[chiefalchemist]

Yes and no. I would say those platforms are more like communes. That is, I'll share mine (audience) is you share yours (audience).

It's like any product: starting from scratch to find fit and from that traction is not easy. It's resource intensive. Failure rate is high.

Yes, these platforms get a piece of your action. But they also provide something in exchange; something you'd likely struggle to create on your own otherwise. Then once you find fit, and traction, you can leverage that and transition elsewhere.

[pembrook]

I agree, you can use these platforms to get off the ground fast and transition later.

BUT, here's the problem, the more you develop workflows, habits, and a big back catalogue on their platform, the harder it is for you to transition off of it.

Your content catalogue could have been building SEO juice for you on your own domain. Instead, by transitioning, any link anybody has ever posted to your content or newsletter becomes obsolete and a dead end into substack.

The truth is, if you aren't able to set up your own platform now, you aren't suddenly going to acquire the time and skills needed to do that while tied to a weekly publishing schedule later--especially given the vendor lock-in I mentioned above.

The platforms know this. I've never heard of a commune that venture capital investors were willing to put $15M in hoping for 10X returns.

It's sharecropping.

[chiefalchemist]

If a self-host blog post falls in the woods and no one is there to read it...is transitioning from Commune Y or Z a sound worth whining about? :)

It's only sharecropping if you allow it to be.Furthermore, SEO take more. There's a reason it's its own industry. So early on, are you better off learning SEO and working at it? Or becoming a better communicator, publishing content, finding fit, and getting traction?

SEO is marketing. It is a tool. Not every business and business model is the right fit for that tool. Full stop.

p.s. VC invest in a lot of things. Most fail. A few deliver marginal returns. A sliver deliver. I'm not so sure it's a lens that applies here.

That said, if Medium, etc. are so bad, why doesn't the market reflect that? If content is king, and you're the content producer, then that makes you the land owner.

Yes, SEO is valuable. But to base your entire decision on it and only it, and apply it in a OSFA way is foolish.

If there's a platform to avoid it's FB. That content is walled in and locked down.