The discussion is about blog network business models. Questions are being discussed about b5’s model – which in my view isn’t very strong, and your comments here show that you are struggling with settling in on a good model – (“We have always maintained that we would launch blogs even if we felt they wouldn’t generate income or traffic.”)

The fact is you have no marquee blog and it would appear from an outsiders view that instead you’re going down that quantity road – biggest blog network etc..

You should sit back and take note of the discussion going on rather than fanning the flames with a shitty attitude.

Just my 2 cents – hint: bloggers are notorious for giving their 2 cents worth ;-)

This is the end of my conversation with you on this John. If you can’t see that you’re spreading rumors (out of funds?), mis-characterizing things (“frizzy” and “unfocussed”?) and offering opinions on a competitor without any disclosure whatsoever, then that’s your bag – not mine.

All the best John, in your radically different, totally uncompetitive venture that uses the same tech, practically the same model, and many of the same authors.

The $500 figure is pretty general around the space. As I remember, your figure was $200-$500, so my “disclosure” flattered b5 a bit.

Let’s not be silly about this. The blogosphere is about conversations. Those of us in the network business will discuss other folk’s aspirations. If someone gets defensive, we assume the worst. Put up your spinnaker, Jeremy, that always signifies an optimistic attitude :-)

Barry: Sure it could turn an investor off. But it would likely turn off the kind of investor interested in a quick return. Which, if that’s their only focus, isn’t the kind of investor we’re interested in.

Note: Response seriously edited, so I don’t “get into” this ;-)

Heya Jeremy – when you say “we would launch blogs even if we felt they wouldn’t generate income or traffic”, how can you integrate that sentiment into a solid business plan?

And I know you’ve said that you’re not actively looking for funding right now, but don’t you think that sentiment might turn a potential investor off in the future?

Why would someone want to pump cash into a company who would launch online products that “wouldn’t generate income or traffic”?

Just thinking out aloud.

B

I was not quoting directly from your accounts and, as I remember, a lot of this went out on b5media.com in the early days. I’m merely discussing general ideas about blog networks, including my own, in the light of your posting.

My point about “passion” etc is my own value judgement, which I’m entitled to hold. I still hold fond memories of b5 and particularly of the founders. I wish you every success. But a half announcement is worse than a frank one, because everyone thinks you’re hiding something, and will discuss it.

Second, we have no cash-flow problems. Quite the opposite in fact. If we were a public company, the auditors would be happy to sign off on that.

On the blog front, we launch blogs for one reason and one reason only: a writer is passionate about it and is *asking* to write the blog. If that passion stays, the blog stays. We have always maintained that we would launch blogs even if we felt they wouldn’t generate income or traffic.

As far as writer’s expectations and “not” meeting the 500$/month mark… We’re only 6 months old. How many blogs could we possibly have missed this mark on? Seriously.

Again, we’re not even seeking funding. Opportunities became available, and we’ll pursue those opportunities. If they don’t happen, we’ll still succeed, we’ll still grow, writers will still get paid, new tech will still get launched.