It was not about the apologies but about the business practices that continued unabated. What good is apologizing for beating someone on the head if you continue to kick him in the shins?

Completely agree. Rich black kids would have no problems; poor white kids are just as badly prepared as poor black kids; the common denominator is economic resources more than anything. Being rich affords the child several benefits: 1. Stay at home parent with the time to take the child to enrichment classes, help the child with homework, challenge the child to stay on top of his classes 2. Child has access to extracurricular experiences such as summer science camps, weekend scouting trips, leadership retreats, etc. 3. Parents are involved and interested in the child's activities - parents of challenged backgrounds work so hard to make ends meet that at the end of the day, they just crash in front of the TV and tell the kids to play outside.

I find nothing wrong with the "Me, Too" Startup Syndrome. I know plenty of friends who went to medical school because their parents were doctors, or it's the "Asian thing" to do, and they turned out to be decent doctors. Same for lawyers, accountants and gardners; a lot of "me too" happening outside of the startup world. Unlike 30 years ago, many more people want to go into technology because it's hip to be in a startup - hell, thanks to popular cinema (The Social Network) and mainstream technology (iOS/Android) geekie hobbies are now cool. People got mocked for playing with their Timex Sinclair in the early '80s, whereas today I have to sign up early in order to reserve my son a spot in the mobile game development bootcamp. Times are a changing, and the OP sounds like the indie college guy who's resentful that his secret band is now being followed by everybody.

Other "me too" activities: marriage, children, golf, smoking, religion, tantric sex... sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't. All a part of life.

Let's talk about the mobile only world: would a native mobile app be self-verifying in that only a mobile phone could download and use the app - so every review requires a real smartphone to post the review. Although "reputation" companies could game this situation by buying 1000 smartphones, but then you would have 1000 smartphones with the same pattern of up-posting such that it would be easier for an algorithm to recognize these "planted" phones.

I'd like to throw in the practicalities of survival income that many college applicants fail to appreciate because they are so used to living off their parents' dole. The following are steps that young people ignore until it's too late:

1. Before living your dream or doing "something you love", you have to make your survival income: the first $1500 for food, shelter, transportation. So where does this steady $1500 come from, and is working the necessary hours to make $1500 going to leave you with enough time to invest in that "dream"?

2. So before graduation, have you established your fall back $1500 contingency plan? Do you have a skill (vocational or otherwise) that you KNOW will bring you that monthly $1500? Step TWO is where I believe high school counseling has failed America's youth. Everybody should leave high school with a $1500 skill, whether that be bookeeping, welding, sales, waiting tables, cashier, etc. It is imperative that upon graduating high school, you are able to count on having survival wage skills.

3. Does your college major allow you to skip step two because it is in such demand that the employment rate for your industry is healthy? Back in the early 90's, CS graduates were not having an easy time and were considered the bottom of the totem pole among engineering majors (in my school they weren't even considered engineers, but rather a soft science more akin to biology, insultingly enough). Again, this is the fault of high school counselors who fail to make foresight an essential part of the planning process - this whole "major in what you love" crap just leaves graduates with a sense of disappointment when they are unemployable. Always temper "major in what you love" with the caveat "as long as you already have a skill to pay for food/shelter/travel".

4. What's your exit strategy from your survival job? Plan this every day as you're waiting tables (bartending, welding, dancing,...).

4. Knowing that high schools (both public and private) are too highbrow to ever consider vocational training for their top students, it's up to parents to fully prepare their children. When my son is old enough, his summers will be spent honing a vocational skill so that he will have an employable skill that any society will find useful such that if he wishes to travel the world, he can always pick up a local job should the circumstances demand it. Two come to mind: welding (easier and ubiquitously needed) or electrician (harder, but more lucrative).

This long rant is a part of my disatisfaction with the high school paradigm as currently constituted. The current paradigm is a crapshoot that ill prepares students for the rigors and realities of survival in a world that could care less if they were once a valedictorian or All-State track star. I have known many former high school heroes turned zeroes after college, and it's a fall from grace that their parents have never ever prepared them for because in their world, their kids will always be special.

Zynga's business model is like any other gaming publisher (such as EA, Blizzard, etc.). To succeed in gaming you MUST have a pipeline of games that continue revenue growth. If you cannot create your own, then you must acquire indie developers (OMGPOP recently). In time Zynga stock will be no different than any other gaming publisher stock. Look at Blizzard: other than Diablo, Starcraft and WoW, it has created nothing in the last 4 years beyond sequels. Homegrown innovation is nearly impossible.

