July 31, 2009

Amazon-Zappos: Not the Usual Silicon Valley M&A – BusinessWeek

Filed under: Misc — jeetu @ 9:25 am

Cover a few mergers and acquisitions in techland and you’ll quickly learn the difference between what companies say and what they mean. A few examples:

Acquirer says: The target will be run independently with its own management team.

Acquirer means: That’ll happen for a while—until we need to cut costs by folding the target into our operations.

Target founders say: We’re not going anywhere!

Target founders mean: As soon as our ownership vests, we’re gone.

Acquirer says: We hope [the target's] innovative spirit rubs off on the rest of our company.

Acquirer means: This competitor may one day be a serious threat. Let’s take them out now.

Cynical? I’ve covered enough high-tech deals to know better. For the target company and its investors, takeovers are a way to cash out. For the acquirer they’re a means of hiring good engineers and removing a would-be rival. Products frequently languish or are discontinued, and key employees at the target typically leave.

Even Google (GOOG), considered among the most entrepreneurial of publicly traded tech companies, has killed off scores of small acquisitions. Remember Jaiku? Google bought the Twitter clone a few years ago and did almost nothing with it, while Twitter grew to some 20 million users. Microsoft (MSFT) squandered billions of its own dollars on fruitless efforts to take on Google in search before it offered $45 billion to take out Yahoo! (YHOO). Ultimately it was forced to accept a deal that lets Yahoo keep 88% of the proceeds of advertising sales. Even this more limited partnership is likely to accelerate Yahoo’s engineering and innovation exodus.

This backdrop is what makes Amazon.com’s (AMZN) acquisition of Zappos especially remarkable. Having followed both companies closely and having known several of the people involved, I can say that this is a rare instance in which the principals mean what they say. Amazon’s Zappos deal might well become an exception to Silicon Valley’s takeover rules.

Unparalleled Customer Service

Zappos was in what could have been an ugly situation. It was a 10-year-old company from which its investors quite legitimately wanted a return. Zappos has $1 billion in gross merchandise sales, boasts a well-known brand, and enjoys an unparalleled rep for excellent customer service.

The trouble is, Zappos founder and CEO Tony Hsieh isn’t one of those all-too-common “serial entrepreneurs” who wanted a quick exit and an excuse to try something new. For him, Zappos’ first decade was just the beginning.

A share sale to the public wouldn’t have given Hsieh the freedom to keep innovating and likely wouldn’t have been well-received. Good customer service, including local call centers and free shipping, comes at a cost. Zappos barely breaks even. So that meant an acquisition was one of the only other alternatives.

Good thing it was Amazon that came calling. Amazon is as different from most publicly traded tech companies as Zappos is from most startups. For one thing, Amazon is one of the few that are still run by its founder. And say what you will about Jeff Bezos, he’s not known for kowtowing to Wall Street pressures. Bezos and Hsieh alike are willing to disregard short-term gains for the sake of long-term vision

Shared Items – July 31, 2009

Filed under: shared — jeetu @ 9:16 am

Points Of View

Filed under: Misc — Tags: , , , , , , — jeetu @ 5:00 am

Posted at Geek Hero Comic – A webcomic for geeks

by Salvatore Iovene

Comic

Click here to comment!
© Salvatore Iovene for Geek Hero Comic – A webcomic for geeks, 2009.

July 30, 2009

Aircel’s innovation in Mumbai rains

Filed under: Misc — jeetu @ 11:23 pm

That’s at Milan subway…been there so many times!

Jeetu

Posted at Webyantra

Aircel in Mumbai came up with this innovative mix of Marketing + CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility). This unique idea (and its implementation) deserves appreciation as it helped the Mumbaikars during the recent rains.

If you have come across any such example of innovation or company CSR…. in the hour of need, please do share.

Yahoo Search – Powered by Bing!

Filed under: Misc — jeetu @ 11:09 pm

Posted at www.flickr.com

Yahoo Search – Powered by Bing!

Yahoo Search - Powered by Bing! by Sahaab.
A fitting logo for the all new search platform! 

