Comments on: Feedster finds funding http://gigaom.com/2005/06/02/feedster-finds-funding/ Sat, 11 Feb 2012 06:01:09 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Om Malik http://gigaom.com/2005/06/02/feedster-finds-funding/#comment-103820 Sat, 04 Jun 2005 15:39:59 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/06/02/feedster-finds-funding/#comment-103820 coming soon … stay tuned

thanks

]]> By: Dan http://gigaom.com/2005/06/02/feedster-finds-funding/#comment-103819 Sat, 04 Jun 2005 07:55:03 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/06/02/feedster-finds-funding/#comment-103819 We want the dirt: numbers.

]]> By: Tim A http://gigaom.com/2005/06/02/feedster-finds-funding/#comment-103818 Fri, 03 Jun 2005 20:42:12 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/06/02/feedster-finds-funding/#comment-103818 They all think they’re leading and prominent but 99% are certainly lagging!!

]]> By: Om Malik http://gigaom.com/2005/06/02/feedster-finds-funding/#comment-103817 Thu, 02 Jun 2005 16:48:23 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/06/02/feedster-finds-funding/#comment-103817 brian

you pose an interesting question. i love it. i think i should make that a site wide policy now

]]> By: brian http://gigaom.com/2005/06/02/feedster-finds-funding/#comment-103816 Thu, 02 Jun 2005 16:46:08 +0000 http://gigaom.wordpress.com/2005/06/02/feedster-finds-funding/#comment-103816 I notice that when you use adjectives to describe certain investors like VCs or angels you most always use superlatives. As in a “leading” VC or “prominent” angel investors. Is there ever a case for describing a “lagging” VC or “obscure” angel investors?

]]>