Blog Post

Old Bad Ideas 2.0

First it was being reborn as AGLOCO, which despite the founders protestations is old wine, new bottle. The only difference, I can see is some fiscal discipline and use of public market funds instead of VC dollars. Now there is word that, the shining example of the 1990s excess and a boom gone wrong is making a come back in some shape or the other.

For readers to young to remember, was a fashion website that included a former model amongst its three co-founders, and had blown through over $40 100 million in private capital. The long departed Industry Standard, whose archives till live among us, had a nice story on the rise, fall and further fall of

This morbid tales from Internet crypt are making me shudder, but since we will not worry for now…. you know that old saying, trouble comes in threes! If you have any guesses on old bad ideas making a 2.0 appearance, share them with us.

16 Responses to “Old Bad Ideas 2.0”

  1. I personally think it is an idea that if implemented correctly, may be the next big thing. I’ve had difficulties explaining to laymen about Agloco hence I came up with simple but effective phrases and diagrams.
    To be honest, if anyone wants to know why this will be big, go get a copy of the book, The Google Story. There, you’ll find tons of similarities between Agloco and Google during the start-up period as well as their mindset. I wish for good health and forever happiness to you and your love ones!

  2. just goes to show you why you should ALWAYS investigate and do your research on a company FIRST before even thinking about giving them 2 precious minutes of your time thinking you MIGHT earn a few lousy bucks. dont waste your time or effort. spare yourself wasted time and trouble from Algoco.

  3. Even if the company is a mild success and pays out some money to its users, won’t it be good for people to make some money? I really don’t see the risk.

    I hope they do well. Why should Google and Yahoo dominate the world of online advertising? If we can get even a small piece of that money into our own hands, I say good.

  4. O, how myopic we are! Check out the shipping comparison site and tell me whether anyone remembers! Iship’s original mission was to be a portal for multi-carrier package shipping. Didn’t work. Here’s why: To be successful as a “travelocity-for-package-shipping”, you need each carrier’s rates, delivery commit times, drop-off/drop-box locations, and an approved connection to their servers for generating shipping labels. The two most expensive and dominant carriers, UPS and Fedex, will not cooperate…they have nothing to win by allowing an intermediary to come in between their customers.

    The tell-tale sign of an impending shut down is clear: try doing a price comparison on Redroller, and you will see that the biggest shipping company, UPS, is missing. It was a good idea with no business model then, and it is a good idea with no business model now. What were the Redroller investors thinking!

  5. Specifically vis-a-vis Boo, and such ‘opportunists’ making a come-back, the development of markets and tech adoption in the meanwhile could mean they may not be bad-idea-redux after all, provided they are good at executing and have a robust business model in the first place.

    In Europe, for instance, Net-A-Porter has built up a huge, loyal and all online customer base for multi-brand luxury retailing. The web experience is not spectacular, as Boo wanted it to be but the overall experience is good. Several multibrand retailers such as Neiman Marcus are also letting users buy mass luxury brands online.

    Worldwide, growth in broadband adoption also means that flashy (both the OTT adjective and the Flash-y) websites are not a pain in the user’s derriere anymore, which they were pre-crash.

    So before putting them under ‘Bad Idea Returns’ lets see what pans out. It is wise to be wary but too much caution and all enterprise is thrown to the wind..

  6. Yeah… that number is different everywhere ( says $130 million) but for sure is beyond $100 million.

    And let’s not forget about buying what was left of literally “for peanuts” back in mid 2000 (domain name, brand rights, etc). I don’t quite remember what was the estimate but I think it was like a couple of millions. So if is going to get re-launched then it’s probably the Fashionmall people (if you go to the name is still there).

    Ohh… the ‘ol dotcom days!!


  7. Henrik and JP I updated the data. There seems to be some difficulty in getting the accurate information for now, so I put over $100 million. On Monday, I will check with the folks at Venture Source and get a more accurate number.

  8. I thought it was $120MM. But, my fun connection is an acquaintance in NY was building their offices – extremely over the top and glamorous offices – and right when they finished … Boo was gone.

    If memory serves, they never moved in.