A little over 24 hours into the announcement of VC funding, quite a few sources have chimed in. To bring some cohesion to the mix, here is what some are saying:
- LonelyBloggers (the new blogger dating site) praises the Canadian VCs investing in a Canadian company
- Renowned Canadian media columnist, Mark Evans, joins b5media as VP of Ops
- I add to that at Blog Herald
- Stowe Boyd praises the $2M investment and Mark Evans
- Tris Hussey is excited about the funding and more so about Mark
- Valleywag gives us two thumbs down… which is like Ebert giving a negative review of a movie – must mean its good.
- 9rules takes a shot at b5media, while pretending to not be hostile toward b5media. Hear me, Tyme?
- Syntagma Media compares b5media being branded “a global media network” as being synonomous with his network distancing themselves from the phrase “blog network” in favor of “online magazine”. Pffft. As if that were close.
- Darren Rowse explains a bit to his readers how and why we took funding.
- A National Post staffer mourns Mark Evans’ departure and wishes him well with b5media
- Minic at The Blogging Times, quotes Duncans expectation for the network post funding.
- Phil Sim thinks he knows the inside skinny as to why this was a bad investment. Sorry, Phil, you’re wrong.
- Shel Israel, famous blogger and Advisor to b5media, chimes in as to why he thinks this extends the global neighborhood.
- Jeremy’s laptop died because he bought a shiny Vaio instead of a sturdy, reliable computer. ;) So he hasn’t said anything. :)
Added: 9rules comes out swinging again (please read for context). Personally, I’ll take our Round 1 over their Round 5 anyday.
I followed up on my overly-nice comment on this entry from this morning with a sharp “addendum”. I doubt it will be approved so I post the comment here:
I’d add that some of your comments, Mike, are pretty offensive to me. Specifically since there’s some sort of “understood moratorium” on mudslinging between 9rules and b5media. I can dig the emails up where 9rules staff have attacked me personally for saying the slightest disparaging thing toward 9rules. It’s nice to see the road go both way, eh?
More specific to your points, investors invest in the potential (correct me if I’m wrong, Rick). That means that, yes, we have many things that need to be improved. Many things that will be improved. If we had already “arrived” then why would we need to go to the next level.
9rules does some things well. Aggregating content is one. We don’t do it as well. Acknowledged. We have an OPML file with all our feeds in it should anyone care to subscribe to our feeds. Thats not much but its something and if you read my entry on the VC thing, you know we have more in our sights.
I’d recommend you take a back seat and watch what happens before slinging mud. Lord knows, I can sling mud at 9rules. Instead, I pick my fights and try not to do so.
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 15 comments }
Aaron, I’m not sure why you think I don’t approve comments that disagree with what I say — that’s the point of blogging.
My entry discussed some of the feedback in the blogosphere I thought was interesting, and then pointed out some things I think b5media does well and some that I’d love to see you work on. You can dramatize on your own blog if you want since that’s your right, but your first comment said this:
“I rolled my eyes when I saw that you had posted that but I’m pleasently surprised that this indeed was a fairly objective piece. Good job, Mike.”
As for taking money over valuable members, if that’s what you’re looking for then that’s your right. We’d take a few hundred 9rules fanatics over money any day of the week, but you’re free to value money and people any way that you wish.
Some of your post was objective. I also wrote my comment after first waking up and not fully digesting all of what you say.
So now you say our members aren’t valuable? Good job, Mike. Way to play your cards so everyone can see your hand.
We’ve said from the start that our members were valuable and that is also the reasoning given every step of the way about pursuing funding.
Good job, Mike.
Aaron you obviously can’t read:
“So now you say our members aren’t valuable? Good job, Mike. Way to play your cards so everyone can see your hand.”
You said you’d take your round of funding over a round to add new members. I said this:
“We’d take a few hundred 9rules fanatics over money any day of the week, but you’re free to value money and people any way that you wish.”
C’mon man, we’re both using English here.
Aaron, I’m not sure why you think I don’t approve comments that disagree with what I say — that’s the point of blogging.
My entry discussed some of the feedback in the blogosphere I thought was interesting, and then pointed out some things I think b5media does well and some that I’d love to see you work on. You can dramatize on your own blog if you want since that’s your right, but your first comment said this:
“I rolled my eyes when I saw that you had posted that but I’m pleasently surprised that this indeed was a fairly objective piece. Good job, Mike.”
As for taking money over valuable members, if that’s what you’re looking for then that’s your right. We’d take a few hundred 9rules fanatics over money any day of the week, but you’re free to value money and people any way that you wish.
