Wednesday, March 28, 2007

(more) dust in your eyes: craigslist foundation

do some research on this, will you? I'd use the comments referring to it in the "craig$" article in the SF Weekly as a starting point.

see you in a week or so...
(I hope this will be my last move -- I've just about had it...)


Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Craig changes his story... (and just *how* he does it...)

MORE: and yes, you'd be surprised (or not...) that interview after interview after boring interview... the issues are still there... intact! every single issue I brought up on this blog! (Craig is either not asked anything -- we just get his story... over and over and over... or if there is the least relevant question, his non-answers are accepted without a word and the pointless interview keeps moving along... what's the point? feels like the movie Groundhog Day... might just as well tell people to listen to a previous interview and be done with it...) D.

By now Craig is far far away from what he originally told people: he asked the community what they could charge for to pay the bills! (just search for his prior statements on the issue, the earlier the better; I’d search before the Lime interview -- that seems to have been the tipping point).

What’s most telling is *how* he does it: in incremental little steps (little by little until he gets to the opposite of what he initially said). Reminds me of Steven Glass and his “method” (start with telling the truth, then say something that is almost true, then something that could be true until you get to the complete whopper! What’s remarkable about this “method” is that people who have believed you through the earlier stages are very likely to be with you at the end…)

re: “What’s the right way to raise some revenue, say to pay the bills or whatever…” [my emphasis] (7:32 min mark)


Monday, March 26, 2007

saddest thing about craigslist...

... plenty of good people fall head on for the spiel (just imagine how painful the wake up would be...) D.

Saturday, March 24, 2007

(ownership of craigslist) Go Wikipedia, go!


"Who own's Craiglist? Craig? The article doesn't say. Sylvain1972 20:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)"
they are finally getting to the real issues! and yes, there is publicly available information on this (things Craig has said about it in the past) -- if Wikipedia pursues this, they deserve a big pat on the back! I hope you'll look into this, but I'll also try to track things down myself (I kind of know what I will find but I want to be able to quote) when the move whirl is over (1 to 2 weeks from now, you may want to check for an update to this entry). D.

Thursday, March 22, 2007

sounds like false modesty but it's true...

EVEN MORE: if you don't have the time to track down these things yourself, here' s a good example: the French woman is plainly asking him how to add a new section to craigslist ("So we contact you saying I would like to add a section or...?", 6:48 min mark) and what does he answer?("They just do what they need and usually don't contact us... which is ok..." 6.52 min mark)

His answer makes absolutely no sense -- there is no way a new section could be just added to craigslist without asking them to add it... well, short of hacking! he completely missed a very clear question... ended-up answering who knows what... -- I have no idea what could have possibly confused him (you'll see plenty of this if you listen to interviews where people ask him questions he may not have expected -- he seems to have difficulty adjusting to new information). D.

MORE: it's also pretty funny to see how often he gets ignored when he posts comments on the web... it's not exactly a surprise -- his comments are usually just empty non-sense (either damage control or just... silly nothings...) D.

Craig: "I'm just part of a customer service team, all much better than me" (1st comment)

you know... it's really true! (it's gotta be!) just check-out a good number of his responses to people... (either on craigslist or on the web: often times he comes across so confused it makes you think he must be tripping... for real!) anybody else would probably get fired for that...


Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Monday, March 19, 2007

(inadequate customer service): (mis)handling abuse

"What does CL actually do about abuse?" good question.... and the answer? "Abuse reports are consistantly ignored"-- ahh, if only Craig knew about it... (I'm sure he has no clue... ;) otherwise he would have surely hired an adequate number of customer service people, right JD?; re: "I'm sure they'll grow the staff as needed to serve their community")


P.S. and no... it's not an isolated problem (just search if you have the time and the interest) D.

Sunday, March 18, 2007

is Craig *gambling*? but of course...

MORE: also, something else could collapse Craig's house of cards: if people woke up! and stopped believing his goofy PR... but... Good god! that would mean acknowledging they'be been had -- big time! and not just a couple of people but pretty much everybody! that's not an easy thing to do, by any means... But if the real thing came around, there would be no hiding from reality... D.

