Feedback for New Idea Please!

Atomico · 08-03-2013 6:47pm

All good points, I have thought of most of these myself. I don't think they necessarily add up to meaning that the idea wouldn't work though, because it is open and applicable enough for a large number of people to still want to use it.

For every CEO who is too busy, there may be a photographer or even, I don't know, a DJ, who is happy to answer questions on what life is like as a DJ! In other words, it could be what people choose to make of it.

RATM wrote: »

Well that is all very well but are you expecting these experts to give up their time for free ? because if you are then I see little incentive for them to do so. There are some CEO's on Quora who give amazing insights but they are very much in the minority- people who are experts in their field are extraordinarily busy and often don't have the time or the inclination to be answering questions from some randomers on the internet. Without a paid model where the expert has something to gain (other than 'reputation') I can't see it working tbh. Also if it is for free then you'll attract all kinds of trolls, spammers, etc.

Agreed that there will be loads of CEOs and well-known 'thought leader' types who wouldn't have the time to use it, much too tied up with other ongoing projects, and day-to-day work, etc. That's exactly the reason why there wouldn't be a paid model here, or a financial incentive - I doubt these same CEOs are going to be on a site looking to make $15/question every other day

They're going to be on the site because they like it, they want to pop on every so often and answer a few questions here and there, engage with folks and pick up that 'direct line' to whoever is following them. Maybe even a little ego boost for some.

They aren't there to serve an audience or fulfill a service (for which they'd want to be getting paid) - they are there because they want to be.

RATM wrote: »

As you say Reddit has their AMA thing as an add-on. If your idea is successful and you proved it then there is nothing to stop any big sites like Linkedin doing the same, it would be just a matter of adding a button to someones profile where they would have said they're willing to answer questions.

I thought of exactly that myself re LinkedIn - can't see them being bothered to be honest. I doubt they are suddenly going to decide to turn people's profiles into Q&A pages. Even if they did, it would be far from the primary focus of the site, I would imagine things would start to get a bit cluttered if they decided to do it as well.

You could really bring up that point about any idea to a large extent. 'I have a photo app, but what if Facebook tweak Instagram to do what I'm doing', etc etc.

There's also plenty of room for everyone, especially when an idea is very clearly and tightly focused around one key concept, as opposed to something that is as multi-functional and 'broad' as LinkedIn.

Atomico · 08-03-2013 6:53pm

In other words, it's not 'I'm giving out all my knowledge and the benefit of my experience for free - where's my reward?' - it's 'I'll pop on and have a conversation and field questions with those who are into what I'm about', etc.

Re spam and trolls, the idea is that making people sign-in and show their real identity via Twitter and Facebook would cut down on that drastically (just like e.g. the Journal, Quora and other sites do).

Atomico · 08-03-2013 7:02pm

Think of it as the text-based version of Udemy!

https://www.udemy.com/

DubTony · 08-03-2013 7:52pm

I don't see how you can monetise this, but as content is supposed to be king these days, your idea that professionals might answer questions in the hope that they may get some business probably has some merit. The thing is this type of activity usually involves blogging to some degree, developing a following and later on selling something to those followers or subscribers. It's pretty much the same method that's been used since the web started. The only advantage to them joining your site is that it should be the go-to place, but won't become that until its established and probably won't be established until the content is there.
If people just go to a web site to have a question answered, they don't become part of anything, so building a community will take a lot more than Q&A pages. Boards for example developed from a gamers forum and evolved in a very organic way.
If I've a question I want answered I simply throw it into Google, and flick through the answers until I get something I feel is the best. Yesterday I needed to do something on the car and got the best answer from Youtube from a guy who has over a hundred videos uploaded.

You'll need something special to make your idea work. I think it might need to start as something specific and be aimed at a particular sector rather than a general answer anything type site.

Atomico · 08-03-2013 8:06pm

DubTony wrote: »

I don't see how you can monetise this, but as content is supposed to be king these days, your idea that professionals might answer questions in the hope that they may get some business probably has some merit. The thing is this type of activity usually involves blogging to some degree, developing a following and later on selling something to those followers or subscribers. It's pretty much the same method that's been used since the web started. The only advantage to them joining your site is that it should be the go-to place, but won't become that until its established and probably won't be established until the content is there.
If people just go to a web site to have a question answered, they don't become part of anything, so building a community will take a lot more than Q&A pages. Boards for example developed from a gamers forum and evolved in a very organic way.

You'll need something special to make your idea work. I think it might need to start as something specific and be aimed at a particular sector rather than a general answer anything type site.

DubTony you are probably right there, I was thinking the same myself. If it is too general, then it may become relevant to everyone but used by (not as many as it could be).

I was thinking that it could start focused on a niche. For example, photography or sports coaching or whatever. That way, it is easier to get people on board, since you only have to concentrate on targeting a very specific sub-set of users.

DubTony wrote: »

If I've a question I want answered I simply throw it into Google, and flick through the answers until I get something I feel is the best. Yesterday I needed to do something on the car and got the best answer from Youtube from a guy who has over a hundred videos uploaded.

