It probably is viral and paradigm-shifting too, based on the description. It really is the perfect startup - hits every buzzword, founder with a previous exit, all-star team, etc.
After trying hard to understand their idea, I think you just delivered the best explanation. They even mentioned the possibility to integrate "coupons" in their system!
Title doesn't do it justice. The photo-sharing part isn't what's novel. They seem to be building a social graph automatically weighted on physical proximity+frequency, using smartphone sensors (the most important one of which happens to be a camera). That's cool, and potentially game-changing.
"All of your contacts are presented in a list of thumbnails ordered by how strong your connection is to that user. Whenever Color detects that you’re physically near another user (in other words, that you’re hanging out), your bond on the app gets a little stronger. So when you fire up the app and jump to your list of contacts, you’ll probably see your close friends and family members listed first. But if you don’t see a friend for a long time, they’ll gradually flow down the list, and eventually their photos will fade from color to black-and-white.
...If you fired up Color in that restaurant example from earlier, you’d only be able to see photos that had been taken by friends and strangers within 100 feet of that restaurant. That is, unless you jump to your social connections. Tap on your best friend’s profile photo, and you’ll then be able to see all of the photos that have recently been taken within 100 feet of them. In other words, Color is trying to give you a way to see everything that’s going on around you, and everything that’s going on around the people you care about."
"Color is also making use of every phone sensor it can access. The application was demoed to me in the basement of Color’s office — where there was no cell signal or GPS reception. But the app still managed to work normally, automatically placing the people who were sitting around me in the same group. It does this using a variety of tricks: it uses the camera to check for lighting conditions, and even uses the phone’s microphone to ‘listen’ to the ambient surroundings. If two phones are capturing similar audio, then they’re probably close to each other."
Yeah, based on what they said they have some much more ambitious plans than just photo swapping. Unfortunately (but unsurprisingly) they were vague about what those plans entail — they made some references to heavy data crunching, but I couldn't really get a straight answer as to exactly what they were crunching or what it would be used for.
From a browser's perspective, I look forward to use it to find "interesting" things - maybe even something that's breaking. Ideally something I would otherwise not have known about. This might be contingent of the demographic of the people who actually bother to snap the photos, though.
Although it might be hard on the battery, getting a push notification whenever I approached a hub of activity would also be very intriguing. (As long as it isn't the shirtless greeter at Abercrombie & Fitch.)
I've lived in the same country all my life, and I still discover new, interesting things in it.
(On another note, people who snap photos in restaurants should be punched in the face.)
It's like Facebook for the people you spend time with without adding as friends; Foursquare for people that aren't motivated to deliberately broadcast their whereabouts; Grindr for people in your area not looking to hook up.
The underlying technology sounds like it could be useful for everyone from Facebook to the FBI, but the service itself has more buzzwords than users in my area, and I don't see too many reasons why that state of affairs should change dramatically...
> you’ll then be able to see all of the photos that have recently been taken within 100 feet of them.
Why are they restricting it to time? Given such a focused physical proximity, seeing what people were doing where you're standing a year ago might be interesting.
"But how exactly is Color going to make “wheelbarrows of
cash”... the company is still very early on, but it
eventually plans to offer businesses a self-serve platform
for running deals and ads
$41 Million for a photo sharing app and this is the best they came up with? You gotta be kidding me.
I'm guessing when the user takes a picture of yourself near a logo/brand, it automatically offer deals/ads based on the fancy proximity guessing thing. The company seems to be trying to build up eyeballs at this stage.
The high price tag mean they have several patents + trusting investors + solid plan, etc. It's similar to Facebook (Zuckerberg has patents of his own I believe).
Assuming they have a back-door API - this could be a freaking BOON for intelligence gathering arms that are seeking to know the surrounds of anti establishment types.
Further - wait until you apply spatial modeling capabilities (what was that MS tech demo called?) where you can start building 3d navigable models of spaces that all the data collected in that 100' radius allows.
