[iamelgringo]

http://VidCaster.com has been building branded pages for companies for well over a year. We've been using them for http://hackersandfounders.tv for months, and we've been thrilled.

VidCaster's also more than just a wrapper around the YouTube API.

They let you import the videos that are already on YouTube and Vimeo, and move them over to VidCaster's streaming service. Crazy good service. Team has been working with online video for years.

Also, VidCaster just demoed at 500 Startups last week and already has paying clients like Microsoft, ZenDesk AirBnb, Twilio, etc...

What I don't get is why TechCrunch seems to give YC companies more coverage than 500 Startups companies. I suppose it's nice to have Arrington as the LP of one of your investors (SV Angel).

[raypaw]

Hey gang. Ray from VidCaster here. iamelgringo, as always thanks for the love. I've had a few conversations with Michael (Vidyard CEO) over Twitter and he is a great guy and their product looks great as well. On the TC story, I left a comment that we are looking forward to a friendly rivalry but the reality is that VidCaster offers a different value prop — we give our users the ability to create turnkey SEO-optimized video websites. In fact, I'm sure there is room for both VidCaster and Vidyard — as we look to the future of VidCaster we think it could very well be a player-agnostic solution for users of services like Vidyard (and Brightcove or Ooyala for that matter). As for the rivalry between 500 and YC, I liken it to the rivalry between Indiana University (my alma mater, as well as my two co-founders) and Purdue. When I meet someone from Purdue, I raz them about it but just for fun. I share your frustrations regarding coverage from TC -- I think one of the problems is that TC writers don't have "beats" (at least to my knowledge) so there is no one who has a comprehensive understanding of the OVP space and how each new entrant is differentiated. Contrast that with Ryan Lawler at Giga-Om who places new product announcements like Vimeo Pro in context of the larger OVP space. But as Ice-T taught us, don't have the player — hate the game.

[iamelgringo]

Please delete the above comment, or failing that..

Downvote my comment to get it to the bottom of the page.

Sorry about the above, if it came off as dickish, or as trying to steal the thunder from VidYard. That's my bad.

I'm still seething from this crap article in the NYT yesterday, and feeling full of piss and vinegar about the whole thing: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2907570

I'm my pissy attitude bled over into my comment about TechCrunch and YC. Poor form. I apologize.

This is VidYard's chance to shine. I have no right to post links to another startup.

Apologies...

[kfarr]

Hi all, I'm Kieran, one of the founders of VidCaster here. iamelgringo is a passionate fan of our service but does not speak for our company.

VidYard's product looks simple and solid. I am happy to see continued validation of the business video market and congrats to the team for addressing what we agree is a common and growing pain -- the difficulty for businesses to leverage video to drive sales and increase the efficiency of their operations.

Welcome Vidyard and congrats on the launch of a solid product. Let's grab drinks soon, we're still here in Mountain View for another few weeks before 500 HQ kicks us out :)

[michaelrlitt]

Sounds awesome. Thanks to both you and Ray for the positive comments, etc. E-mail re: beers is en route to your inbox.

[cal5k]

Why the hate-on for Vidyard? It was founded a bunch of smart young guys from Waterloo with a passion for building a good product... I, for one, think it's great that they got a writeup in TC.

[Gaussian]

>What I don't get is why TechCrunch seems to give YC companies more coverage than 500 Startups companies.

How can you possibly not get that? YC is a bigger deal, so it gets more coverage. There's little nuance to the matter. If 500 Startups rattles off the hits and builds a pedigree similar to YC, it will receive commensurate coverage. I'm not saying other startups don't deserve coverage. I'm saying that the Valley and the tech crowd (TC's audience, by and large) are demonstrably interested in what comes out of YC -- so why wouldn't TC cover it well?

[olivercameron]

This trend of other companies trying to hijack other companies launches is really disappointing, especially when said company is in your incubator. Why not submit something for Vidcaster separately?

