Last summer, I was listed as a co-author in Pfizer’s paper that was published in Digital Medicine, Simulating patient matching to clinical trials using a property rights blockchain.
I am now mentioned along with Bitmark and our project Feral File in the new book Surfing con Satoshi. Arte, blockchain e NFT:
In both cases, I don’t feel I did anything to deserve mention, but what wonderful honors to be associated with in these great projects.
In 2013, I led a team to create FriendsPlus, a mobile app that was acquired (and killed) right at launch.
It turns out Facebook’s new dating app, announced last week, is very similar. Let’s see how Facebook talks about it:
Facebook Dating product manager Charmaine Hung tells me that “I have 2,000 Facebook friends. I’m not best friends with all 2,000 people, and there’s a good chance that one of that could be a really good match with me. I trust them, I appreciate them and I know we’re compatible. The only thing missing is knowing if we’re both interested in being more than just friends without the fear of rejection if you were to do this in real life.”
Let me first share how I talk about FriendsPlus on my LinkedIn Profile, with my intro deck and a screenshot below.
Dating service acquired in 2013 by Vietnam’s largest dating community, Noi.vn.
► Recruited and managed 5 person cross-functional team to produce FriendsPlus, a social / local / mobile dating (SoLoMo) app for iOS and Android.
► Created service targeted towards professional-age females, emphasizing real relationships to make romantic connections in contrast to typical male-oriented “browsing” dating services. Product Manager.
► Led startup to acquisition of application and technology platform.
https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/embed_code/key/DO1xBQWZQYEr5a
An overview of Friends+ as pitched to investors and later, acquisition partners. The application and technology platform were acquired pre-launch in Q4 2013 by Vietnam’s largest dating service, Noi.vn
Feature: Allowed you to propose a meetup right now based on the type of activity and person you would like to do and meet.
To be honest, the app was not going to be easy to launch and have traction grow on its own; this is why I ended up selling it to Noi.vn, Vietnam’s most popular dating service. Noi never launched the app either. I suspect it was hard to get internal support for something that did not work on traditional engagement metrics.
Going back to Facebook, its Dating team is going to face the same issues in defining success. After you set up crushes, what do you do? FriendsPlus would wait for that magic moment, but if the user does not take action right away with Facebook Dating, she will not go back into the app. It’s also not like you add new friends (I guess this rate declines with age) constantly and consistently over time and can be reminded to set new crushes.
I imagine the real-world usage as follows: I set some crushes. Some time later, as not all users will use the app at the same time, a crush of mine may also use Dating and set me as a crush. Facebook whisks us into an awkward chat:
Facebook: “You guys seem to be crushes. Go chat!” (at a random time of day in which the pair may or may not be busy)
Me: “Hi”
You: “Hi” (anywhere from immediately to days later, have you seen how the modern generation replies to messages?)
Me and You: [Uhhh, what now?] (Hopefully, not a dick pic)
Potential awkward fail, at least based on how the app is described in the TechCrunch article.
The Facebooks and Googles of the world get easy media attention any time they release a new app. My impression is that most of these apps are tests from product teams that need to build out their resumes. These apps are not real businesses; they get 15 minutes (seriously, go search Techcrunch) of media attention and die out months later.
While this sounds like a humble brag, I claim this more about my failure in social products: I feel I hit my peak as a social innovator in 2012/2013, seeing pain points and constructing social utilities to solve them on a monthly basis. Because I was in Vietnam, these ideas died; I could not get investor support for anything without clear virality (“build it and they will come” and gamification are not strategies) and revenue models. (Cyworld and Mimo failed in significant part because unlike MySpace, Facebook, and Snapchat in the West, we had to grow users rapidly and make money.) Months or years later, I would see these same ideas I had get millions in funding in Silicon Valley, like Facebook Dating. They unsurprisingly all failed, though perhaps some like FriendsPlus in Vietnam eventually got acquired.
That is what I expect to happen here.
As with my Minecraft post, I do have an ego-driven need to see my insights proven correct. (Don’t worry, I know I am often wrong) Below is a slide deck I put together in an interview with Facebook for Facebook at Work (now called Workplace) in September 2015.
After 1+ years and only thousands of paying users and questions about what how the site should be used, however, perhaps my Slide 5 was onto something.
Facebook claims it has already signed up “thousands” of paying subscribers to Workplace Premium, spokeswoman Vanessa Chan told CNBC. Facebook’s name recognition and user familiarity could be a major asset that should help it muscle into the marketplace. But the social media site needs to overcome the perception that the site is a productivity killer at work and convince employers that staffers will be using the tool for work, not social purposes.
Silicon Valley Business Journal – April 2017.
When I research something and build a plan for it, I really get invested and passionate about it. Then, I hope to see it fruition so I can believe my instincts were correct. As we begin to see Microsoft open up its Minecraft platform and launch larger education initiatives, I look fondly on this deck I created while interviewing with Microsoft two years ago.
As a former Northwestern Kellogg MMM (MBA + Masters in Design Innovation), I’ll tell you something that you want to know but that no one at Kellogg will ever tell you:
Secret Pro Tip:
If you’re an international student who REALLY wants to work (and / stay) in the United States (USA) after graduation, invest in the MMM program.
Here’s why:
It can be said that the MS DI program is not really an engineering program, in the way that most people think about engineering (hardcore math & science). Nonetheless, it’s classified as an engineering program.
Beyond that are the more traditional reasons to be part of Kellogg: long-time elite business school brand, the amazing new all-glass lakefront building, rise in the rankings, leading percentages for diversity in gender and internationality, continued emphasis on tech, and my articles on the experience). Plus the MS in Design Innovation offers a great core of classes that will help you understand problems from bottom up (“what is the user/customer thinking?), rather than just top-down (“well, it’s clear from the financials, we have too many employees, let’s just fire them”).
All that sounds sound great, but let’s be real. The reason you go to business school is to fulfill your professional goals. If your goal is to be in the United States long term, apply for Kellogg MMM.
The simple math: at today’s acceptance rates, you have a 60% chance of getting rejected and having to leave the country after one year. With MMM, you can stay at least three years and the chances you will end up having to leave the US without a Visa is only 21.6%.
Is this worth an extra quarter of tuition? Of course it is.
I Spit Hot Fire 