

TechCrunch50 has few younger first time entrepreneuers - skmurphy
http://www.drama20show.com/2008/09/08/techcrunch50-where-are-the-poor-hungry-founders/

======
zain
Wait... you want Mike Arrington to give preference to people who are young and
poor, regardless of the merits of their startup? If David Sacks has a better
startup to present, why would he be turned down? Isn't the primary goal of
TC50 to showcase cool startups?

~~~
drama20
That's not what I wrote nor is it what I suggested. As I made clear, in his
attacks on DEMO, Michael Arrington claimed that the fees DEMO charges
presenters are tantamount to "payola." One of his blatant insinuations was
that startups shouldn't be forced to pay to present because doing so is
exploitative and drains them of capital that could be put to better use
elsewhere.

He argued that TechCrunch50 selections were completely merit-based and that he
is now providing the only major launch venue that's financially viable for
young startups that don't have a spare $18,500.

Frankly, I think if you look at the startups that were selected and who is
behind them, you can only come to two possible conclusions:

1\. Silicon Valley's consumer internet scene is seriously f*cked. 2\. Startups
founded by (or associated with) people Arrington knows or is connected to in
some way were favored.

I could honestly care less about the selections but calling Arrington's
disingenuous arguments about TechCrunch50 disingenuous (which was the point of
my post) is well-deserved in this case, especially after Valleywag pointed out
that a startup involved with Michael Arrington's associate, friend and Edgeio
co-founder Keith Teare was included. Apparently Teare is a TechCrunch
shareholder as well if that's not enough conflict for you.

------
russ
Go Drew & Arash!

~~~
ALee
For everyone who does not know, Russ is referring to Dropbox

------
vaksel
The whole he used to be for the little guy, and is now for the big guys
happens in almost any industry when the company gets big. Its the whole
selling out concept.

~~~
sgrove
I don't know about that. The drama with TC50/DEMO has soured me on the whole
affair, but I think it's still proceeding along the lines it was designed for.

If you have the goods, you're in. If you can't afford it, no problem, there's
no charge. If you can afford it, well, still no problem, because you have a
cool "startup".

I think in some cases the definition of startup has been stretched, and that's
the only area where I might have some qualms.

~~~
fallentimes
I agree that the drama is very annoying. But at least it's resulted in the
founders receiving more attention.

Could you elaborate on your definition of startup thoughts? I'm really
interested to hear.

~~~
sgrove
I suppose it's a bit of an image problem - "startup" has a "small guy" nuance
to it, a group still struggling and fighting to get their model right. If it
begins with already well-established industry players, I would less associate
it with "startup", and perhaps simply classify it as a company.

It may very well be a meaningless bias from frequenting hn and the groups I
hang out with, reflecting a bit more.

------
morbidkk
and then we were discussing about startup founder's salary
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=299137>

out of 100K 20k for this event only

no way

------
alaskamiller
Journalistic integrity lacking at TechCrunch? Oh no, say it ain't so! You mean
to tell me that companies that MOST LIKELY ABLE to afford the $18k to go to
Demo are FEATURED at TechCrunch50? And that the ones left out get the option
to pay $3k a DAY for that privileged? SAY IT AIN'T SO!