I know what you mean, but people search and seek out information in different ways. If throwing an old search into Google was all people were happy to do, then we would all just use Google all the time and we wouldn't have specialist forums, blogs, Quora, Udemy, SkillShare, JustAnswer, Twitter search, etc. I think one of the amazing things about the web is the myriad different ways that information can be presented, sought out, shared, etc.

colblimp · 08-03-2013 8:49pm

If I want to find something out, I can do so after a short search on the internet. I can't see how you're going to make a success of this. The community idea isn't going to work, people only want to find an answer to their question, noone has time for the whole community thing.

Additionally, the answers you've received on this thread have all been put down by yourself. Why ask for peoples opinion when you take little or no notice of them?!

Peterdalkey · 08-03-2013 9:05pm

2x 2 posts (11/12 &18 /19) and then a 3 sequential post 32-34 all by the OP! Is this a record?

The OP is so far ahead of the game here, the only surprise is that this brilliant idea has not been taken up by the top US tech VCs. I bet Bono is watching every move and will pounce early.. you never want to miss the Elevator.

Atomico · 08-03-2013 9:22pm

colblimp wrote: »

If I want to find something out, I can do so after a short search on the internet.

You must not have read my last post. Google isn't the only way people find and search for information.

colblimp wrote: »

I can't see how you're going to make a success of this. The community idea isn't going to work, people only want to find an answer to their question, noone has time for the whole community thing.

Heheh, are you serious? You do know what site you're on, right?!

colblimp wrote: »

Additionally, the answers you've received on this thread have all been put down by yourself. Why ask for peoples opinion when you take little or no notice of them?!

Again, you must not be reading my posts. Have I not thanked various people for their input, perhaps even Peter with his 'crap business idea' comment. I actually have agreed with various posters as well...I only just agreed with DubTony's last post there too. So not sure where you're coming from there?

Atomico · 08-03-2013 9:23pm

Peterdalkey wrote: »

2x 2 posts (11/12 &18 /19) and then a 3 sequential post 32-34 all by the OP! Is this a record?

The OP is so far ahead of the game here, the only surprise is that this brilliant idea has not been taken up by the top US tech VCs. I bet Bono is watching every move and will pounce early.. you never want to miss the Elevator.

Have you picked up your copy of Internet for Dummies yet Peter?

betonit · 08-03-2013 11:14pm

Atomico wrote: »

Have you picked up your copy of Internet for Dummies yet Peter?

have you?

DubTony · 09-03-2013 2:56pm

Atomico wrote: »

If throwing an old search into Google was all people were happy to do, then we would all just use Google all the time and we wouldn't have specialist forums, blogs, Quora, Udemy, SkillShare, JustAnswer, Twitter search, etc. I think one of the amazing things about the web is the myriad different ways that information can be presented, sought out, shared, etc.

Google sometimes leads to some sort of Q&A site, so there's no doubt they have their place. Having said that, I've never come across any of the sites I've highlighted above. In fact, boards.ie consistently appears on the first page for almost any question I ask.
I have a feeling that the place for Q&A is anywhere/everywhere.

The Apprentice · 09-03-2013 9:26pm

Heated topic..
There are some good points, bad points and some frustrated peeps and from what i gather from what you have said only a few business models that i can gather from this..

1. Advertising Business model - Query based Paid Placements.. Eg. Seomoz in the Online Marketing Questions, Intromercials, before the user gets to the content usually seen on America Websites (New York Post,Times etc) or last but not Least Content Targeted Adverts .. Google adsense its doing this on boards to the Right of this post as i type.. (Eg. boards making 100k+ a year on this)
Oh and also user Regristration - content-based sites that are free to access but require users to register and provide demographic data. Registration allows inter-session tracking of user surfing habits and thereby generates data of potential value in targeted advertising campaigns etc

2. Infomediary model - Traditional banner advertising from Seo moz in the Online marketing forum etc boards.ie do this very effectively, also done deal is another perfect example. Go between car sections, dog and you,ll see highly targeted banners.

3. Afflifilate model - Think of adverts with sales going directly to you such as - Amazon, Commission Junction etc .. lots of these around just the commission based model essentially. Amazon being much more highly targeted but there are sites where you can gleem affliate banners for 60% commissions.. :P

4. Subscription Model - Users pay a yearly,monthly subscription model to ask as many questions as they like or 5 or 1 per month etc, Quora have this and i suspect they will incentivise this eventually. I think at the moment you have to earn points
Person to person interaction ? - €25 to ask Michael dell about supply chain ?
Person to group interaction ?? €10 to ask 10 expercts abotu supply chain ??
A lot of videos on seomoz that are free will be part of this soon i think, Subscription model to get a 30 min video on a certain topic, entrepreneur topics etc.. Think of Ted videos that are a premium edition to your subscription for an extra €5 per month..

Also people pay beleive it or not for Namechanges, Avatars, Expert User Avatars, Site Donater on other forums :P Lots of cash in this model

5. Utility model - Pay as you read approach to your subject, similar to the Wired magazine subscription, new york times, you can only read 10 articles per month unless you pay the subscription of $6.95

In march 2010 Quora was rumour valued after funding @ $1b and declinded a buy out of 300m clams - as a start up with intial venture Capitol offered ..
As of 2012 its has now settled after second round funding at just over 400m .. So its worth a few pennies i can say that.

