[brianvan5155]

I'm a web producer and developer. I'm an early commenter from Slashdot, Ars Technica, and Gawker. I've been using online communities for 22 years, longer than some people around here have been alive. I've read quite a few threads on HN and respect this as a news source, and I haven't felt fit to contribute until now.

I've been talking with Julie about her experiences as a like-minded professional and I also remain baffled why her extremely sensible business plan continues to //receive tepid interest// (EDIT: originally wrote "go unfunded" here but I'm speaking inaccurately and out-of-line) despite an aggressive half-year VC campaign while the most harebrained ideas in the world (founded by prep school dudes) seem to effortlessly accumulate resources provided by others... including free press from many of the news sources that get shared here frequently. I believe business leaders in our industry play favorites and manipulate us into believing their partners are somehow better and more deserving than the rest of us... and that it fattens their bottom line and increases their domination of the culture of this industry. I think more of us need to take a stand against this... if not just on principle, but because it's good business and certainly a better plan than the lengthy boom/bust cycles this VC ruling class keeps leading the rest of us through like lemmings, leading to capital shortages and employment drop-offs that starve families and stifle innovation.

So, let's use this as a forum to discuss what may or may not be wrong about this view of things.

[homosaur]

Chasing VC money is becoming an increasingly stupid thing to do with your business. The sooner everyone realizes this and start to build businesses that actually reflect need, the better off we'll be.

I cannot imagine how many people's 20's have been wasted in the last decade chasing some mythical social web 2.0 dollar. We need to understand that most of the Instagrams of the world got lucky simply because of the bubble and the confusion over what's a viable business on the Internet not because they've actually created billions in value.

They won a damn lottery, they aren't creating models for new business.

[rdouble]

remain baffled why her extremely sensible business plan continues to go unfunded despite an aggressive half-year VC campaign while the most harebrained ideas in the world

Maybe cuz it's an API for social games. No Silicon Valley VC will fund anything that has to do with games these days. Untried harebrained ideas at least don't have dismal track records yet.

[Redoubtable]

Heh I'm stoked someone called us an API for social games. Usually people call us wildly less accurate things. YAY!

We are technically a suite of tools (which you know depending on your executional ability is an API, or a set of SDKs, or us hand holding you through using them) for brand managers and marketers to build applications and games with their own data. Layer up content + actions and out pops your very own custom THING.

We have found that there is a huge demand for brand creative, as digital marketing requires more marketing, not less, with newer storylines & media format being demanded w/ever more frequent turns.The advertising agencies are struggling to deliver quality, timely results, and brand managers struggle to afford the associated cost of traditional, all original (or custom) marketing.

We believe that if brands could rapidly create compelling new campaign media by leveraging a standing (and hopefully ever improving) body of component elements with their own brand data and concepts this is a powerful

Obviously this approach is well accepted today in software creation and the good news in we have worked with host of brands to try this theory out in practice- aka in client paid efforts. 

Essentially what we're seeing, is if the tools allow quality brand marketing results, that reflect the brand’s story telling objective, then the brand manager is satisfied. 

If the creative cost & delivery are both materially lower, this is a winning path—and the birth of a potentially formidable new cloud based SaaS business

[RyanZAG]

I'm in the industry so I get what you're saying here - but I'm pretty sure most VCs and your customers are going to be mighty confused. You should try and simplify a 'what we do' message that is easier to understand.

The first 30 seconds of introduction to your concept is the most important - make sure people can understand it!

[lancewiggs]

Without looking at the site, here are three potential what we do messages:

"We help businesses make compelling games using their own customer's data"

"We help businesses make personalised games for their customers"

"Personalised games for your customers"

[iosnoob]

I'm also in the industry and I second this.

Speak plain English and explain in a nustshell what you do for whom.

Investors and brands are busy, make it easy for them.

[Redoubtable]

Indeed! We've rarely had a confused customer thankfully.

[pekk]

This is also consistent with confused people not becoming customers.

[Redoubtable]

Heh well yes. Logical win :-)

[balloot]

I read this and still have no clue what this business is. You may want to consider the possibility that Silicon Valley isn't massively broken and you simply don't have a good elevator pitch.