Dont think the military is doing CRAZY things with optical intel:
"The system can also be used for general night vision; it can follow bats five miles away in darkness."
Cool but take a look at the links that I posted which are years old. The fact is that there are amazing technologies employed in certain military and defense research projects that when coupled with todays consumer internet applications have unbelievable capabilities... As a former employee of Lockheed - I can assure you I am not the only person who believes this...
that much money sounds ridiculous, but there's definitely something very cool about proximity-based social networks and these guys now have the time and cash to find the right application.
Sounds technologically impressive, I'm just wondering if a dynamic friend list is really an advantage over a static list. The last thing I want to be doing when hanging out with friends is to be on my mobile phone checking out what they've posted to Color. I'd rather, you know, interact with them in real life. Maybe I missed a vital point of it, though.
The best part about a dynamic friend list: instead of friend requesting a cute girl on Facebook, you need to take lots of photos of her and be near her location all the time.
first thing that I thought to myself when I saw the name - half the world spells it different, so they may want to also buy and brand the colour.com domain
Was anybody able to find the android app? They don't link directly to it and searching for "color" is too generic. Which, btw, is a problem with their name.
I'm curious how a proximity-based social network is going to keep from placing me closer to my upstairs neighbor than, say, my brother on the other coast.
I think from Color's perspective, that's the idea -- only figuring that "adding" implies an acquisition.
Actually, I guess it would depend on whether market validation is worth $10m -- which I doubt, because it's just a feature to them, not a whole product. Also, that's what interns are for, right?
I'm pretty sure that Color also takes interaction within the application into account (i.e. if you frequently comment on a user's photos, view their stream, etc., then it also boosts your social connection).
I've previously been in the camp that there isn't a bubble. This seems like its a valuation of 1 or 2 hundred million for a company that hasn't launched yet. It's very hard to see how this deal could make sense in a traditional way.
Don't get me wrong I think this sounds like an excellent idea that could turn out to be an excellent company. It's just such a large amount of money to raise that it kind of raises the question of what game the VCs and/or founders are really playing.
It seems like at this point there might be a possibility of VCs planning on Facebook and Twitter going public and either being acquired at an inflated price with all that new capitalization or going public themselves in the wake.
I think movie flops are much more uncommon than failed companies though. Maybe this investment represents a very uncommon level of certainty in the company's success. It could also just be a bad investment, there is always a range.
It still isn't clear to me that if there was a sudden readjustment of these overvalued companies how many companies would really be effected and what it would mean for the sector as a whole. I don't think its defining the whole sector the way it did in 2000. It might mean bad things for VCs in general, but maybe this is the economy working VCs out of the system.
I think the VCs realize that this is the start of a bubble and soon wall street will bring loads of public money through fancy investment instruments to the game.
It is always wise to invest at the start of the bubble and withdraw your money before the euphoria peaks. Maybe they are hoping to create a bubble with these ridiculous deals.
This is the deal which firmly cements my belief that there is a big big bubble.
Anyone with the technical skills and idea to launch a tech startup should collect the cash now. Act fast, at this rate the foolish money wont last long.
It's pretty difficult to search for this on the iPhone App. Store, I went through pages and pages on a search for 'color' before going to color.com and clicking the link. Will most people do this though?
Same happened here. It's totally blank until more people around you actually have & use the app. Which no one will do because... it's blank unless other people use it. Classic chicken or the egg problem. I guess $41 million doesn't buy you an answer.
I don't care what it does, $41 million at pre-launch for a mobile app is ridiculous.
I sure believe they've hired a staff of 29 very talented people. But even if you give each of them a salary of more than 1 million dollars it would still take a year to burn that money.
The article makes it seem as if Color hasn't launched yet but it actually has (presumably today). I downloaded it and am pretty stunned at how confusing of a UI $41 million can buy you.
Parts of it are downright broken: the swipe-to-delete makes the "delete" button appear in a very awkward position.
I'll level with a lot of their choices for being "different", but they've gone too far in some instances. It feels very un-iOS. Maybe because it's cross-platform?
