I just visited their YouTube channel to check out what you wrote above, and it's (stunningly) correct. Producing their video -- which seems to be done at a pretty high level of quality -- must be very expensive. It's just head-scratching that they're not seeing better numbers, or seemingly making any attempt to promote them. Are they using them in another app/platform?
I can't help but wonder if, had the founders started the Skimm a few years later, things would be very different. That sounds obvious, but hear me out -- since they started, the ground has shifted to favor more focused, niche publications, especially in email newsletters. They basically cover everything, and don't have a particular topic area they're known for. I wonder, too, if they raised all that money b/c that's what media companies in the era they started were doing. I've been a fan of theirs for a long time and have been rooting for them (and I still am).
I would say it's the opposite. Had theSkimm launched a couple years later, it might not have grown as addicted to the VC money, in which case it would have never made a series of pretty awful pivots.
They've already taken the unfortunate, but necessary step, of being a leaner operation. Investors are never going to see an ROI on their investment, but if it stays lean, it can likely be a profitable business.
Wow. Very telling. I don't see the reason for all of that funding either based on your findings. I swear, there are days when I think about how a nice boost from funding would help my two businesses, but I know that bootstrapping is best for me and keep pushing.
An excellent investigation, Simon, I'm constantly amazed at the lopsided balance between editorial and "product" at many new media companies (especially those that don't really have truly innovative products to show for it!
I just visited their YouTube channel to check out what you wrote above, and it's (stunningly) correct. Producing their video -- which seems to be done at a pretty high level of quality -- must be very expensive. It's just head-scratching that they're not seeing better numbers, or seemingly making any attempt to promote them. Are they using them in another app/platform?
I think some of their stuff is cross-posted across Facebook and Instagram.
I can't help but wonder if, had the founders started the Skimm a few years later, things would be very different. That sounds obvious, but hear me out -- since they started, the ground has shifted to favor more focused, niche publications, especially in email newsletters. They basically cover everything, and don't have a particular topic area they're known for. I wonder, too, if they raised all that money b/c that's what media companies in the era they started were doing. I've been a fan of theirs for a long time and have been rooting for them (and I still am).
I would say it's the opposite. Had theSkimm launched a couple years later, it might not have grown as addicted to the VC money, in which case it would have never made a series of pretty awful pivots.
What do you think the future holds for them now?
They've already taken the unfortunate, but necessary step, of being a leaner operation. Investors are never going to see an ROI on their investment, but if it stays lean, it can likely be a profitable business.
Another great article, Simon!
Wow. Very telling. I don't see the reason for all of that funding either based on your findings. I swear, there are days when I think about how a nice boost from funding would help my two businesses, but I know that bootstrapping is best for me and keep pushing.
An excellent investigation, Simon, I'm constantly amazed at the lopsided balance between editorial and "product" at many new media companies (especially those that don't really have truly innovative products to show for it!