So, I got to meet Jim Buckmaster, CEO of Craigstlist at the Mesh Conference last week. And one thing struck me about the interview he did with Mark Evans that is only reinforced by the interview at Wired: Craigslist is an Internet phenomenon by any definition.
But Craig Newmark is no visionary. He’s no guru. And he’s no soothsayer. He’s a guy who lucked into his business, and it continues to succeed in spite of his lackadaisical efforts at starting it and running it.
No, I’m not referring to his anti-spam efforts — they may or may not be successful.
Rather, its a situation where he created a “half-assed” list of things that was happening in the San Francisco area, that ballooned into something much greater than itself. And thanks to some great timing (1996), Craigslist had the benefit of first-mover advantage that no other web concern has really had.
Profitable? Sure, in a way that makes VC’s drool. But classifieds are such a lean operation that it would be mind-boggling how it *couldn’t* be profitable.
I know one thing which drives me crazy is just how utterly slothful Craigslist is about monetizing itself. Jim Buckmaster was asked directly about the issue at Mesh, and basically gave the same answer that he gave for about 40 minutes: “we do what the community wants; if that’s not what the community wants, we won’t do it.”
To me, that strikes me as an enormous dodge, and a passing of the buck, as it were.
I respect the importance for sticking to your values. I understand that’s how Craigslist likes to clothe its business decisions. But not wanting to take advantage of an enormous opportunity to create an efficient business and maximize revenue — especially to do more Good … well, that doesn’t strike me as being wise. It just strikes me as being lazy.
I mean all this talk of having trying to take lessons from “unintended consequences”, an “unstructured approach”, and “getting out of the way when something good happens” — isn’t it as silly as trying to learn something from becoming the Prince of England? Mr. Newmark lucked into his good fortune, and continues to succeed, not because of some sophisticated corporate strategy, but the barest and most intuitive of tactics: listen to your customer.
Mr. Newmark might be a humble and affable gentleman. Mr. Buckmaster certainly seems so.
But let’s be honest — Craig Newmark was lucky as hell to stumble into Craigslist, and thanks to the enormous network effects and branding that’s generated out of it, it continues to grow into the behemoth it is today. In spite of what Craig and Jim do.
June 7th, 2007 at 12:09 am | Permalink
Normally, I think your posts are right on. But not this one. I think you are misreading Craig. His facade of humbleness and “let-the-users-decide”-ness is exactly the basis for his success.
I trust Craig Newmark and therefore I trust Craigslist. I want to use Craiglist and its ease of use and strong userbase makes it extremely useful.
That all started with Craig’s attitude.
June 7th, 2007 at 1:28 am | Permalink
Well, You, here’s the thing.
I’m glad you like and trust Craig Newmark. However, whether anyone likes or dislikes the founder of Craigslist is largely immaterial to its success. I don’t think that most people know Craig Newmark, and I don’t think that most people care.
There’s nothing sophisticated about letting users decide. In fact, one could argue that’s exactly what most businesses try and do at every stage of their development.
Craig had one thing that most people don’t have — the luck of timing, and being in the right place at the right time. Things exploded around him in a way he never predicted, and its gotten so big that I think it doesn’t matter what he does.
Classifieds by themselves are a lean operation, and so he’s going to make buckets of cash in spite of his philosophy and what he does, day to day.
I’m glad you like him — but I’ll stand by my assertion that his likability is a non-factor to his success.
June 7th, 2007 at 9:28 am | Permalink
Isn’t it said that 50% of success is simply showing up? His timing was fortuitous but (and this is a big but) they executed flawlessly. Super simple interface with everything easily accessed from one page- this is not easy to do at all. Most portals are awful. They also scaled flawlessly, adding cities as they received requests from the citizens of those cities. When they added Rochester, NY (my hometown) there was zero publicity- it just appeared on the list one day. Yet it was full of content almost immediately.
Branding- again flawless. You know this guy Craig? Just an old hippie who’s honest. That’s the perfect brand position for babyboomers who are his target audience.
And finally, PR (BTW, all the Google ads served up next to this post are for PR services- coincidence?). They handle it daily and its 100% positive.
Luck? Yes but you can’t underestimate execution.
