Oh, I suppose, at least as much of a public service project as anyone who gives vast sums to political candidates or college sports teams, and by law can expect nothing in return, but in reality, they reap political favors, ambassadorships, or primo parking spaces on game day and first dibs on the pricey skyboxes. <G>
I mean, technically, venture capital is "venture"-- the VC venture out to support a project that they think will pay off in some sort of benefit for them, but the benefit is hardly a sure thing. The people who court VC may make them specific promises about what they may deliver, but "audiences of millions who WILL buy product X" are so much vaporware. VC means you take a risk, and may not see a return. But what might a VC get by supporting a platform rapidly becoming a new Commons? Do they say, "OK, I get my stock, make it pay off", and that's it? Or is there a larger, indirect benefit to a VC making an investment in a platform, in that, if the platform itself takes off and reaches exponential adoption levels (becomes the cool place to hang out), the pie of business opportunities grows larger, and new side platforms spring up, etc. blah blah blah? Sometimes, I presume, VC make investments in infrastructure because it behooves VC to make more money off an improved infrastructure. Hence, you do have companies sponsoring highway cleanup (more people shop in cleaner towns), sponsoring stadiums and arenas, slapping their names on all sorts of public works, far beyond the equivalent of a plaque on a park bench. Why did the former CEO of Home Depot build that massive Aquarium in Atlanta again? Was it just for the gate receipts, or was it to invest in Atlanta, to help to make the city itself, and its downtown "Commons" (Centennial Park, across the street) more of a "destination"? It's what I could never figure out, 10 years ago, when visiting India (it may be different there now). I never saw a place that so vastly under-invested (and by extension, under-profited) in its own infrastructure. Chris ps I should look up the cost of the Georgia Aquarium, perhaps, to see if it compares to the $496M pumped into Facebook... http://science.howstuffworks.com/georgia-aquarium.htm $290M to build, not sure on maintenance... cost of big fishies, all that. "So how did they do it? How did they build habitats for all those animals, and where did they get all the fish? What does it take to keep the water clean and the animals fed and healthy? And how did the aquarium -- a nonprofit organization -- afford all that? In this article, you'll learn the answers to these and other questions. You'll also learn about the aquatic animals that are the aquarium's star attractions." On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Jared Spool <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Sep 22, 2008, at 12:44 PM, Christine Boese wrote: > > What if the whole idea of a "revenue model" is the wrong question? Coming >> in >> from left field here, but does anyone ask, "What is the revenue model of >> the >> Boston Commons? The town square?" >> > > I see. > > So the $496,000,000 that has been poured into Facebook by Microsoft, Li > Ka-shing, and the other venture capitalists should be thought of as a > public-service project? > > Jared > > ________________________________________________________________ Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)! To post to this list ....... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
