This is just silly. (and i don't mean that in a mean way...). Most people instances of perceived meanness are really just acting on a set of interests that don't align with your own. There's no malevolence involved, yet the perception is the actor is mean. Im quite sure Paul has in the past acted in a way that was perceived as mean by a non-aligned party, as have we all. Acting out of pure malevolence/meanness is different than that. That type of action is hopefully so rare that it is a terrible proxy for success/ failure.
Its interesting that despite their founders outspokeness, the influx of heavy weight VC, tech press expose's on their offices, etc., RapGenius is really no more or no less than a standard, multi-multi-page SEO site, no different than the countless others just like it. No brand, no user affinity, no direct traffic to speak of. Just a bunch of drift net pages crawled by Google waiting to pick off unsuspecting search traffic. My favorite line of this post was the last: "Much love. iOS app dropping next week!" - unless you are searching that term in google, Im not sure who that is addressed to.
Getting misquoted in an interview happens to almost everyone who has given an interview ever. It is a product of the interviewer trying to put an editorial spin on a story (i.e make it interesting) and human error (based on reporter time constraints). Being misquoted is the tax for using the interviewer's platform for marketing. For most people, the benefit of the publicity outweighs the tax. So you give the interview, knowing full well that the end product is going to come out somewhere on the spectrum of slight misquote --> just made up stuff. And this isn't going to change. But it is something to keep in mind when you're pitching PR for your startup. You will get misquoted, its a matter of degree. Share your words as wisely as possible. Unfortunately, unlike PG, the rest of us don't have a platform for setting the record straight on a misquote.
The difference here is he was not supposed to be interviewed, he was offering background for an entirely different piece, and they turned the discussion into an "interview" after the fact when they presented pieces of said material claiming it to be an interview.
if you talk to a reporter for a story, you're being interviewed. Let me rephrase, if I was talking to a reporter and the conversation was being recorded, I would presume I was being interviewed. If the reporter told me it was off the record, I would not consider it an interview.
No one likes risk. Even early stage investors. A good investor deck should convince the investor that whatever risks are associated with particular investment opportunity are seemingly mitigated.
Team - not your first rodeo, know how to win, subject matter experts.
Focus - clearly stated value proposition.
Dream - big market, big value.
Plan of Attack - clear path to capture market share.
Validation/ Traction - customers!
Tech - solid, non-obvious, not easily replicable. (i.e. if your successful, someone else can't just hop into the market and eat your lunch).
Use of proceeds - not just pay my salary, but grow this business.
Next big milestone: profitability? another fund raise?
If you hit on these, then investors will want to put money in their favorite types of companies: the one's that don't look like they need it. ;)