India’s Online Retail Saga – A Review

Before going into the details and dissecting the online retail scenario in India I would like To clearly state that “Indian’s do not buy online”. Yes it’s in their nature. They may buy a gift online, they compare prices online and mostly they gather information on their options through internet. Rarely will you find someone choosing the online mode before the various formats of retail India offers. Indian’s do prefer to gift online as it makes their life much simpler. They can avoid the hassles of selecting; packaging and posting the gift through the online channel. Many Indian’s also like to do a brief online research on the products they might like to buy, but eventually they buy it from regular stores. This is very much evident from the fact that Network 18’s comparison site clocks more hits than its E-tailing website. Some leading Indian e-tailing websites have also positioned themselves differently like: Infibeam’s tagline start with “Gifts to India “ , Naptol “Online shopping and price comparison India”.

online-retail

No surprise that India’s online retail industry is trailing at Rs 1105 crores ($ 0.23 billion) whereas UK’s online retail market stands at a whooping £9 billion($15 billion). Despite of the small size and its seasonal nature (Diwali, New Year, Holi, Rakhi etc ) in Indian online retail we cannot discount it as a niche business. The online retail has seen a 30% increase year on year from the last few years. With India poised to have third largest net users by 2013, the growing economy and worsening traffic conditions; we certainly would have more online purchasers in India. Hence all the largest business houses in India have either entered or are planning to enter the online retail space. We already have Reliance Rmoneymall, Pantaloon’s Futurebazaar.com, Videocon’s eDigiworld.com, Vishalmart’s Vishalmegamart.com and we have Tata coming up with its own e-mall.

Despite of the small market size we have lot of players in this online space due to the small market barriers. Let me cover the top ten Indian retail websites ranked according to daily page views

*Arrived with the help of cubestat.com and alexa.com. Are only indicative and not accurate.

Ebay.in: No wonder that worldwide leader in retail Ebay is doing great in India too. Backed by a powerful brand, loyal customers, and experience in online retail it has generated good traction in India. It came to the Indian scene with a bang by acquiring Baazee.com in june 2004 for Rs 230 cr. Their graph in compete or alexa shows that though they have a large loyal customer base , they are not attracting new visitors. Maybe it’s time to revamp their strategy a little

Flipkart.com: I call it the Indian amazon.com; and what do you know according to their linkedin page ”it was launched in sept 2007 by employees of Amazon.com” . With traffic comparable to that of ebay.in I don’t think they should call themselves a startup. I also came across some good revies about the site in mouthshut.com. The success story of flipkart would require a separate post.

Infibeam.com: I will give a 9/10 to this website on site content and design. They were in news recently when they acquired picsquare. Infybeam’s Car retail section is also a unique in this space which is helping them to gain a lot of eyeballs.

Shopping.rediff.com: Rediff never fails to impress me. Full with Simple and elegant web 2.0 features and the website is seamless. I did actually buy a gift from rediff and the experience was quite satisfying. What they could probably do is to increase their inventory. I think they can do better given that alexa shows only 1.7% of the customers visiting rediff.com visit shopping.rediff.com

Naaptol.com : Positioned as a comparison website, they actually do sell online too. They have multiple revenue sources like advertising, selling online and passing on leads for local stores. The site is very rich on content and the design seems to be flawless. Refined web 2.0 features are also present in the website.

online-retail-saga

Shopping.indiatimes.com : Give the Times brand and the popularity of the Indiatimes website I personally feel that they can do better. Their homepage is cluttered with a lot of links. They are trying to sell too many things but unfortunately they only have a single homepage. A redesign in the lines of shopping.rediff.com can do wonders to their traffic and profitability.

Indiaplaza.in: Amazingly Indiaplaza which looks so Indian is a company based in US. They were acquired by Fabmall.com and retained the name Indiaplaza. Given their traction and visits I think they can afford a redesign of the website. I find the websites design and features very basic.

Homeshop18.com : Like all other network 18 websites, it has also taken India by storm. Very professionally designed and promoted the website is gaining traction fast. Running on Network 18’s Information network they are a possible player to be watched out in the future.