Hi Gomerrr!

He seems to be milking craigslist for as much as he CAN *at the moment* while keeping his eyes firm on the *long term* profits ... (plenty of things that could bring more profits now would be a bad idea in the long run).


P.S. Is he GAMBLING? of course (if you ask *me*...): the thing can collapse in his face, anytime...-- all it would take is for the real thing to come around and Craig would be exposed as a fraud... (again, *my* opinion): imagine someone actually *doing* what Craig is only preaching... (imagine the tens of millions in net profit being spent on customer service and improvements instead of finding their way into Craig's, Jim's and other shareholders' pockets -- given the tunes they have been singing, they should have never turned for profit! there was no rhyme or reason for it... makes me think they never meant a word they were saying... it was just "creative capitalism," -- better known as bullshit -- as a poster said in the forums – damn, can't find the quote, again...) D.

Wikipedia page on "craigslist": fact-checking

re: "Couldn't Craig issue a press release stating these facts somewhere on Would that be sufficient for facts if we were referring to them in regards to the company. Basically an official statement by the company. Strawberry Island 23:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC) " (under "article errors")

*couldn't* he?.... :) Well... I'm sure he could... and I think he *would*! if he could just get away with it -- if Wikipedia would accept his *saying* so as FACT (I hope they don't...) ...

as to "would that be sufficient for facts [my emphasis]" ... I would hope NOT! Wikipedia has been much better than the vast majority of media as far as regarding Craig's blog, for instance, as biased towards Craig and his company... don't give-up now!:)


Saturday, March 17, 2007

the coming of people$list (it's just a matter of time...)

Craig: "If somebody serves our community better than we do, we are screwed..." (01:22)

very well put! and...yep! I think it's gonna happen... (it's just a matter of time...) -- just imagine tens of millions spent on customer service and improvements instead of disappearing in the thin air... D.

Friday, March 16, 2007

GFE, anyone? (it's illegal, but craigslist doesn't care...)

MORE: generally, users assume that if they ask a question in the feedback forum, they will get an official response from craigslist (or at least one that craigslist finds adequate -- this is not unreasonable, given that they say they read all posts in feedback) D.

this wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't posted in feedback forum (where craigslist staff reads all posts) or if there was at least an "academic" approach to defining the term... the way it is presented there is little doubt what's going on here... (wink-wink, nudge-nudge) re: "Obviously many of us [my emphasis] seek this GFE, not a pro" as a response to what does the term mean "in the erotic ads" (right under the eyes of the craigslist staff with no reaction from them... -- something like, "ads offering gfe are illegal, please flag/send to abuse etc." would have been in order)


Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Craig gets by with *a lot* of help from his "friends"....

"Craig [Newmark, founder] isn't interested in having a business. He's interesting in having five thousand friends." (under 5:17)

No kidding! who needs a real business? -- those are annoying things that just soak up money... it's much more efficient to pocket the money and get your "friends" to promote your business! ... and the less they know about what's really going on the better! (they can sing praises all day long... and get other poor souls to join them... until the whole world is just one big circle of clueless "friends" -- Craig's friends!)


Tuesday, March 13, 2007

a hefty cash cow...

EVEN MORE: variations on the same theme...

follow-up comment for Giovanni

well… just how well is craigslist serving the people who have helped built it, spread it and develop it? (keep in mind that craigslist started as a non-profit and after garnering huge support as such — donation, expertize, word of mouth — turned for profit ostensibly “to pay the bills” but what they really did is turn into a cash cow! they figured pocketing the money was more fun than using it to serve their community…)

it’s severely understaffed and underdeveloped and not for lack of available $$$ — they just prefer to pocket tens of millions in net profit… and somehow manage to get smart people (such as yourself) to justify their behavior…


P.S. are you *sure* you are not on their payroll?:)

re: "was reminded that craigslist does not own a community; rather, it serves the community"

Hi Giovanni!

how do you figure that? craigslist looks more and more like a ... hefty cash cow!


P.S. feel free to check-out my craigslist criticism blog for details D.

