Dreams, teams and the Color app
The latest app making a big buzz seems to be one simply called Color. Why the hoopla about what is, at best, a location-based photo sharing app? Because they raised a whopping US$41 million dollars in funding before even launching. Before you say "bubble 2.0," let's take a look at what Color does. Although I have to wonder how much of that went to procuring the URL www.color.com -- and if this really is the peak of the new bubble. [Update: According to Gizmodo they paid $350,000 for the domain. Thanks, commenters!]
Color, as an app, is nicely designed. When you first start it up you'll be asked to give your name. I entered Victor, but it seems you can enter anything here, and you might want to consider your Twitter handle. I have no idea how Color will handle duplicate names. Will I become Victor1138 when I encounter another Victor? We shall see.
Naturally, you'll have to agree to use your location, and (if you wish) push notifications. I found both dialogs came up at the same time, which was annoying. Then you take a picture of yourself, and it is appropriately tagged with a location (invisible to you), which creates a new group. Upon taking the required picture of myself, the app crashed and did not save my name.
The concept appears to be that if you and your buddies are all taking pictures at the same event, those will all be grouped together in the app, automagically, and you'll get to see one big album. Just like a photo party! That's basically it for the app. Pictures are grouped by location, within 150 feet of each other. There's even a cute warning on the app description page: DON'T USE COLOR ALONE! Once you take your first pic, you are encouraged to go out into the world and take pictures with friends who are using the app at the same location.
The app is free, so try it yourself and see if it is your cup of tea. But is this worth $41 million dollars in funding?
Mathew Ingram at GigaOM asked the funding question and answered it quite well, I think. It goes back to what smart investors do: invest in the team, not necessarily the dream. Color has an all-star lineup in management. Veterans of Lala, LinkedIn and BillShrink are running the company. Each one of those companies, let alone the men behind them, are fantastic (remember Apple bought Lala) and easily could parlay their networking experience into a powerful social network based on location-grouped photos.
Except, in my opinion, this team has a real challenge. They have to rapidly build a social network before competitors flip a switch and enable this very same function. Ignoring, for the moment, the fact that the Facebook app is mediocre at best, how much effort would it take to get this same functionality in the Facebook app? Even Instagram, which is enjoying some level of success in building a photo-based social network, could do this quite readily.
Just because you have an A-Team of managers and a kewl domain does not mean you will make a 10x return on investor's money. I like Color, and it's always great to see new things, but in this case, color me skeptical of its success for investors. Before passing judgement yourself, be sure to look at this hilarious satire of Color's "pitch" deck -- a great parody of the mentality behind VC funding in general. Good luck, Color, you're gonna need it.
Share
Source: http://color.com/
Categories
The latest app making a big buzz seems to be one simply called Color. Why the hoopla about what is, at best, a location-based photo...
Add a Comment
nothing special or a got to have this app... meh
How they got those millions is more interesting, who the foolish VC's are, and how they get written up here would have been a better story TUAW...
They paid a little shy of $380,000 for the color.com domain, according to Gizmodo.
March 24 2011 at 6:08 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyI like the fact that the app is called "color" and the image of 3 people taking pictures is in Black and White!
March 24 2011 at 6:00 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyBwahaha! Awesome.
March 24 2011 at 6:12 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyThat's k. "App" is now just "p." Like "okay" is now just "k." Economy of language.
March 24 2011 at 5:44 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyI'm sorry, I would have read this article except for the fact that I still need to process mentally that there are still VC firms putting upwards of $41M into companies before anything is proven, yet. Give me some time and I might post a more constructive comment tomorrow.
March 24 2011 at 5:04 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyHow useful is this app if you are the only one in town using it?
March 24 2011 at 4:40 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyIs it the 1990's all over again�!
March 24 2011 at 4:05 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down Reply41 million? Whatever happend to the idea of starting a business small, building traction, creating actual, you know, income and then growing big.
Many of today's start-ups seem to be doing little more than throwing stuff onto the wall, see what sticks. And the early investors are doing the betting...
You know what could use $41 million dollars of investors' money? THE RELIEF EFFORT IN JAPAN.
March 24 2011 at 3:18 PM Report abuse Permalink rate up rate down ReplyIgnoring the fact that I don't know what they would do with $41M, I don't like mixing business and humanitarian efforts together. From a purely business standpoint, I don't believe business should stop because of a disaster.
Now don't get me wrong: I think businesses should still be responsible and help where they can. But I don't think a company should spend that $10M they have for R&D and divert it to humanitarian efforts. To that same end, I don't think individuals should, for example, stop eating dinner for a year, save the money up, and donate that off. Donate what you can, but we all have budgets; the people funding this idea were already willing to spend $41M on some idea. This rather useless app happened to be it.
No, you're absolutely right. Business should not stop because of a horrible natural disaster. It just makes me a little sad that this app, which, at the moment, seems to be unpolished and one of a million social networking photo apps (i.e., both redundant *and* useless), received an obscene amount of money.
A few million dollars from the international community could buy quite a bit of bottled water for children and infants.
I'm a photographer and I'm not interested enough to download this 'free' app. Says it all really. For me at least.
If, say 6 months from now, everybody I knew was using this - I 'might' give it a try. Until then .... yawn.
Deals of the Day
more deals- Refurb Mac Pro Xeon Quad-Core 2.8GHz Workstation for $1,150 + $38 s&h, more
- Used Apple iPad 32GB Wi-Fi Tablet for $200 + free shipping
- Apple iPod nano Multi-Touch 8GB MP3 Player for $100 + $8 s&h
- Cases for New iPad at HandHeldItems: Extra 20% off, $2 credit, from $3 + $3 s&h
- $15 Apple iTunes Gift Card for $8 for new Saveology customers
- Retro 80's Case for iPhone for $11 + $2 s&h
24 Comments