Rovio was in the business for 5 years before Angry Birds, and I doubt they'll have another hit like Angry Birds ever again.

Id fell apart when it couldn't come up with something better than the Doom franchise.

OMGPOP was very smart to sell out to Zynga, because there is no way it would have come up with something even close to Draw Something in another 5 years.

Unlike rock stars and pop singers, creating a string of gaming hits is so much harder because it requires the perfect storm of so many variables each and every time, whereas a single person like Adele, Amy Winehouse, etc. can rely on their genius alone to create a hit.

> Id fell apart when it couldn't come up with something better than the Doom franchise.

Except for, you know... Quake.

On your other point. The difference between Zynga and EA is that Zynga's games have a huge turnover rate and a very low percentage of paying customers. EA's games -- at least most of their games -- have 100% paying customers and have a large returning customer rate year after year (Madden 11, Madden 12, Madden 13, Fifa 11, Fifa 12...).

So in other words, Zynga's business model is completely different than EA's.

I can appreciate this insight on Zynga, but I'd like to offer another perspective:

First off, have you seen the way Blizzard's stock performed during 2008? It was one of the few that continued to grow...

Rovio has more than just Angry Birds direct sales, it has a TON of merchandising opportunities with the characters (think Pixar). Plus they have a huge base of users that is excited to see what's next.

I'd also contend the rock stars analogy is backward - It is FAR more risky to assume a sole person can continue re-inventing themselves over a entire career. Granted, it's hard for game publishers, but at least there's a team and a more defined process for the innovation.

Jason, your gut instinct is correct. Groupon is a Ponzi scheme in every way: last customer in gets no money out. I feel sorry for that Mom & Pop pizza that paid $1,000 to run a Groupon deal, and expecting $300 back in 60 days, only to see Groupon go belly up and get nothing but a letter that says "Please send your creditor claim to the bankruptcy trustee listed below".

It is when you need new sales to pay for the cost of maintaining existing client base: 1) client #1 pays you, but you have to give him back half at a future date, 2) while his money sits in your account, you spend it on operating costs, 3) get new client money in order to pay client #1 back.

It is that money sitting in the account that gives Groupon the cash flow it needs to hire more sales people to grow the revenues further, but remember always that a % of that must be returned to the customer at a future date. Where it falls apart is when your new sales can no longer replenish the client account (no it does not sit in a trust or escrow, but in company's general operating account).

So what happens when Groupon declares Bankruptcy? All that money sitting in the account is gone, customers get NOTHING back. Yes, this is indeed a Ponzi scheme because the last customers in get nothing, even though they are owed the %.

Anecdotally, the first generation of sales rep have nothing but depressing things to say about this entire market segment now. The first year sales numbers were gangbusters, until their clients called back complaining, swearing never to do another Groupon deal, ever again.

It's not just Groupon, this entire business model is unsustainable: asking a retailer to discount his products for a fee in the hopes that he will attract new "local deal" customers willing to pay full retail next time, when the ONLY reason these customers came in the first place was because of the discount.

Not only that, but I suspect that people who are loyal to businesses and like interacting with local business owners are less likely to use sites like groupon, because they know that the businesses often get screwed, and because they don't want to be thought of as bargain-shoppers.

A friend sent me a Groupon for a local bakery. It was something ridiculous like $20 worth of food for $10. Since I had heard about the bad relationships between businesses and Groupon, and since I actually like this little store, I declined to get the Groupon. I'd rather pay full price to support a local business!

There's nothing ridiculous about using sales as a customer acquisition strategy. What is unsustainable about GroupOn, etc. is the requirement for extreme discounting that crushes the retailer.

Two more problems with the model:

1) Groupon taks a large cut on top of the big discount. It used to be that GroupOn wanted a 50% discount and then 50% of the revenue. This is like running a 75% off sale.

2) The customers are poorly-qualified leads. All we know is that they are local and like a good deal. That doesn't give the retailer much indication that they would be a good customer (and I think we have seen that they aren't).

I'm guessing that some of the "new customers" that Groupon delivers are customers you don't want.

I remember my girlfriend many years ago working in a restaurant that offered a ‘kids eat free’ deal one night a week. People would come in with their kids and their neighbors’ kids, order one burger and let the restaurant feed a bunch of kids for nothing. Obviously the restaurant needed to put some terms around the deal, which they later did, but some people are just a blight on humanity in this way.