

TechCrunch is still relevant - iseff
http://www.mobiledevhq.com/whytechcrunchisstillrelevant-or-howonearticlerepresented-25k-mo--36/article

======
dmor
You owe a lot to the practice of PR actually, which you should probably
consider investing more in if its working for you.

I have this spreadsheet at Twilio that tracks signup sources by type, and
lifetime revenue. Without going into too much detail, people who signed up
after learning about us in a news story generate a lot of money per account,
and that has continued to prove true over 3+ years. So we invest in being good
at PR (bringing it in house, using various agencies to help us get broader
distribution).

Startups, especially those filled with engineers, generally dislike PR. Can't
blame them, it is this ridiculously irrational art and it can become very
expensive - but it has a big impact if you can wield it as a tool in your tool
belt. You don't have to hire a PR professional to do it though - I did it for
Twilio by myself for the first 18 months and learned a ton. The first thing I
ever got to the front page of HN was this post on exactly this topic:
[http://www.twilio.com/blog/2009/03/doing-startup-pr-on-a-
sho...](http://www.twilio.com/blog/2009/03/doing-startup-pr-on-a-
shoestring.html)

The coolest part of PR is just how many media outlets there are targeting
different audiences - so TechCrunch is one important one of many. Pitch wide,
read more, dive into niches, get to know writers and the audiences they are
trying to reach. PR isn't about manipulating writers either (at least not the
credible form of writers), all you can do is tell them your story, they decide
what to do next.

One thing I'll add, is that it is a shame that publications are struggling to
figure out business models while businesses are benefitting a ton from
coverage. Its a shame because I worry that the publications will eventually
run out of money and go away, killing an important customer acquisition
channel. This asymmetry is an opportunity.

~~~
jonbishop
I'm working with a SaaS company whose highest conversion rate and signup
numbers are through PR (by far). It really surprised me based on my previous
experience.

I think that "which you should probably consider investing more in if its
working for you." is key here, though. I've done marketing for businesses
where PR was one of the weakest channels.

~~~
dmor
Totally agree. Kind of cool to hear I'm not the only one finding this channel
surprisingly valuable - anyone else out there?

------
rriepe
I can't emphasize this enough: You don't owe Sarah Perez a damn thing. Not a
"thank you" and especially not a debt of gratitude.

You can thank journalists for a lot of things: balanced coverage, fairness,
excellent writing quality. Never, ever thank them for covering you, or for
covering you in a positive light. Some journalists even consider this an
insult.

Remember, they're serving their readers (and by proxy of course, their own
interests, for all the cynics out there), not you. The article wasn't written
_for_ you, it was written _about_ you.

~~~
tptacek
It has not been my experience that trade press journalists consider
thankfulness an insult. Rather the opposite.

So, I think you're correct in principle, but off the mark pragmatically.

~~~
logicalmoron
SAI/former VentureBeat reporter here: it's considered a moderate offense.
Could infer to your/our Twitter followers etc. that there was an exchange for
positive coverage, which is a pop at our credibility.

Credibility is basically all we have. (However small it is.)

~~~
Retric
IMO, On the consumer side credibility is not as important in tech journalism
when compared to say political reporting. Products get canceled, startups die,
so you would have to predict the future to always be relevant. Having
connections and finding interesting stories / ideas and knowing how to
critique them is more important than knowing the iPad7's release date.

We have all read bad spin, and honestly it quickly becomes noise.

------
doktrin
Whenever someone says "X is still Y", there's a growing chance that it, in
fact, is not.

TechCrunch has most assuredly jumped the shark, and Siegler has almost single
handedly ensured I will never again read another of their articles unless I am
practically rick-rolled into doing so.

~~~
whamill
Indeed. The plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.

------
dasil003
TC has jumped the shark, but they still drive a ton of traffic—enough to kick
start your product if it's good enough. However "king maker" is a strong word
for it. I've been several times by TC over the last 5 years and it never
amounted to much in terms of conversions. Back in the day they had big
influence with investors which was proportionally valuable in the tight-knit
community of SV investors, but these days they're well into the downward slope
of the bell curve. Congratulations to the author for benefitting from TC, but
there's never been a better time to ignore them.

------
tatsuke95
Despite its decline in quality, Techcrunch still generates lots of traffic.

But at the end of the day, you built a good product. Take full credit.

------
woohoo
I think it depends on what market you're in. If you are selling to app
developers, TechCrunch is a good place to focus your energy. If you are
selling to businesses (or folks that aren't in the tech industry), I don't
think it gets you much.

~~~
iseff
Certainly agree with this. Understanding where your customers are, what
they're reading, and how to get in front of them is the most important factor.

But, after that, finding the most authoritative sources within those markets
is crucial. So, when people say TechCrunch is irrelevant for mobile/tech
startups, well, that's just wrong (at least for us).

------
soupboy
Though I am happy for the team, it is a slight stretch to claim that you have
a monthly recurring revenue of $25k due to the techcrunch article even though
there have been only 1.5 months since the article came out.

------
Calamitous
"X is still relevant," much like "I'm not crazy!" is a sentence that nobody
believes as soon as you have to say it.

------
SandersAK
Any major news publication that aligns with the vertical of your product or
service is relevant to you.

PR for tech companies is cheap / free advertising.

It's not that TechCrunch is still relevant or not - because we're not really
discussing the quality of their journalism or what they represent. We're
talking about the staying power they have for a readership that's interested
in tech.

So in that regards, yeah definitely - TechCrunch still drives tons of page
views and click-through's so anytime you get an article there, it can't hurt!

------
ckluis
Excellent article. I would be curious to see how much of that recurring
revenue sticks for 3 months. Would be awesome to see monthly follow-ups for a
few months.

~~~
iseff
Thanks! We've been trying to be very transparent recently, so we'll do our
best to do follow-ups and stay transparent. :)

~~~
tstegart
Awesome. And congrats, this made me want to check you guys out. I wish you
guys had a case study that's easier to find though. I think there might be a
few in the articles section, but having one up front would really help me
understand how exactly it helps me grow my business. A lot of this search and
keyword stuff is hard to grasp for some of us initially.

------
duxup
Relevant here = made some money for some folks.

------
drivebyacct2
TechCrunch drives traffic, sure. I'm not willing to say their coverage or
reporting is "relevant". Their article on WebRTC in Firefox yesterday was
awful, even after they rewrote most of it. Not to mention the stream of
contradictory posts about Google Glass.