Personally i think its a good idea from what you have but you didnt exactly convey what you wanted to do with it and it strayed into a heated post with Peter.. In his defence i can stand behind his business acumen, maybe not so much on 1 or 2 of his comments or yours but hey - its a forum after all.
80% of this forum dont like me for my midnight laptop rambles where i neither edit nor stop to develop my thoughts in a fluid manner and often type totally the opposite of what im trying to say making me like a right **** .. either way, i think you should kiss and make up dudes its a learning forum after all..

I think your on to something but you need to nail down your strategy from the get go, and be more concise on what business model you have from the few i have above..

Best of luck with it either way - good idea buddy
The Apprentice

Atomico · 10-03-2013 1:20am

The Apprentice wrote: »

Heated topic..
There are some good points, bad points and some frustrated peeps and from what i gather from what you have said only a few business models that i can gather from this..

1. Advertising Business model - Query based Paid Placements.. Eg. Seomoz in the Online Marketing Questions, Intromercials, before the user gets to the content usually seen on America Websites (New York Post,Times etc) or last but not Least Content Targeted Adverts .. Google adsense its doing this on boards to the Right of this post as i type.. (Eg. boards making 100k+ a year on this)
Oh and also user Regristration - content-based sites that are free to access but require users to register and provide demographic data. Registration allows inter-session tracking of user surfing habits and thereby generates data of potential value in targeted advertising campaigns etc

2. Infomediary model - Traditional banner advertising from Seo moz in the Online marketing forum etc boards.ie do this very effectively, also done deal is another perfect example. Go between car sections, dog and you,ll see highly targeted banners.

3. Afflifilate model - Think of adverts with sales going directly to you such as - Amazon, Commission Junction etc .. lots of these around just the commission based model essentially. Amazon being much more highly targeted but there are sites where you can gleem affliate banners for 60% commissions.. :P

4. Subscription Model - Users pay a yearly,monthly subscription model to ask as many questions as they like or 5 or 1 per month etc, Quora have this and i suspect they will incentivise this eventually. I think at the moment you have to earn points
Person to person interaction ? - €25 to ask Michael dell about supply chain ?
Person to group interaction ?? €10 to ask 10 expercts abotu supply chain ??
A lot of videos on seomoz that are free will be part of this soon i think, Subscription model to get a 30 min video on a certain topic, entrepreneur topics etc.. Think of Ted videos that are a premium edition to your subscription for an extra €5 per month..

Also people pay beleive it or not for Namechanges, Avatars, Expert User Avatars, Site Donater on other forums :P Lots of cash in this model

5. Utility model - Pay as you read approach to your subject, similar to the Wired magazine subscription, new york times, you can only read 10 articles per month unless you pay the subscription of $6.95

In march 2010 Quora was rumour valued after funding @ $1b and declinded a buy out of 300m clams - as a start up with intial venture Capitol offered ..
As of 2012 its has now settled after second round funding at just over 400m .. So its worth a few pennies i can say that.

Personally i think its a good idea from what you have but you didnt exactly convey what you wanted to do with it and it strayed into a heated post with Peter.. In his defence i can stand behind his business acumen, maybe not so much on 1 or 2 of his comments or yours but hey - its a forum after all.
80% of this forum dont like me for my midnight laptop rambles where i neither edit nor stop to develop my thoughts in a fluid manner and often type totally the opposite of what im trying to say making me like a right **** .. either way, i think you should kiss and make up dudes its a learning forum after all..

I think your on to something but you need to nail down your strategy from the get go, and be more concise on what business model you have from the few i have above..

Best of luck with it either way - good idea buddy
The Apprentice

Great post Apprentice, some great points made and thanks for taking the time! I guess one or two of my posts were a bit smart, have to say I was taken aback by one or two comments there early on though. Maybe Peter will end up being one of my beta-testers, you never know!

Cheers

ironclaw · 10-03-2013 1:42pm

I've read through this and I honestly cannot see the point. Its just another 'similar' site to the others. If I was a DJ, which I am, and I need an answer to a question I Google it. And I'll probably find a thread or forum somewhere with a similar problem, join and ask the main thread poster who answered it. Same goes for my development work, I'll Google and 99% of the time end up on StackOverflow and ask there.

If we take the 'expert' side to it, thats a good angle but seriously how to you qualify someone? The Internet is full of posers, people who are good at copy & paste and WikiPedia spoofers. Even Wikipedia has had its fair share of bad press over bad articles apparently written by experts. You will never ever be able to qualify someone to a professional standard.

Whats different about this site?

The Apprentice · 10-03-2013 2:05pm

ironclaw wrote: »

I've read through this and I honestly cannot see the point. Its just another 'similar' site to the others. If I was a DJ, which I am, and I need an answer to a question I Google it. And I'll probably find a thread or forum somewhere with a similar problem, join and ask the main thread poster who answered it. Same goes for my development work, I'll Google and 99% of the time end up on StackOverflow and ask there.

