Rob Malda, was to examine the strength of “Crowd Wisdom” as it pertains to Digg’s ability to raise more popular stories to the top of it’s home page.

There is a ton of activity right now focusing on the wisdom of crowds. Crowd sourcing, crowd wisdom, user generated…it seems as if the new capitalism is seeking low-cost growth through leveraging the average Joe (or Jane) to do their work for them. The problem, is that like any investment, there is a risk/reward proposition that must be adhered to and something so cheap, must have it’s costs, real or otherwise. For Digg, these costs come in the form of the potential to game the system and show less crowd based wisdom, and more small-clan strategery.

Anyone remember the John Stewart appearance on Crossfire a while back? He tore into Tucker Calrson and asked him, and his show, to “please stop, because you’re hurting America.”

I think someone should do the same for Michael Ball and anyone helping him get Rock Racing off the ground. This is not what the sport of cycling needs right now. He is hurting the sport. I know times are tough and there aren’t a lot of contracts out there, but this cannot be helping. Looking at two teams that have chosen to innovate this year – Slipstream and Rock and Republic, we see a stark contrast between doing things “different” and doing things “wrong”. For anyone who loves this sport and wants to see it rise like a phoenix from the ashes of Tours past, what Michael Ball is doing, saying and paying for can only bee seen as toxic. Please stop. You’re hurting our sport.

A recent New York Times article by Silicon Valley journalist extraordinaire, Brad Stone, talked about the recent mad rush on Facebook applications (5500 and counting…) and the subsequent fight by venture capital to fund fund fund anyone making an app to throw food at a friend on Facebook. I know there are some (a lot) of very smart folks out there so I’m trying to figure out the rational behind a $2MM valuation on an app that has 500,000 users on Facebook and NO view for how to monetize on or off of Facebook.

Here’s what I came up with for reasons:

1) Simple Math: Given the portfolio theory of VC funds, this may be a way to break down the traditional model into smaller pieces. Instead of 10 $10MM deals for $100MM a FB strategy can fund 20 deals at $50k for only $1MM. 2x your chance of success at a tenth the cost. And you’ll get results in months, not years.
2) Find a Team: Regardless of the app, every developer worth his/her salt wants to build the next great FB Food Fight. This is a cheap way for a fund to find a talented, driven team that can execute. What you do with them after that, it’s up to you…
3) User Acquisition: With 500k – 1MM users and a $2MM valuation, that’s a value of about $2 – $4 per user. Assuming you can translate some significant portion of those users to real money, that’s actually a pretty low CPA for new users.

Other reasons?