Aaron, I’m not sure why you think I don’t approve comments that disagree with what I say — that’s the point of blogging.
My entry discussed some of the feedback in the blogosphere I thought was interesting, and then pointed out some things I think b5media does well and some that I’d love to see you work on. You can dramatize on your own blog if you want since that’s your right, but your first comment said this:
“I rolled my eyes when I saw that you had posted that but I’m pleasently surprised that this indeed was a fairly objective piece. Good job, Mike.”
As for taking money over valuable members, if that’s what you’re looking for then that’s your right. We’d take a few hundred 9rules fanatics over money any day of the week, but you’re free to value money and people any way that you wish.
Aaron, I’m not sure why you think I don’t approve comments that disagree with what I say — that’s the point of blogging.
My entry discussed some of the feedback in the blogosphere I thought was interesting, and then pointed out some things I think b5media does well and some that I’d love to see you work on. You can dramatize on your own blog if you want since that’s your right, but your first comment said this:
“I rolled my eyes when I saw that you had posted that but I’m pleasently surprised that this indeed was a fairly objective piece. Good job, Mike.”
As for taking money over valuable members, if that’s what you’re looking for then that’s your right. We’d take a few hundred 9rules fanatics over money any day of the week, but you’re free to value money and people any way that you wish.
Aaron, I’m not sure why you think I don’t approve comments that disagree with what I say — that’s the point of blogging.
My entry discussed some of the feedback in the blogosphere I thought was interesting, and then pointed out some things I think b5media does well and some that I’d love to see you work on. You can dramatize on your own blog if you want since that’s your right, but your first comment said this:
“I rolled my eyes when I saw that you had posted that but I’m pleasently surprised that this indeed was a fairly objective piece. Good job, Mike.”
As for taking money over valuable members, if that’s what you’re looking for then that’s your right. We’d take a few hundred 9rules fanatics over money any day of the week, but you’re free to value money and people any way that you wish.
Some of your post was objective. I also wrote my comment after first waking up and not fully digesting all of what you say.
So now you say our members aren’t valuable? Good job, Mike. Way to play your cards so everyone can see your hand.
We’ve said from the start that our members were valuable and that is also the reasoning given every step of the way about pursuing funding.
Good job, Mike.
Some of your post was objective. I also wrote my comment after first waking up and not fully digesting all of what you say.
So now you say our members aren’t valuable? Good job, Mike. Way to play your cards so everyone can see your hand.
We’ve said from the start that our members were valuable and that is also the reasoning given every step of the way about pursuing funding.
Good job, Mike.
Some of your post was objective. I also wrote my comment after first waking up and not fully digesting all of what you say.
So now you say our members aren’t valuable? Good job, Mike. Way to play your cards so everyone can see your hand.
We’ve said from the start that our members were valuable and that is also the reasoning given every step of the way about pursuing funding.
Good job, Mike.
Some of your post was objective. I also wrote my comment after first waking up and not fully digesting all of what you say.
So now you say our members aren’t valuable? Good job, Mike. Way to play your cards so everyone can see your hand.
We’ve said from the start that our members were valuable and that is also the reasoning given every step of the way about pursuing funding.
Good job, Mike.
Aaron you obviously can’t read:
“So now you say our members aren’t valuable? Good job, Mike. Way to play your cards so everyone can see your hand.”
You said you’d take your round of funding over a round to add new members. I said this:
“We’d take a few hundred 9rules fanatics over money any day of the week, but you’re free to value money and people any way that you wish.”
C’mon man, we’re both using English here.
Aaron you obviously can’t read:
“So now you say our members aren’t valuable? Good job, Mike. Way to play your cards so everyone can see your hand.”
You said you’d take your round of funding over a round to add new members. I said this:
“We’d take a few hundred 9rules fanatics over money any day of the week, but you’re free to value money and people any way that you wish.”
C’mon man, we’re both using English here.
Aaron you obviously can’t read:
“So now you say our members aren’t valuable? Good job, Mike. Way to play your cards so everyone can see your hand.”
You said you’d take your round of funding over a round to add new members. I said this:
“We’d take a few hundred 9rules fanatics over money any day of the week, but you’re free to value money and people any way that you wish.”
C’mon man, we’re both using English here.
Aaron you obviously can’t read:
“So now you say our members aren’t valuable? Good job, Mike. Way to play your cards so everyone can see your hand.”
You said you’d take your round of funding over a round to add new members. I said this:
“We’d take a few hundred 9rules fanatics over money any day of the week, but you’re free to value money and people any way that you wish.”
C’mon man, we’re both using English here.
Comments on this entry are closed.