June 7th, 2007 at 9:36 am | Permalink
Thanks Martin — I’m well aware of the quote from Woody Allen, and I think it may be something like “90% of success is just showing up.”
But whereas you see a brilliant design, I just see a whole bunch of links vomited up on a page that has been tweaked over the years. As for the brilliance in branding, it may be that it was brilliant in a post hoc analysis, but I don’t think for a second that Craig intentionally built it that way. And PR? How easy is it to get good PR when Craigslist is such a feel-good story? As you say –old honest hippie makes millions without trying.
And that’s something any PR firm would salivate over.
Craigslist is what it is — but I think a large part of it is luck … larger than Craig, or anyone else will admit.
Thanks again, Martin.
June 7th, 2007 at 10:33 am | Permalink
Tony,
I would argue that most successful entrepreneurs are lucky, and that being in the right place at the right time is a key element in how well they do.
Look at YouTube. Do you think Steven Chan and Chad Hurley are video visionaries? They just happened to start YouTube at a time when online video was just starting to really emerge, and were lucky when the service resonated (for whatever reason) with users.
To think you need something deeper from Newmark is a futile exercise. Craigslist is what it is.
June 7th, 2007 at 12:11 pm | Permalink
Mark,
I think we’re on the same page here.
I agree — Craigslist is what it is (in fact, I think I said as much above), and I also agree that YouTube can probably be put into the same category as Craigslist, and luck has as much as anything to do with entrepreneurial success.
Having said that, I don’t understand why people question if its anything more than that. And in that, I agree — its a futile exercise to think there’s anything deeper than that from Mr. Newmark.
June 7th, 2007 at 2:04 pm | Permalink
I’m not quite sure I understand the point you’re trying to make - is it that Craig could be making more money than he is? Isn’t it possible that he’s just happy with the way things are? If he made the kind of changes you’re suggesting he could have a full-scale revolt on his hands, ala digg and the HD key. Why does everything have to be so profit driven? He provides a massively helpful service, profits from it, and has a hugely loyal user base. Just because he isn’t making MORE money doesn’t make him lazy.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:06 pm | Permalink
There’s a lot of people for whom work is just a way of funding the rest of their life, and especially in San Francisco, people for whom significant business and/or financial success is looked on with a level of suspicion. The laws of chance say that sooner or later, someone like that would start a successful company. Craig is that guy.
Side Note: I can’t say I’m much of a CL fan. I’ve never found either a job or an apartment from its listings, and the one time we sold some household items on CL we had a very unpleasant experience. Obviously, though, I’m in the minority on that view.
June 7th, 2007 at 3:53 pm | Permalink
Tony,
People are fascinated with Craigslist in the same way they’re fascinated with the Caramilk Secret. Everyone wants to know the secret even if there’s no secret - it’s human nature.
June 7th, 2007 at 4:09 pm | Permalink
I guess I’d be perfectly happy with a company that throws off $75-100 mil annually with less than 100 employees (quite a few less I understand).
Maybe he’ll do a Bill Gates and monetize it at some point to raise a huge chunk of change for charity- that would be a bold move.
And, BTW, sometimes no design can be good design. That’s why classified ads worked so well in the first place. Easy to scan, brief, to the point.
June 7th, 2007 at 5:39 pm | Permalink
Maybe Craig knows something you don’t know. I’m impressed that he refuses to chase quarterly earnings to pacify a bunch of short-sighted investors.He doesn’t fit the corporate mold. His simplistic approach to running a business is refreshing.Good luck to him.
June 8th, 2007 at 6:38 pm | Permalink
Eh, I can’t fault anyone for refusing to maximize profits. Too many people sacrifice everything for profits. It’s nice to hear someone say, “I’ve got enough money. I don’t need more.”
Sure, more money could do more good. But there’s always a point where you have to decide if you’re willing to make the necessary sacrifices to make that extra buck. I can’t fault anyone for choosing to enjoy life rather than work harder than they’re comfortable working. In fact, I think that’s the major problem with our society. We value work more than life.
June 12th, 2007 at 9:41 pm | Permalink
Well done to him on not taking the money and splitting!
September 22nd, 2007 at 7:10 pm | Permalink
[...] Tony over at Deep Jive Interests voices some annoyance at Craig Newmark’s non-desire to moneti…, even calling him lazy. [...]