Futurebazaar.com : A future groups venture though elegantly designed and professionally managed I see declining trends for the website in alexa and compete.com.

Related Posts

Follow us on: Twitter | Facebook | Linkedin | Orkut

Our Network: WATShow.com | WATJob.com | WATGame.com | WATPR.com

India’s Online Retail Saga – A Review

The Little Secret of Web Startups

Filed under: Misc — Tags: , — jeetu @ 7:51 pm

Posted at TechCrunch

by Guest Author

This guest post is written by Marcelo Calbucci, the founder and CTO of Sampa — a personal homepage creator that will be shutting down next month. He’s writing a series of posts about the lessons learned from the venture at http://blog.calbucci.com. He’s also the publisher of Seattle 2.0, a web resource for tech entrepreneurs and startups in Seattle.

Consumer startups are tough. You have two basic choices: A paid offering or a free offering (or freemium). If you charge people a penny, you’ll turn off the bulk of your visitors. If you offer free services, you might grow to be the next YouTube, WordPress or Facebook. Most entrepreneurs are not risk-averse and the dream of being big is just too appealing and the majority of us take the “free-route”.

Once you offer something for free, all shades of people will try to benefit from your service. You’d think a service like Sampa with a strong family and baby branding would just repel small business, teenagers, criminals, etc. but that’s not the case at all. And I suspect most blogging services; photo-sharing or web-site building solutions face the exact same issue we did.

Most entrepreneurs and investors will look at data analysis and talk about averages or totals: Averages number of blog posts per user per week, average number of sign-ins per user per month, viral coefficient, total number of active users, etc. Entrepreneurs who are more sophisticated will split their “averages” and “totals” in two or three groups. For example, fixing one of the dimensions into users that sign-in 30 or more times per month (very engaged), between 10 and 29 times per month (engaged), and between 0-9 times per month (on the brink of leaving) and then run the averages and totals for the different groups (e.g. “very engaged users upload 25 pictures/month, engaged users upload 7 pictures/month, etc.”)

Very few startups actually look at demographic and psychographic data as a way to group their users. Primarily, because it’s hard to get gender, age, income, interests and intentions without asking the user, and once you ask them you might just scare them way or get the wrong information.

One time we went to pitch Sampa to a VC in Seattle, and out of the blue he mentions this other startup growing amazingly fast – had nothing to do with our business. After the meeting I went to check the startup website. Their Compete and Alexa growth was just amazing. Their website contained profiles of all users since it was a public social network. So I clicked on the profile of the 20 people featured on their homepage (“most recent users to join”). Of those, about 75% were girls between the age of 9 and 13 – likely the worst demographic to make any revenue from.

Did the startup know about this? Oh, yeah. Did that VC that was looking at investing on them? Likely not.

In the middle of 2008 we decide to do a qualitative analysis of our user base. People of all kinds were creating sites on Sampa. There wasn’t an automated way to know if it was a baby site, a family site, a small business, a technology blog, etc. We looked at more than 300 sites, randomly selected and created a spreadsheet with the category, the demographic of the author (if we could figure out) and we plugged that into our own analytic system to split our averages and totals for each site category. The results sucked!

Just 20% of our users were on the target audience. That meant 80% were not building any kind of family or baby site. Ok, maybe we can live with that. But it turned out that more than 25% were by pre-teens. There are two problems with that: First, It’s actually illegal in the US and most countries to allow a younger than 13-year-old to sign up to your service without parental consent. Second, pre-teens are not a great audience to build an advertising-based business model.

However the data showed an even worse picture. Pre-teens were a quick burning flame. They would come, upload lots of pictures, write lots of blog posts, “bling” their site, invite 20+ friends and they would be completely gone in a month. That behavior skewed our data enough that once we looked at our growth, viral rates, and everything else, our business didn’t look so great.

Being Proactive Can Backfire

Can you force users to comply with your Terms-Of-Service and still be successful on a UGC service? Yes, you can. Facebook manage to be very aggressive on the enforcement of their TOS, and so did Flickr. However, if you look at most Web 2.0 startups, they are not doing that at all. The most prominent case is YouTube, which allowed copyright infringement on their website and can plot a $1.6B exit based on their “turn a blind eye” strategy.