[ig1]

It's perfectly reasonable to discuss competitors in a thread discussing the announcement of a new company/product, we should of course keep such discussion civil and respectful, but HN is a discusion site not a cheerleading one.

[prayag]

>What I don't get is why TechCrunch seems to give YC companies more coverage than 500 Startups companies. I suppose it's nice to have Arrington as the LP of one of your investors (SV Angel).

That's just bull-shit. Just because they covered your competitor doesn't mean you get to talk shit about the coverage.

In addition, I just don't get why are you getting so excited about this. You know who is eating your lunch, not VidYard, it's YouTube and the Sales executive who don't know any better than uploading video on YouTube. You have a common enemy called ignorance. Instead of getting riled up about competition may be you guys should work together.

[davemc500hats]

maybe i'm mistaken, but i think the comment was made by Jonathan Nelson, who runs the Hackers & Founders meetup, not by anyone at Vidcaster (a 500 company).

also to clarify: 500 Startup is an investor in many YC companies (close to 20 at current count), so altho we may occasionally compete at the incubator level we have tremendous respect for PG & team, as well as their companies, and we would go out of our way to not talk shit about them, as well as taking issue with people who do.

kisses,

dmc

[prayag]

Copy pasted from below: "I happen to know Kieran Farr quite well. http://www.vidcaster.com/ was one of the first companies in our Co-op incubator. And, I have no doubt, that Kieran is going to be far richer than some reporter who still makes his living writing for a company that think that selling yesterday's news written on pieces of dead tree is a viable business model."

Now this is just a mean comment.

Nothing against 500 start-ups. Personally I don't think either YC or any company they fund considers 500start-ups as a competitor. There are tons of incubators in Silicon Valley.

The spirit in which the comment was made was just mean, in a manner that was directly attacking the company for being a competitor to their company(or his friend's company, or however it works).

No comments about Techcrunch's conflict of interest. I am not in the know-how of how the investment tree looks like.

[ig1]

Although the OP didn't phrase it in perhaps the most tactful way, there is a serious issue of undisclosed conflict of interest going on here. Techcrunch's own policy (I suspect general AOL editorial policy as well) requires full disclosure, and it's simply not happening here.

[prayag]

I agree completely. If there is a conflict of interest, it should be disclosed. (I don't know how there is a conflict of interest, I am not aware of how the investment graph looks like.)

[ig1]

Mike Arrington (editor of TC) is a limited partner in SV Angels who offer to invest in every YC startup via a convertible note.

[genieyclo]

?

iamelgringo is a customer of VidCaster, not a competitor of Vidyard.

I also don't understand your ignorance comment. Vidcaster and Vidyard are two competing companies.

iamelgringo brings up a salient point I think, YC companies get a disproportionate amount of coverage on TC as compared to other startups.

[olivercameron]

Customer of VidCaster? I don't think so, check his previous comments:

"I happen to know Kieran Farr quite well. http://www.vidcaster.com/ was one of the first companies in our Co-op incubator. And, I have no doubt, that Kieran is going to be far richer than some reporter who still makes his living writing for a company that think that selling yesterday's news written on pieces of dead tree is a viable business model."

[genieyclo]

Pardon me, I inferred from the hackersandfounders.tv site that uses VidCaster was an independent venture and not by a co-op incubator or anything.

The main point I have against this article are that

1) It's poor journalism in that little research into competitors was done. Leena Rao doesn't seem to be aware of the many competitors who have been in this space for years (like VidCaster) but only a few like Ooyala and Brightcove (which TechCrunch uses iirc).

2) Lack of disclosure as to the relationship between TechCrunch and YC startups is a problem. There's an inherent bias without full disclosure.

[prayag]

>I also don't understand your ignorance comment. Vidcaster and Vidyard are two competing companies.

Ignorance on the part of Sales executives who upload their videos on youtube.

[benologist]

"What I don't get is why TechCrunch seems to give YC companies more coverage than 500 Startups companies."

Bucketloads of free traffic from HN.

[awfycooper]

Not cool man, really not cool. Hi-jacking is a lacking-services way of advertising.