
  TechCrunch50: You Want Advertising? We’ll Give You Advertising  - jasonlbaptiste
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/03/techcrunch50-you-want-advertising-well-give-you-advertising/
======
jdrock
We looked at both shows, but no-starter on TC50 is that you can't have any
public exposure before the event. This seems pretty silly, in my opinion. Most
decent startups should have exposure before a singular event. Banking on entry
into one event is a poor decision (more foolish is banking on winning the
competition, as that's where 99% of the publicity goes).

DEMO has less stringent requirements when it comes to the amount of publicity
a startup has before the event, which, in my opinion, allows companies that
aren't sitting on their butts when it comes to marketing have a nice big event
at which to launch.

Edit: I should also note that I've had one group of friends go to DEMO, and
one get into the TC50 Demo Pit. The former got a ton of exposure and new
users. The latter got no benefit in terms of attracting users. Granted, this
is a minimal sample size.

------
wavesplash
Great drama, though Mike does have a point - the $1mil prize is only useful if
IDG has a magazine in your niche. That said, DEMO still has the most
mainstream press walking the floor (nytimes, etc) and it covers much more than
just web startups. Quick rule of thumb: you want mainstream press: Demo. You
want exposure in Silicon Valley: TC50. Neither event is necessary. Why launch
with a flood of 40-100 other companies when you could launch in a down news
cycle and get all the attention for your company? And although it's fun,
beware of manufactured drama

------
SwellJoe
That Mikey Arrington sure is a scrappy little thing, aint he?

Honestly, though, I can't believe anyone would pay to play at DEMO.

~~~
thorax
Well, to play devil's advocate:

Attendees looking to invest in new companies probably like DEMO because the
presenters are convinced enough they have a great product that they'll come up
with the funds to go there. They're showing both a solid demo and enough
leadership/backing to procure the money to play.

At TechCrunch50, investors can see a different sort of startup. One who has a
lot of potential, but may not have had the drive/opportunity to gather any
real money in the first place.

From a purely investment risk perspective, companies that are already finding
capital with a good idea and a good demo have more going for them than
startups that merely have an idea and a good demo.

Because of this, perhaps VC firms (and big business partners) like DEMO more
and angels/seed funds like TechCrunch 50 more.

(again, just playing devil's advocate here)

~~~
SwellJoe
And, of course, the big gaping hole in that argument is that if you can
effectively raise money to participate in DEMO, then you don't need DEMO's
help with raising money.

I'd be curious to see a breakdown of success vs. failure from DEMO and TC50
launches. I'm betting, even without knowing _anything_ about the selection
criteria of either or having ever spent any time at all looking at the
companies launching at either, that TC50 produces more success stories.

Hmmm...actually I just checked out the DEMO site...there's an awful lot of old
companies "launched" at DEMO (RealNetworks, really!?!?).

So, now I not only can't believe anyone would pay to present at DEMO, I _also_
can't believe anyone would be willing to sit through that kind of crapfest.
It's just a bunch of ads. Why would anyone, particularly someone representing
millions or billions of dollars, want to sit through a bunch of ads?

I just don't get it, obviously. Pretty swish website they have, though.

Edit: DEMO 09 appears to have had roughly half the participants as DEMO Fall
08. Perhaps the rules changed, or perhaps folks made the connection that it's
not the best use of time/effort/money. I dunno.

~~~
thorax
> And, of course, the big gaping hole in that argument is that if you can
> effectively raise money to participate in DEMO, then you don't need DEMO's
> help with raising money.

That sounds a bit like a reflexive argument to my comment.

Conferences aside and all other things being equal-- if you were an investor,
would you rather put your money in a team you know can already raise $20,000
if they need it versus someone with unknown skills/means in that area?

Surely it's not a negative. You know the old adage that most investors are
happy to invest in companies that don't really need their money.

But of course, just because a company can raise $20k doesn't mean they don't
need "real" money-- which is surely why they got the initial funds so they
could demo and raise more.

~~~
SwellJoe
Sure. I think your devil's advocate positions were quite well-reasoned. I'm
just returning the favor. A few companies I respect have done DEMO. I don't
think they're idiots, just because they wasted $20k on DEMO. Everybody makes
mistakes. But, I really don't think I'd be willing to sit through that
particular dog and pony show, if I were an investor.

------
ErrantX
As a socially interesting analysis I think there is enough of a parallel here
to think of this as a flame-war between TC50 and DEMO - on the million dollar
scale..

I have to say though as someone who has taken little or no interest in either
event the Techcrunch "prize" seems vast... I know I'd kill for a full
$1,000,000 in advertising on their sites... it could worth billions :D

I dont like Arrington much: but I have to admit he has some style :)

------
alain94040
Right now, the big winner is the startups... The more money and goodies going
their way, the better off they are.

The more noise about launches, the better for entrepreneurs.

disclosure: we were a tc50 company last year (this only minimally impacts the
content of this comment)

~~~
hassing
That was my first thought as well. But it I'm afraid the "right now" is the
key part of your first sentence.

It doesn't really seem like TC is trying to help startups with the prize. It
looks more like an attempt to push out DEMO so they can become the only major
startup demo-event.

The article is written as if DEMO added the prize money as an attack on TC50
and as if DEMO is trying to trick entrepreneurs with fake rates and hidden
expenses. None of it backed up in any way.

To me the article look like FUD and the TC50/DEMO war fairly one sided.

~~~
Timothee
Exactly. The post starts with: "Despite our best intentions, it looks like the
DEMO v. TechCrunch50 war will continue" but clearly Michael Arrington is
fueling the war as much as DEMO is: "if DEMO increases their number, we’ll
increase ours to stay at 2x whatever they are at"

Being the peaceful one would be not to react to what the other one is doing...

------
robryan
In the same way they question DEMO's advertising giveaway you could probably
question the TechCrunch one. It's just going to be advertising on there site?
Unless your aiming your startup purely at the tech community doesn't sound
great.

------
jack7890
Anyone wondering how this can be a profitable decision for TC? Do they gross
so much off TC50 that they can afford to give away $4M for an edge in a
contest they were already winning by a landslide?

~~~
Raphael
TechCrunch probably couldn't sell enough ad space this year.

------
jlees
I'd be interested to find anecdotal evidence from HN startups; did you apply
for or launch at TC50 or DEMO? How did it go?

------
sarvesh
Wow, $20,000 is quite a lot of money, I would rather spend it on surviving a
few more months as a startup to make a better product to make my users happy.
Who are really the only ones who will eventually make your product popular or
unpopular.

May be they are targeting companies that have already been funded.

~~~
bkbleikamp
>> Maybe they are targeting companies that have already been funded.

This is definitely the case.

I can't imagine an angel would be happy if their money was spent to present at
DEMO. A YC company would have to spend their entire 3 month stipend to get a
spot. Insanity.