Whats different about this site?

You just answered your own question .. With relevant traffic any site cant become a significant database of knowledge, all you have to do is ask a question in google.ie and boards.ie is all over it.

Banner advertising is running (both impressions and Cpm) you click but not purchase through the site but on another site 40 days later because djs need to purchased equipment every year..
The site has a 90 day cookie, and with that relevant knowledge you looked up inadvertantly you have lined his pockets with €140 commission..
Im sorry but i hope this clears this up in how people can still make money off of you even though you may not think it.

There is plenty of opportunity now in this site after sleeping on it.. Tell me whats the difference between facebook and Gplus ?? Not a whole pile in my opinion !!
Plenty of room for others in the market i think

The Apprentice · 10-03-2013 2:12pm

Took me a few minutes to find an affliate music/dj banner .. 20% to start up to 80% on quantity..

http://www.zzounds.com/aff

ironclaw · 10-03-2013 3:05pm

The Apprentice wrote: »

Banner advertising is running (both impressions and Cpm) you click but not purchase through the site but on another site 40 days later because djs need to purchased equipment every year..
The site has a 90 day cookie, and with that relevant knowledge you looked up inadvertantly you have lined his pockets with €140 commission..
Im sorry but i hope this clears this up in how people can still make money off of you even though you may not think it.

I'm well aware of how affiliate links etc work. I have numerous sites myself that run them as well as advising others. A hugely trafficked site in Ireland which I advised on in a fairly niche area (But with worldwide reach) only grossed €4k last year. That was Google Ads and Manufacturing Affiliates combined. Click ad's etc are great if people actually click them. Someone googling for a product probably already owns it, knows where to buy it or has the pricing suss'd, so a link to buy one is valueless to them. Also you have to contend with people running cookie cleaners etc something that has seen a huge interest with Chrome usage.

As per the dot com bubble, people seem to vastly over estimate the value of websites.

Atomico · 10-03-2013 4:13pm

Hi there, thank you for the feedback.

ironclaw wrote: »

I've read through this and I honestly cannot see the point. Its just another 'similar' site to the others. If I was a DJ, which I am, and I need an answer to a question I Google it. And I'll probably find a thread or forum somewhere with a similar problem, join and ask the main thread poster who answered it. Same goes for my development work, I'll Google and 99% of the time end up on StackOverflow and ask there.

If StackOverflow didn't exist, and I was proposing setting it up, would you say there'd be a good chance that you would think it was pointless and 'just Google it'?

You even say that if you need an answer to a question you google it - but then you admit you end up on a particular site which serves your need better than Google, or a random article you might find in search results.

The web is a big place (don't need to tell you!), and there are many different ways of structuring, presenting and organising info, and many different ways that people can interact with one another around that content/info.

Sites may appear 'similar', but when you look a little closer, they often have a specific angle or something that serves a need better than another site (or fulfills it in a way no other site does).

ironclaw wrote: »

If we take the 'expert' side to it, thats a good angle but seriously how to you qualify someone? The Internet is full of posers, people who are good at copy & paste and WikiPedia spoofers. Even Wikipedia has had its fair share of bad press over bad articles apparently written by experts. You will never ever be able to qualify someone to a professional standard.

Whats different about this site?

It's not about verifying experts though. It's an open platform, and I have some mechanisms in mind to ensure people are who they say they are, etc. It wouldn't be a platform for advice, it's a platform to ask a person a question -and there are a number of ways that people could use such a platform.

ironclaw · 10-03-2013 5:18pm

Atomico wrote: »

If StackOverflow didn't exist, and I was proposing setting it up, would you say there'd be a good chance that you would think it was pointless and 'just Google it'? You even say that if you need an answer to a question you google it - but then you admit you end up on a particular site which serves your need better than Google, or a random article you might find in search results.

If StackOverflow, with all its features, didn't exist I'd be hounding you to do it. I mean that.

I appreciate this idea is your baby so to speak but I genuinely cannot see the niche or that glimmer that puts its above anything else thats already out there. If someone approached me to code this, I'd say no. Simply because I can't see the return in effort. And I'm not talking about money, I mean I'd only want to create something that was actually new and different even if it never paid me back.

Yes it takes a little from here and there, but from my reading of it, its Yahoo Answers that emails a real person directly and who in turn answers back. Would that be a fair summary? Please correct if I'm just not seeing it.

Had you suggested whats a few posts back i.e. €25 to get a real solicitor to answer a question etc I'd say go for it. In fact I'd probably invest in it. But a community website answering questions, I'm sorry but as a business it just won't work. You won't retire on it anyway.

devildriver · 10-03-2013 6:24pm

One thing I didn't see mentioned here is the issue of user / identity verification. That's a huge issue for a site like that which Atomico is proposing.

The site stands or falls on the quality of the advice given by your experts. Yet the site allows open registrations. So using LinkedIn as a sign-up mechanism is all well and good but it's easy enough to create fake accounts there too.

Quora has real identifiable celebrities, business people etc answering questions authoritatively on their site but the difficult part is knowing how they verify these accounts as being genuine.

