Blog Post

Company Note: Wrong On All Counts

Stay on Top of Enterprise Technology Trends

Get updates impacting your industry from our GigaOm Research Community
Join the Community!

Mike, Despite your apparent cold war with us, all it would have taken you to get the facts is drop me an e-mail. Instead, you got it wrong on all counts: TechCrunch reports that our company is looking to raise $2 million to $3 million and that we are also considering selling the company. I can’t say this clearly enough: he is wrong on ALL counts. Let me elaborate:
— We may raise some more money but it is nowhere in the range Mike reports.
— We raised considerably less than a million in our first round from Greycroft partners…we didn’t disclose the round, but all we said was it was less than a million.
No, we are NOT looking to sell…not now, not in the near future. True, companies have approached us on whether we would consider the option, both in the past and even now, (some have even mentioned it publicly) but that’s probably happened to every company mentioned in Mike’s post. And my stock answer to anyone interested: We’re not yet ready.

So there you have it…over and out.

19 Responses to “Company Note: Wrong On All Counts”

  1. Kip Sheeline

    Your newsletter is concise, factual and, when you add editorial comment, in my opinion it's an intelligent perspective. Keep up the good work and don't let unattributed rumors get under your skin.

  2. Now now ladies. Interesting to see that this story has the most posts I've ever seen on a stroy. It has everything a news story should have. Drama, money, lust…er, well, maybe not. But I do LOVE paidcontent, news aggregator or not.

  3. I actually enjoy and get excited reading TC. Although it's easy to point out criticisms with someone who stakes his name with subjective opinions, Mike provides much more good than harm as so many startups rely on TC for information, mostly awesome!

  4. Rafat,

    Your site, particularly is a complete joke. In fact, it is nothing more than a news aggregator with a one line commentary. The fact that Mark Lehman who is not known at all, has joined Def Jam and that makes the front page of Moconews just shows how pathetically useless your site is.

  5. ..The first comment is at 3:14 am, right after the post went live. In those wee hours, most people are either asleep or in flagrante delicto…

    Ed, people on the other side of the world are wide awake during these hours :)

  6. From what I read, his descriptions were not designed to be accurate. They didn't give specifics, but ranges. It looks more like an opinion piece created to generate a page views for all. While he may be wrong with regard to this site and financing, he does raise some interesting points.

  7. TC is all about throwing spaghetti against the wall to generate page views for ad serving.

    The first comment is at 3:14 am, right after the post went live. In those wee hours, most people are either asleep or in flagrante delicto.

    You have to wonder what TC CEO Heather Harde thinks of these posts. It's got to make her nostalgic for Fox. You assume Mikey had to load her up with options to get her to bolt.


  8. There's a steep difference between paidcontent and techcrunch. I read both, and while techcrunch is clearly more popular, it's far less valuable, in my opinion. This site has valuable news and commentary, techcrunch has tons of profiles with very little solid analysis.

  9. Mike is using this to promote his stock. The public secret is that he is actively selling his company right now.

    Cnet passed and others are questioning his deal value. Mike is just trying to gain support for a financing that is going south. Now he is making up that he can rollup other blogs as his primary business model. Nice try Mike.

    Note to Mike: Nobody wants to work with you. Sell Techcrunch now while it's worth something. My guess is that you can get close to $5-$10m cash if you sell it hard.

  10. Dell Harris

    great post, rafat. fwiw, i think your site's quite valuable and i'm glad you're not going anywhere. truth is i didn't get too excited reading the techcrunch post. as someone on this board earlier noted, arrington's credibility as a reporter is poor. isn't he the guy who said rupert murdoch would buy yahoo? :) that and a lot of other one-sourced rumors put out as fact…the dude must be feeling the heat because his stuff is getting really mediocre of late.

    anyway, keep doing the great work.

  11. I don't think I'm saying that you can completely trust all sources. IMHO Techcrunch is a specific offender and often uses gossip to replace facts.

  12. errr, so sorry, but YOUR comment says: "M-U-S-T question everything…".

    frankly, i do not read tc, but i suggest YOU question everything from EVERY SOURCE…including paid content and wsj.

    what, no hulu pumping here today?

  13. I believe more of what I read in the WSJ than I do in Techcrunch. Sorry. If you feel that Techcrunch is a bastian of credibility then prove it. I'm all ears.

  14. The reason why Arrington got his facts wrong is because he researched via Twitter. His facts were from his followers in Twitter and obviously did not bother talking to the subjects of his post… like you. Is that how you write and research for posts now? Via Twitter?

  15. Michael Arrington does have a credibility problem and it will hurt his ultimate valuation. I agree that a blog can be a media company and credibility always has to be there. He seems to be overly casual with facts — to the point where you MUST question everything he says. Sorry, but I don't have to do that with the WSJ.