Creepiest part- "it uses the camera to check for lighting conditions, and even uses the phone’s microphone to ‘listen’ to the ambient surroundings."
The auto-social network based on proximity is awesome, though. I can't wait for this and the creep factor will be gone in five years anyway since we are all moving to a more open society.
There have been some research projects which can use snapshots of the lighting and sound around you to tell which building you are located in with 90% accuracy. I.E. they can tell you are in the Starbucks and not the hardware store next door. See "SurroundSense: Mobile Phone Localization via Ambience Fingerprinting" in the proceedings of Mobicom 2009.
So the idea here is that it will let me see more and be more in touch with... the people who I already see and am in touch with?
I'd rather do the exact opposite - it's my friends in other states who I want digital tools to keep me more in touch with.
Absolutely, but that is what makes the speculating fun. You have to ask, what possible story could you spin around what they have that justifies $41M pre-revenue. Even assuming a healthy multiple of 20, and investor exit of $250M you're talking about projected earning of $12.5M with a gross margin of say 60% that's like $21M/yr in revenue. And I'm assuming an ABC round (which is to say the would expect to not do another round prior to some liquidity 'event').
But they clearly have a good story and their investors are happy. So silly or not, its the path they've chosen. It reminded me of this blog posting I ran across:
"Simultaneously use multiple iPhones and Androids to capture photos, videos, and conversations into a group album. There’s no attaching, uploading, or friending to do. "
It seems like all Facebook need to do is add a "Merge Albums" feature for use between friends.
And I've come to the conclusion they're just after FB stock via acquisition. Fair plan.
Proximity based advertising is cheaper and more efficient to smaller and local businesses.
I've been working on something similar... $41M sure would be nice! For a group of proven talent I can understand the investment, but $41M is pretty crazy.
Well, at least they have enough money to market it down people's throats. They're going to need every single dollar they can get to eventually get some of those Facebook users to want to use this thing.
184 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 244 ms ] threadToo bad startups aren't checklists to tick off.
"All of your contacts are presented in a list of thumbnails ordered by how strong your connection is to that user. Whenever Color detects that you’re physically near another user (in other words, that you’re hanging out), your bond on the app gets a little stronger. So when you fire up the app and jump to your list of contacts, you’ll probably see your close friends and family members listed first. But if you don’t see a friend for a long time, they’ll gradually flow down the list, and eventually their photos will fade from color to black-and-white.
...If you fired up Color in that restaurant example from earlier, you’d only be able to see photos that had been taken by friends and strangers within 100 feet of that restaurant. That is, unless you jump to your social connections. Tap on your best friend’s profile photo, and you’ll then be able to see all of the photos that have recently been taken within 100 feet of them. In other words, Color is trying to give you a way to see everything that’s going on around you, and everything that’s going on around the people you care about."
"Color is also making use of every phone sensor it can access. The application was demoed to me in the basement of Color’s office — where there was no cell signal or GPS reception. But the app still managed to work normally, automatically placing the people who were sitting around me in the same group. It does this using a variety of tricks: it uses the camera to check for lighting conditions, and even uses the phone’s microphone to ‘listen’ to the ambient surroundings. If two phones are capturing similar audio, then they’re probably close to each other."
I don't understand it from neither a sharer, or a browsers perspective.
Although it might be hard on the battery, getting a push notification whenever I approached a hub of activity would also be very intriguing. (As long as it isn't the shirtless greeter at Abercrombie & Fitch.)
I've lived in the same country all my life, and I still discover new, interesting things in it.
(On another note, people who snap photos in restaurants should be punched in the face.)
The underlying technology sounds like it could be useful for everyone from Facebook to the FBI, but the service itself has more buzzwords than users in my area, and I don't see too many reasons why that state of affairs should change dramatically...
Answer: probably not enough to warrant a $41m investment.
Why are they restricting it to time? Given such a focused physical proximity, seeing what people were doing where you're standing a year ago might be interesting.