Outside of all the possible revenue models and the subject matter of the site, ncihe or general, this is the big problem with trying to make this concept work.

Atomico · 11-03-2013 1:02pm

ironclaw wrote: »

If StackOverflow, with all its features, didn't exist I'd be hounding you to do it. I mean that.

I appreciate this idea is your baby so to speak but I genuinely cannot see the niche or that glimmer that puts its above anything else thats already out there. If someone approached me to code this, I'd say no. Simply because I can't see the return in effort. And I'm not talking about money, I mean I'd only want to create something that was actually new and different even if it never paid me back.

Yes it takes a little from here and there, but from my reading of it, its Yahoo Answers that emails a real person directly and who in turn answers back. Would that be a fair summary? Please correct if I'm just not seeing it.

Thanks for the reply. That's not what it is at all, no. The angle isn't actually expert advice as such, if it's not entirely clear what the angle is from my posts, it's that way for a reason though. I have a very clear vision for the site, but I don't want to go on about it in too much depth just now

ironclaw wrote: »

Had you suggested whats a few posts back i.e. €25 to get a real solicitor to answer a question etc I'd say go for it. In fact I'd probably invest in it. But a community website answering questions, I'm sorry but as a business it just won't work. You won't retire on it anyway.

I wouldn't have proposed that myself, that is what would be a big mistake I would suggest. JustAnswer have pretty much got that covered a good while now.

Graham · 11-03-2013 1:04pm

So you're not going to tell us what the idea is but you'd like feedback on it anyway?

ironclaw · 11-03-2013 1:24pm

Atomico wrote: »

Thanks for the reply. That's not what it is at all, no. The angle isn't actually expert advice as such, if it's not entirely clear what the angle is from my posts, it's that way for a reason though. I have a very clear vision for the site, but I don't want to go on about it in too much depth just now

Can you explain how your Q&A site is different then? Whats the unique angle? Because I re-read this thread to try get a grasp and I honestly cannot see it.

And as a word of caution, your very protective of your idea and how great it is. I consider 100's of web ideas every year. Both myself and from others. Few get my attention to the extent where I'll offer code or money. 90% of this thread is negative with good, sound advice. I'd re-think my idea if I had that much 'No' going on or at least explain why its wrong.

Atomico · 12-03-2013 12:02pm

The main difference between this site and Yahoo Answers and the like is that the focus is on the person being asked the question, not the question itself. On Yahoo Answers, Quora, etc, the question is the focus, not the person.

So let's say you are on the site, and you are big into rugby, or you are big into web design. Instead of asking your question on e.g. rugby coaching, or design standards, and waiting for a bunch of replies, you would be seeking out the person to which you want to ask the question.

That may seem like a subtle difference, but I think it is actually a pretty significant one.

Let me give an example. Look at Brian O'Driscoll. He is a very prominent sportsman (needless to say), he has had a long career, would have tonne of stories, knowledge and insights to share - and there is no doubt that there would be an infinite number of people out there who would only jump at the chance to pick his brain and ask him about his experiences, what his no. 1 all time training tip is, what it feels like to put on the green jersey, etc.

Another example is a prominent personal trainer - ask him about supplements, training protocols, motivation issues, etc.

The site would be for everyone - you sign up to claim your own page, and anyone - from the local well-known physio or trainer, to a social media consultant to a sports or film star could field questions.

I have a particular system in mind for deterring spam and trolls, and to prioritise which questions rise to the top.

Later on, very well-known people, or those with well documented expertise, etc, could charge a flat fee for people to ask a question. Lots of revenue models that could be explored.

For brands, they could claim their own page, structure their questions, file them and manage them. Twitter is not built for this.

In short, it's more about the person than the question.

I'm definitely taking everyone's feedback on board, if nobody agrees with my thoughts above then that is certainly a red flag of sorts - I am definitely not discounting anyone's feedback!

RATM · 12-03-2013 10:49pm

Atomico- you last post finally explains this idea clearly to me (and I'm sure other) because I don't think it was 100% clear up until now.

The idea has merit certainly, I'll give you that. The thought that I could login and ask Brian O'Driscoll about his career is a compelling one. But I am not yet getting what it in this for Brian O'Driscoll, like the guy is most likely a millionaire a couple of times over and most likely has a lot of better things to be doing with his time than answering questions for free (or even for €25 a pop) on the internet. You could not pay Brian O'Driscoll enough for this to be worth his while financially. He might do it out of the kindness of his heart but I doubt you could afford his fee if he did want to charge. You only need to look at websites out there who sell after-dinner speakers, this is essentially something similar, except with questions. Even minor Irish celebs charge €2k for a 30-45 minute after dinner speech. A waffler like Bertie Ahern was charging (and getting ) up to €30,000 for a one hour speech up until a couple of years ago.

But from a PR perspective for a celebrity who has a range of endorsed products for sale then yeah it is a good idea for them to do something like this 2 or 3 times a year to let the fans think they care about them so they then in turn put their hands in their pockets to buy albums, see movies, buy books, perfumes, whatever products they are selling. Indeed their products could be sold from your very site or at least linked from your site for a % commission.