We didn’t do that at Sampa, and I’m sure we could have seen 2 or 3 times more growth if we had used the same strategy. We proactively removed pre-teens websites. They weren’t easy to find, but every time we found one, we would remove the website and notify the owner she was 12-years-old. They would be mad at us and tell that “Jamie, Emily and Sally also have a website on Sampa”, and we would say thank you and delete all their friends websites too.

We would also proactively delete porn websites. There is nothing wrong with porn. It’s not illegal or immoral in my view, but it didn’t go well with our family-oriented business proposition. Also, most UGC porn sites are infringing in someone else copyright and we just didn’t want to deal with DMCA or lawyers.

We also found criminal websites, from people trying to steal credit-card and passwords to the ugly side of online pedophilia. We had the FBI come over twice to collect evidence.

And let’s not forget link-farms. Although we had CAPTCHA and email confirmation for new websites, every once in a while someone managed to create dozens of websites in a single day all full of links to some bank, real estate agent, mortgage broker, auto dealer, etc. I’m sure the business that were benefiting from it didn’t know they hired a “black-hat” SEO.

Pretty much every Social Network-builder, website builder or content sharing site deals with the same issues we dealt with. A good number of entrepreneurs (and most investors) will be oblivious to those facts and just think that everything is going great and the growth is sustainable and proof they are creating great value and soon will be able to turn a huge profit or to sell for hundreds of millions of dollars, until someone takes the time to figure out what people are using their service for and finds out it’s really not what they thought it was.

Crunch Network: CrunchBase the free database of technology companies, people, and investors

Shared Items – July 30, 2009

Filed under: shared — jeetu @ 7:04 am
July 29, 2009

MySQL on EC2: are all instances equal?

Filed under: Misc — jeetu @ 6:57 pm

Interesting find!

Jeetu

Posted at www.infibase.com

MySQL on EC2 Part 1: are all instances equal?

Posted on July 28, 2009, 4:38 pm, by Nadav Soferman.

BenchmarksAs part of our tinkering in the cloud, we decided to run some benchmarks to figure out how well MySQL really performs on Amazon EC2. Some data has been posted here and there but no comprehensive results really gave us the answers we needed. So – we prepared a complex set of automatic benchmarks, ran them many times under various scenarios and analyzed the output. We’d like to share with you our findings  (so that you won’t need to work hard like we did…).

In this post and the following ones we will provide the highlights of our benchmarks of MySQL on EC2. Please feel free to join the conversation, ask questions and add your own findings!

In this first post, we’ll share our methodology – and surprising results that not all instances are equal!

The Benchmarks

Our primary questions were:

  1. What is the difference in performance between EC2 instance types?
  2. How do storage options impact MySQL I/O? (Local disk, EBS, EXT3 and XFS file systems, striping, etc.)
  3. How do MySQL versions and configurations matter, and does MySQL 5.4 deliver on its promise?
  4. What other EC2 characteristics affect MySQL’s performance?

We ran the following benchmarks using various configurations:

  • sql-bench (click for more details)
    • Background: SQLBench is the standard benchmark suite that comes with MySQL server.
    • Tests used: all included tests both using the MyISAM engine and the transactional InnoDB engine
      • InnoDB command example:
        • sql-bench/run-all-tests –create-options=ENGINE=InnoDB
    • Main output: number of seconds the entire benchmark took (so lower is better)
  • sys-bench OLTP (click for more details)
    • Background: sys-bench is a transactional database benchmark.
    • Tests used: both the read-only and read-write benchmarks with both MyISAM and InnoDB
      • InnoDB command example:
        • sysbench –test=oltp –mysql-table-engine=innodb –oltp-table-size=1000000 prepare
        • sysbench –num-threads=16 –mysql-table-engine=innodb –max-requests=100000 –test=oltp –oltp-table-size=1000000 –oltp-read-only run
        • sysbench –num-threads=16 –mysql-table-engine=innodb –max-requests=100000 –test=oltp –oltp-table-size=1000000  run
    • Main output: number of transactions per second (so higher is better)
  • DBT2 (click for more details)
    • Background: DBT2 is an implementation of the standard TPC-C online transaction processing benchmark.
    • Tests used: a certain heavy configuration of DBT2, for 30 minutes
      • InnoDB command example:
        • datagen -w 20 -d /tmp/dbt2data
        • scripts/mysql/build_db.sh -uroot -f /tmp/dbt2data -d dbt2
        • scripts/run_workload.sh -n -c 20 -t 10 -d 1800 -w 20  -u root -z “my test”
    • Main output: number of transactions performed per minute (so higher is better)