MORE: I'm trying an experiment: I'll post the same comment on a number of blogs... (and not just wish them well and leave...) we'll see what happens (hopefully I'll be able to keep up with the responses...)

Shel Israel (didn't seem to be home...)

Uwe Hook (posted a comment to this entry)

follow-up comment for JD:

#1 "I don't recall whether Craigslist was originally a nonprofit -- i didn't think they were."
well... after having wrote a craigslist criticism blog for a few month and having talked with quite a few enthusiasts, I'm no longer surprised that people who have great words of praise for craigslist are unfamiliar with pivotal events it its history (such as having turned for profit ostensibly "to pay the bills" and then pocketing tens of millions for years)

#2 "I'm sure they'll grow the staff as needed to serve their community" -- the need has been there for a very long time as well as the resources -- the *willingness* has been lacking! but if you are SURE... you are sure... (what can I say about that?)

#3 "I do know that they've been focused like a laser on serving the community since day 1, hence their very loyal following"

you may want to do some research before believing their PR...

#4 "In any event, it's certain that they're not out to maximize profits, otherwise Craig would have sold the site and bought his own island by now."

you seem to have a thing for "sure" and "certain" when things are far from it...

the long term plan (that they claim not to have) appears to maximize profits for the long run (just look at the pattern of starting to charge for jobs in new cities when the job market matures) -- this may result in much more money than what he could make by selling

also, Craig seems to be after other things than just money (power and influence would be lost if he sold)


P.S. thanks for sharing your thoughts with me! we seem to be so far apart on this subject that... I doubt I helped much... but at least I tried!:) take care! D.

Hi JD!

this quote sounds funny to me -- it seems to apply to craigslist just as much as it may apply to the newspapers... especially the "now they've been positioned as cash cows."


P.S. craigslist started as a non-profit serving the community that helped build it,spread it and develop it; then they turned for profit ostensibly "to pay the bills" and have become what appears to be a ... hefty cash cow! that gets fatter by the day...(craigslits estimated net profits have been in the tens of millions for years and constantly growing -- would they have stayed non-profit, this is the money that would have been used to *serve the community*, to hire an adequate number of customer service people and do badly needed improvements among other things). D.

"craigslist charges...(...)... but just to pay expenses"

last comment for Jordan:

"you are welcome, Jordan!

I think it's great that you are doing some research... (this in itself makes it worthwhile that I talked to you) -- I would just recommend that you focus on the fundamentals (things like history of craigslist and their past and current claims) and on *the facts* (such as how does the customer service look like on the ground -- as opposed to what craigslist or the media say; how much does Craig *profit* from craigslist -- as opposed to how big his salary may be, which is just a red herring...).

otherwise, there is a whole lot of speculation about craigslist that I believe misses the important issues and confuses others... but that's for *you* to decide!:)

ok! nice talking to you! take care! D.

follow up comment for Jordan:

#1 "There are many expenses server update, executive pay, employee payments constant upgrades."

as I said... their NET profits are estimated to have been in the tens of millions for years (that's *after* all those expenses you list are deducted)

#2 "Executives and other profits, whether that be for future costs or the people should be expected."

would they have been *upfront* about wanting to make money, the question of profits would have been moot (they would have been entitled to whatever they could legally make), but this is not the story of craigslist...

they asked for and accepted peoples' donations, expertise, word of mouth for a very long time making people believe it was NOT going to turn for profit, then ... they did just that! (turned for profit) ostensibly "to pay the bills" but what they really did is...pocketed tens of millions for years... (those are NET profits that went straight into the pockets of Craig, Jim and the other shareholders)

#3 "Craigslist is as good as it was when it was first created, if not better"
given the profits it should have been much much better by now! (it has been severely understaffed and underdeveloped for no good reason -- certainly not lack of finances -- for a very long time... and they appear to have no intention to hire an adequate number of customer service people or do significant improvements)


P.S. I don't see the comparison with google, youtube or MySpace as relevant (craigslist has made and is still making very different claims...) D.