I still think you should be looking at niches here. Because you are building it from scratch it will be very difficult for you to be all things to all people from day one. Like for instance if you took the celebrity example and did something like Reddits AMA then it could well be a success. People are interested in celebrities, they buy magazines on them and they follow the gossip on them in lots of different ways. So the idea that a fan can login at a certain time and ask them questions is a good one, much like Reddits AMA. What I'd be doing here (after building your site which can hold big bandwidths) is getting on a flight to Hollywood and trying to sign up the first 10 actors/actresses and aim at hosting a Q&A session once a week for 10 weeks. The celebrites would let their Twitter followers know about it and the web traffic to your site would be secured.

I think it would work well for celebs, Premiership footballers, rugby players, book authors etc. But would it work for photographers, DJ's etc as you have suggessted ? I don't think it would unless the DJ was Tiesto or Felix da Housecat or some other well known and top selling DJ. Or a photographer who has won lots of acolades from National Geographic, Reuters, etc. In other words what I'm saying is you really need to sign up the people who are the very very best in their domain. So if you're going to concentrate on athletics then you need Usain Bolt, period. If you get the dude who finished 5th in the Olympics 100m final then it most likely wouldn't work.

One thing to also consider though. As it stands practically every celebrity has a Facebook account. Twitter may not be made for this but Facebook certainly is- you can ask questions there on their wall and they could respond in real time. But regardless of this I think if you created a good site and live fan led celebrity Q&A sessions were your only focus and you got known for it quick then you could indeed corner a market and not have to worry about the Facebook threat.

Another point to consider is that if you were going to do this it would be a good idea to have a system where the celebrity can be seen live on screen by the audience, you could even consider allowing the questioner also being live in video face to face with the celebrity when they are asking the question, people would definitely pay good money for that.

Now that you have clarified the idea I think I do see some good merit in it. What you are proposing though isn't easy to pull off. I think the way to make this is a success is (apart from having a killer website that never crashes, regardless of the people logging in) is to firstly concentrate on a niche such as pop stars. Then concentrate on getting your first 10-15 interviewees signed up, they need to be really really famous and this will be the most difficult part. Getting to talk to their agents will NOT be easy, don't mind trying to convince them. But if you can convince them it is going to increase their sales of albums, endorsed products like t-shirts, perfumes, etc then they may well go for it. I am thinking that bands that teenagers love like Justin Bieber, One Direction, etc would be a good place to start as they have large Twitter followings so the artists themselves would bring the crowds online with you having to to little or no promotion. You could also do country specific ones with a translator thrown in- for example Japan is a market of 80million people and every celebrity wants to tap it but language is a barrier. English/Irish boy bands are huge in Japan and a Q&A session with a Japanese translator could go some way to tapping the Japanese market. The possibilities are endless really when you think about it.

The most important thing is that you've just got to be sure you have a website that can handle a few hundred thousand or even a million+ people logging on simultaneously because if you don't get the technical end of something like this right from day one then you'll be dead in the water- with both the fans and the celebrity world.

ironclaw · 12-03-2013 11:32pm

RATM wrote: »

//Post

But then after all that, you have to ask why someone would use Atomico.com as opposed to the world renowned Reddit? Plenty of celebs have done it on Reddit. Look at Deadmau5, he streams live from his studio. Some celebs respond on twitter to fans. Others prefer not to. And all of them are controlled in some way or form by management.

While I agree if you could get 10 celebs to do it, for free, or at least a price where a bank loan could cover it, what do you do for the other 6 days of the week? There are 365 days in the year. You need something new and fresh every single day. Look at Broadsheet.ie, we all get annoyed if its been 15 mins since the last refresh

I believe RATM has put a good framework on it but its just not doable. Reddit, Google HangOut etc are just too big. Google have done sessions (Talks in Google I think?) with famous writers etc. And they are free on YouTube for anyone to watch. They certainly have the money, the leverage and the brand to attract celebs. Even Skype offered a chat with GaGa I believe recently. Facebook could probably code what you want to do in about a day.

If Bieber was to take the stage on your site, it would crash. Instantly. You'd need serious bandwidth. Serious, parallel, distributed servers. And all that costs thousands. I mean mega bucks. Google already have this infrastructure in place.

@Atomico, I replied to your PM.

Atomico · 13-03-2013 10:27am

ironclaw wrote: »

But then after all that, you have to ask why someone would use Atomico.com as opposed to the world renowned Reddit? Plenty of celebs have done it on Reddit. Look at Deadmau5, he streams live from his studio. Some celebs respond on twitter to fans. Others prefer not to. And all of them are controlled in some way or form by management.

While I agree if you could get 10 celebs to do it, for free, or at least a price where a bank loan could cover it, what do you do for the other 6 days of the week? There are 365 days in the year. You need something new and fresh every single day. Look at Broadsheet.ie, we all get annoyed if its been 15 mins since the last refresh

I believe RATM has put a good framework on it but its just not doable. Reddit, Google HangOut etc are just too big. Google have done sessions (Talks in Google I think?) with famous writers etc. And they are free on YouTube for anyone to watch. They certainly have the money, the leverage and the brand to attract celebs. Even Skype offered a chat with GaGa I believe recently. Facebook could probably code what you want to do in about a day.