The high price tag mean they have several patents + trusting investors + solid plan, etc. It's similar to Facebook (Zuckerberg has patents of his own I believe).
Assuming they have a back-door API - this could be a freaking BOON for intelligence gathering arms that are seeking to know the surrounds of anti establishment types.
Further - wait until you apply spatial modeling capabilities (what was that MS tech demo called?) where you can start building 3d navigable models of spaces that all the data collected in that 100' radius allows.
Dont think the military is doing CRAZY things with optical intel:
"The system can also be used for general night vision; it can follow bats five miles away in darkness."
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2007/02/72632
the military now has autonomous robotic helicopters that can visually track bullets in flight.
http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/02/gigapixel-flyin/
Now they just need the general public to be a part of the larger sensor intel fabric.
I am not sure why the article did not have the link for the application.
edit - never mind they updated the article.
Also how does it feel: " I am using color" vs "I am using Colors"?
* 7 founders (~14% split evenly, unlikely though)
* 41M raised
* Staff of 27 (obviously get some equity)
Some valuation math:
(Dilution) Pre-Money Post-Money (Founder dilution from ~14.28%)
I realize the percentages are essentially a wild guess, but I feel its a good data point to add in.Thinking about it maybe there's a kind of bathtub curve of photos that I'm interested in
- I'm highly interested in photos around me and of close friends
- I don't really care about photos of acquaintances and people I went to school with but haven't seen in years, etc,
-I'm highly interested in photos of people I am close to but that live far away.
Actually, I guess it would depend on whether market validation is worth $10m -- which I doubt, because it's just a feature to them, not a whole product. Also, that's what interns are for, right?
Don't get me wrong I think this sounds like an excellent idea that could turn out to be an excellent company. It's just such a large amount of money to raise that it kind of raises the question of what game the VCs and/or founders are really playing.
It seems like at this point there might be a possibility of VCs planning on Facebook and Twitter going public and either being acquired at an inflated price with all that new capitalization or going public themselves in the wake.
It still isn't clear to me that if there was a sudden readjustment of these overvalued companies how many companies would really be effected and what it would mean for the sector as a whole. I don't think its defining the whole sector the way it did in 2000. It might mean bad things for VCs in general, but maybe this is the economy working VCs out of the system.
It is always wise to invest at the start of the bubble and withdraw your money before the euphoria peaks. Maybe they are hoping to create a bubble with these ridiculous deals.
I am setting up a photo-sharing company, like, now.
Anyone with the technical skills and idea to launch a tech startup should collect the cash now. Act fast, at this rate the foolish money wont last long.
Do they just have a mean, scalable roadmap that we are unaware of?
I sure believe they've hired a staff of 29 very talented people. But even if you give each of them a salary of more than 1 million dollars it would still take a year to burn that money.
I'll level with a lot of their choices for being "different", but they've gone too far in some instances. It feels very un-iOS. Maybe because it's cross-platform?
The auto-social network based on proximity is awesome, though. I can't wait for this and the creep factor will be gone in five years anyway since we are all moving to a more open society.
In theory, If you've got multiple people taking photos at the same place with a short period of time, you can get sound media as well.
Though some may suspect they are trying to put together conversations, I doubt that is the case (but maybe if you want to go for a conspiracy theory).
-------------update apparently they are capturing your conversations --------------------
from their homepage "capture photos, videos, and conversations into a group album".
There's no getting away from the fact this is just an app that shows you photos taken near you, by strangers.
I just don't get it. I might be wrong, in 12 months I might be kicking myself, I just cant imagine it.
But they clearly have a good story and their investors are happy. So silly or not, its the path they've chosen. It reminded me of this blog posting I ran across:
http://www.gamesbrief.com/2011/02/50-questions-why-too-much-...
It seems like all Facebook need to do is add a "Merge Albums" feature for use between friends.
And I've come to the conclusion they're just after FB stock via acquisition. Fair plan.
I've been working on something similar... $41M sure would be nice! For a group of proven talent I can understand the investment, but $41M is pretty crazy.