[snowwrestler]

I understood but only because I work very near the world of PR, which is the language in which the parent post was written.

The background is that big companies like Coke or Nike need creative content to post on Facebook and Twitter. They pay PR agencies huge dollars to come up with that content.

My plain English translation would be something like: this company helps PR agencies make custom online games for their clients. The agencies will look good because lots of people will play the games. (Maybe the games also collect consumer preference data--not clear.) Agencies with developers on staff can self-service; agencies without developers can pay extra to get help.

[rdouble]

The text on playapi.com says "PLAYAPI IS A PLATFORM FOR CREATING SOCIAL GAMES AND APPLICATIONS." in a big font.

[Redoubtable]

Indeed it is what says! Which is kind of the lost point I should make in all of this in that we've in the past positioned the company to appeal to certain things we thought the industry would find appealing not necessarily our customers.

Who really don't find us through our website but through word of mouth with ad agencies, brand managers and media partners. But nevertheless we say PLATFORMS! SOCIAL GAMES! SHIT WE THINK WILL PLAY WELL BUT OUR CUSTOMER BASE DOESN'T CARE ABOUT REALLY.

And well I suppose this is all true. But also framing.

[OGinparadise]

Maybe it was decided in Zynga's better days. Now they may want to revisit that, games aren't happening

[gregpilling]

>We are technically a suite of tools (which you know depending on your executional ability is an API, or a set of SDKs, or us hand holding you through using them) for brand managers and marketers to build applications and games with their own data. Layer up content + actions and out pops your very own custom THING.

I have signed up for a demo. Would like the handholding variety please. I have a brand in truck accessories (http://traxda.com) and one in phone cases (http://sascase.com).

[dinkumthinkum]

> Heh I'm stoked someone called us an API for social games. Usually people call us wildly less accurate things. YAY!

You're website says:

"playapi IS A PLATFORM FOR CREATING SOCIAL GAMES"

And your name is "playapi." Sounds pretty accurate given the website. :)

Now as a total outsider to your business or it's history, having never heard of it, if this comment is like your pitch, personally, I think it is a little convoluted. HTH!

[brianvan5155]

I'm oversimplifying and muddying things by referring to funding, so let's bring this back to what it's supposed to be about: I believe, from what I know, that this is a company with strong fundamentals. (You can inquire more if you are interested, but I don't feel at liberty to provide specifics for a private firm) But you're right: "No Silicon Valley VC" will support an idea that fails to appeal to their biases. And I question where their biases lie. And I question the effect that their activities have on the stability of the industry.

It's true that I have other friends who have very well-funded companies and who I believe have businesses with strong fundamentals. (One of them: a social gaming company) But I also can't deny that all of the friends who have received significant support in this industry have really similar backgrounds and attributes to them, and that the homogenous nature of the industry - in diversity and in thought - is disturbing. I think it discourages healthy growth of the industry from the sort of people who would disrupt the homogenous nature of the industry. The disruptors hate being disrupted!

[rdouble]

I wouldn't say the homogeneity is disturbing. Like attracting like is a common human theme. However, it is a bit disappointing.

That said, it seems like SV isn't really into the media agency industry, either. Even Apple's marketing is done mostly in Los Angeles. Maybe this particular company would be better off in NYC or LA?

[RyanZAG]

If you believe that the current VC crowd is playing favorites and passing over highly profitable investments, it would be heavily in your best interests to become a small-time VC and help fund these projects. There is a lot of money in backing the winner.

And there is always Kickstarter.

[radio4fan]

Well this makes sense to me in a way that the post didn't. I didn't identify 'tech' as meaning 'VC ruling class'. I guess I'm just obtuse.

[brianvan5155]

Part of the struggle is to make sure that one subculture of businessmen in SV isn't allowed to position themselves as entirely representing the interactive media industry. There is already more than them out there... a lot more. But they are so frequently given credit as the only game in town. And they like it that way, it makes them feel more important. It shouldn't be all about just "them".