If Bieber was to take the stage on your site, it would crash. Instantly. You'd need serious bandwidth. Serious, parallel, distributed servers. And all that costs thousands. I mean mega bucks. Google already have this infrastructure in place.

@Atomico, I replied to your PM.

Hey ironclaw, sent you back 2 replies yesterday afternoon, did you get them?

Atomico · 13-03-2013 10:32am

RATM wrote: »

Atomico- you last post finally explains this idea clearly to me (and I'm sure other) because I don't think it was 100% clear up until now.

The idea has merit certainly, I'll give you that. The thought that I could login and ask Brian O'Driscoll about his career is a compelling one. But I am not yet getting what it in this for Brian O'Driscoll, like the guy is most likely a millionaire a couple of times over and most likely has a lot of better things to be doing with his time than answering questions for free (or even for €25 a pop) on the internet. You could not pay Brian O'Driscoll enough for this to be worth his while financially. He might do it out of the kindness of his heart but I doubt you could afford his fee if he did want to charge. You only need to look at websites out there who sell after-dinner speakers, this is essentially something similar, except with questions. Even minor Irish celebs charge €2k for a 30-45 minute after dinner speech. A waffler like Bertie Ahern was charging (and getting ) up to €30,000 for a one hour speech up until a couple of years ago.

But from a PR perspective for a celebrity who has a range of endorsed products for sale then yeah it is a good idea for them to do something like this 2 or 3 times a year to let the fans think they care about them so they then in turn put their hands in their pockets to buy albums, see movies, buy books, perfumes, whatever products they are selling. Indeed their products could be sold from your very site or at least linked from your site for a % commission.

I still think you should be looking at niches here. Because you are building it from scratch it will be very difficult for you to be all things to all people from day one. Like for instance if you took the celebrity example and did something like Reddits AMA then it could well be a success. People are interested in celebrities, they buy magazines on them and they follow the gossip on them in lots of different ways. So the idea that a fan can login at a certain time and ask them questions is a good one, much like Reddits AMA. What I'd be doing here (after building your site which can hold big bandwidths) is getting on a flight to Hollywood and trying to sign up the first 10 actors/actresses and aim at hosting a Q&A session once a week for 10 weeks. The celebrites would let their Twitter followers know about it and the web traffic to your site would be secured.

I think it would work well for celebs, Premiership footballers, rugby players, book authors etc. But would it work for photographers, DJ's etc as you have suggessted ? I don't think it would unless the DJ was Tiesto or Felix da Housecat or some other well known and top selling DJ. Or a photographer who has won lots of acolades from National Geographic, Reuters, etc. In other words what I'm saying is you really need to sign up the people who are the very very best in their domain. So if you're going to concentrate on athletics then you need Usain Bolt, period. If you get the dude who finished 5th in the Olympics 100m final then it most likely wouldn't work.

One thing to also consider though. As it stands practically every celebrity has a Facebook account. Twitter may not be made for this but Facebook certainly is- you can ask questions there on their wall and they could respond in real time. But regardless of this I think if you created a good site and live fan led celebrity Q&A sessions were your only focus and you got known for it quick then you could indeed corner a market and not have to worry about the Facebook threat.

Another point to consider is that if you were going to do this it would be a good idea to have a system where the celebrity can be seen live on screen by the audience, you could even consider allowing the questioner also being live in video face to face with the celebrity when they are asking the question, people would definitely pay good money for that.

Now that you have clarified the idea I think I do see some good merit in it. What you are proposing though isn't easy to pull off. I think the way to make this is a success is (apart from having a killer website that never crashes, regardless of the people logging in) is to firstly concentrate on a niche such as pop stars. Then concentrate on getting your first 10-15 interviewees signed up, they need to be really really famous and this will be the most difficult part. Getting to talk to their agents will NOT be easy, don't mind trying to convince them. But if you can convince them it is going to increase their sales of albums, endorsed products like t-shirts, perfumes, etc then they may well go for it. I am thinking that bands that teenagers love like Justin Bieber, One Direction, etc would be a good place to start as they have large Twitter followings so the artists themselves would bring the crowds online with you having to to little or no promotion. You could also do country specific ones with a translator thrown in- for example Japan is a market of 80million people and every celebrity wants to tap it but language is a barrier. English/Irish boy bands are huge in Japan and a Q&A session with a Japanese translator could go some way to tapping the Japanese market. The possibilities are endless really when you think about it.

The most important thing is that you've just got to be sure you have a website that can handle a few hundred thousand or even a million+ people logging on simultaneously because if you don't get the technical end of something like this right from day one then you'll be dead in the water- with both the fans and the celebrity world.

Ah no dude, thanks for the feedback but as I said Reddit AMA already caters for that - I don't think I'd be looking to compete with Reddit and YouTube for the Lady Gaga type celebrities of the world just yet! (not that I would have any interest in Lady Gaga anyway

)

The likes of YouTube would be a natural first port of call for those kind of celebrities, they already have the audience and the infrastructure to support that audience (and peaks in page / video views) as well.