Additional notes:

  • Each test was performed several times for better accuracy, the results presented are the averages.
  • We used Linux instances running Alestic’s Ubuntu 9.0.4 Amazon Machine Images.
  • All tests were performed in the us-east-1a availability zone.

In case you are not familiar with EC2’s instance types, here’s a short summary:

Amazon EC2 Instance Types

Now, to the results!
Benchmark vendors

Intel vs. AMD

It’s a virtual world. Amazon EC2 sells compute units. So you might expect that all units are the same. Well, they are not!

You don’t know in advance which processor your virtual instance will be running. Even for a specific instance type, Amazon use both Intel and AMD processors, of varying types and clock rates. Why is that important? Well, better CPUs give better performance. We found consistently that the Intel-based instances gave better performance than the AMD-based ones – on the same instance type (i.e., same price!)

Intel Xeon 2.66GHz CPUs performed 30% better than AMD Opteron 270 CPUs using DBT2:

AMD vs. Intel DBT2 and sql-bench

The conclusion: in the EC2 “roulette”, you should hope to get an Intel Xeon!

Below you can see the distribution of CPU vendors per instance type. It is interesting to notice that high-CPU instances always got Intels and small instances almost always got AMDs.

AMD vs. Intel by instance type

Overall we ran into the following CPU types on EC2:

  • Dual Core AMD Opteron Processor 270
  • Dual-Core AMD Opteron Processor 2218 HE
  • Intel Xeon CPU E5345 2.33GHz
  • Intel Xeon CPU E5410 2.33GHz
  • Intel Xeon CPU E5430 2.66GHz

Inconsistent Performance

So we’ve learned that results vary according to CPU type. Unfortunately, EC2 has several such inconsistencies. We found that the exact same benchmark on the exact same instance type and processor type can still get different results. Most results will be similar but once in a while you might see a significant difference. I/O to the ephemeral (local) disk and to EBS is also inconsistent and is affected by various I/O parameters, network performance more. I realize that the fact that it’s a virtual machine can cause these side effects, for example your physical server is hosting instances that run heavy processes (such as MySQL benchmarks!).

Coming Up Next

Now that we understand the basic ingredients of EC2 and the consistency (or lack thereof) of the results, we can continue to research additional aspects of MySQL’s performance on EC2. In upcoming posts, we’ll share our results for various instance types, MySQL versions and configurations and much more.

Strategy: Let Google and Yahoo Host Your Ajax Library – For Free

Filed under: Misc — Tags: , , — jeetu @ 3:35 pm

Posted at High Scalability

by Todd Hoff

Update: Offloading ALL JS Files To Google. Now you can let Google serve all your javascript files. This article tells you how to do it (upload to Google Code Project) and why it’s a big win (cheap, fast, caching, parallel downloads, save bandwidth).

Don’t have a content distribution network and loading architecture for the most popular open source JavaScript libraries, which include: jQuery, prototype, script.aculo.us, MooTools, and dojo. The idea is web pages directly include your library of choice from Google’s global, fast, and highly available network. Some have found much better performance and others experienced slower performance. My guess is the performance may be slower if your data center is close to you, but far away users will be much happier. Some negatives: not all libraries are included, you’ll load more than you need because all functionality is included. Yahoo has had a similar service for YUI for a while. Remember to have a backup plan for serving your libraries, just in case.

Older Posts »