Oh... and your main claim (what got me to post my initial comment) was that "craigslist charges money...(...)...but just to pay for expenses" (your reply appears to state otherwise) D.

re: “Craigslist charges money for job listings, but only in seven of the cities it serves ($75 in San Francisco; $25 in the others). And it charges for apartment listings in New York ($10 a pop). But that is just to pay expenses [my emphasis].”

Hi Jordan/Andrea3

You agree with that? How do you figure that? (just curious…)


P.S. Craigslist’s estimated net profits (after all those expenses are paid) are in the tens of millions.

Sunday, March 11, 2007

(Wikipedia) true (and verifiably so) craigslist criticism is removed again...

re: "What is seldon told is how one sided and tyranical Craigslist can be. Harmless posts are removed for no reason while others that are clearly offensive or spam remain. The online flagging and staff removal is more like children picking out others they don't like as opposed to an organisation of grown men trying to do business in the real world. Trying to get an answer from Craigslist staff as to why a post is removed is like talking to a wall." Revision as of 20:25, 9 March 2007 (edit) (undo) (Talk)

shouldn't editor EncMstr (re: revert unattributable addition by (talk) to last version by JennaMarie85) give ANY willing editor of the "craigslist" entry the same deal he offered Craig? (EncMstr: "In your case [meaning Craig's case], I'd be happy to incorporate any changes for which I can find a reliable published source, or remove material for which I can't find something you point out is in error"; under "proper etiquette")

That would just be fair, no? By that criteria, he should have done some research and found out the statements above are pretty much true (a more neutral phrasing would have been in order but the facts talked about appear to be true -- just search feedback / flag / help)


(Wikipedia page on "craigslist") if it only were that easy...

"If any of the unreferenced statements above have been mentioned in the press somewhere, then all we need to do is link to it and we're done. I'm thinking that since Craig has probably done countless interviews about his company, he must have mentioned the above facts somewhere other than on this page?" Katr67 18:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC) (under "article errors")

the big problem with that is that in the vast majority of cases no research is done to verify Craig's claims -- interviewers are just taking notes of what Craig is telling them! so as unbelievable as it may seem it does end-up being "Craig's own press"...


Friday, March 9, 2007

once you've bought the craigslist spiel, it's hard to think straight...

or so it seems...

ohh, Al... I'm afraid I'm going to have to give up on you :)... for the last time: *profits* in the long run is the issue (Craig's salary is just a red herring)... and yes, I did tell you this using the exact same words a couple of times before


P.S. anyways, take care! D.

Monday, March 5, 2007

Jim, check your pockets and... stop preaching!

re: Jim: Thou shalt "not seek maximized revenue" (10th paragraph)

'course, not...well, not as far as people can TELL... (thou shall just keep people in the dark and hide the truth of how much you profit so you can keep getting free work and word of mouth for as long as you can get away with it -- ain't nothing wrong with that! thus spoke the Lord...) D.

Friday, March 2, 2007

just to pay the bills! poor things...

EVEN MORE: my response to Rick goes even deeper into this

MORE: my second post on this blog gives more detail on this...

Craig: five, six years ago, I asked people: "Hey, how are we going to pay the bills?" (under "your economic model for craigslist?")

"we make enough to pay the bills and then go beyond that [my emphasis]" (8:46 mins into the interview ; close to the end of the interview) -- you don't say! like... tens of millions beyond it! and they continue to operate on a shoe string... (severely understaffed and severely unimproved -- function wise it could be much much better!) So where does all that money go? you guess!


(adding apartments to craigslist) just a *suggestion*? (I don't think so...)

Craig: "Hey, how about apartments?"(under "why did you start craigslist") I have a hunch this will prove to be one of the most lucrative categories for the long run... D.

here's your answer: waiting for somebody like you to come along and actually help out!

re: Craig: "when I asked them, ‘O.K., well, what did you do before, how did you advertise before?’—well, there was no good answer".

you'd think small brokers who Craig knows "don’t earn a lot of money, and (...) are not getting reimbursed for advertising costs" would be a no brainer to help out... but... nah... that would mean being genuine and actually following through with what he's been saying for a very long time! why should he do that when he can bullshit and get away with it for a decade...


P.S. when are people going to wake up? D.