If you want to fund a potential scouting trip to Hollywood though, then I'm all ears!

Cianos · 13-03-2013 11:27am

Atomico wrote: »

Ah no dude, thanks for the feedback but as I said Reddit AMA already caters for that - I don't think I'd be looking to compete with Reddit and YouTube for the Lady Gaga type celebrities of the world just yet! (not that I would have any interest in Lady Gaga anyway )

The likes of YouTube would be a natural first port of call for those kind of celebrities, they already have the audience and the infrastructure to support that audience (and peaks in page / video views) as well.

If you want to fund a potential scouting trip to Hollywood though, then I'm all ears!

RATM raises a good point though - there's probably too little correlation between between those who would be valued contributors, and those who would be available to contribute.

If it's all about the person, then by definition the person has to have some kind of established reputation for an audience to value their content.

If reputation is a requirement for being a (publicly valued) question answerer, then you'll have a real problem with getting enough people contributing. The demand will be heavily truncated to people wanting the biggest names, whereas the people that will be available will be those who are the least in demand.

Yahoo Answers etc have tonnes great content because they don't require the answerer to be pre-qualified...so long as they give a good answer and it receives votes from the users, it doesn't matter if they're world famous or a 16 year old in their bedroom. And obviously there's a much bigger pool of the latter to draw from than the former and as such, there's no major barrier to the provision of content as there would be with your platform where you could be fighting for every nugget of content.

Also, even on Reddit with its massive reach do people give very little time to their AMAs. Contributors usually announce the AMA saying they'll be available at this time, on this day (usually about 2 hours). In the end they get through very little questions, and give very short answers for the most part. It's clear that they see it as a something to just give an hour or two to in order to give their profile a quick boost, right before the launch of a movie or something.

The question is whether there are enough internet-oriented 'minor celebs', be they recognised experts in their field, local public figureheads and so on to be the main contributors of content in terms of volume, and whether their content would be appreciated enough for people to value the platform/service.

But bottom line I think you'll have a real tough time finding people who have the kind of reputation you're looking for, to contribute and get involved.

Atomico · 13-03-2013 12:03pm

Cianos wrote: »

RATM raises a good point though - there's probably too little correlation between between those who would be valued contributors, and those who would be available to contribute.

If it's all about the person, then by definition the person has to have some kind of established reputation for an audience to value their content.

If reputation is a requirement for being a (publicly valued) question answerer, then you'll have a real problem with getting enough people contributing. The demand will be heavily truncated to people wanting the biggest names, whereas the people that will be available will be those who are the least in demand.

Yahoo Answers etc have tonnes great content because they don't require the answerer to be pre-qualified...so long as they give a good answer and it receives votes from the users, it doesn't matter if they're world famous or a 16 year old in their bedroom. And obviously there's a much bigger pool of the latter to draw from than the former and as such, there's no major barrier to the provision of content as there would be with your platform where you could be fighting for every nugget of content.

Also, even on Reddit with its massive reach do people give very little time to their AMAs. Contributors usually announce the AMA saying they'll be available at this time, on this day (usually about 2 hours). In the end they get through very little questions, and give very short answers for the most part. It's clear that they see it as a something to just give an hour or two to in order to give their profile a quick boost, right before the launch of a movie or something.

The question is whether there are enough internet-oriented 'minor celebs', be they recognised experts in their field, local public figureheads and so on to be the main contributors of content in terms of volume, and whether their content would be appreciated enough for people to value the platform/service.

But bottom line I think you'll have a real tough time finding people who have the kind of reputation you're looking for, to contribute and get involved.

I agree that it would be difficult to get very well-known people, and possibly lesser known folks with a 'local profile' or those who are industry leaders, to get involved.

However, for every person who wouldn't be bothered, there could be 10 or 20 who would jump at the chance to have their own platform, to be able to interact with others directly and subtly or not so subtly promote their wares/services to those who are looking for what they sell or provide.

Just look at Boards, and all the people on here who provide a service or sell a product, and who would love to be able to do that on here - but they can't, because it's not about them - it's about the Boards community. Same as on Twitter - don't be 'salesy', that's not what this platform is for. On this site, they would have their very own page, to do with what they please (within reason).

The idea for kicking this off would not be to try and persuade people that it is a good idea that they should use this service, it would be to approach those who would be open to using it and who would see the benefit of using it for their own business / brand. I could see these people using it, getting questions, others jump in going 'yeah I have a question for him/her', and on it grows from there.

In other words, for those who aren't interested, they'd probably never use it. For those who are, it could work very well for them as another channel for their brand (personal or otherwise), to reach those who have an interest in what they have to say, in what they might be selling, or in the services they provide.

I also think that the level of reputation that someone needs to have before others would feel compelled to interact and engage with them is not as high as you might imagine. You don't have to appearing in the paper every week or be a 'leader' of some sort, for people to value your thoughts or insights on something. That would come to the fore when someone gets asked a question and it prompts someone else to jump in too, especially when they see there's a platform for and an easy way of doing so.

Feedback for New Idea Please!

Comments