Comments on: Freelance Journalism Site True/Slant In M&A Talks

By: Gus Venditto

Gus Venditto — Thu, 20 May 2010 20:52:15 +0000

Would you all feel better if it were yet another mobile/ad network/social media play with no revenue that was getting funded?

The type of content TrueSlant publishes is far from a commodity — it’s building a community around well-written content.

I have no inside knowledge of whether they have the right formula, but the idea that they are going to be able to attract good writers with a rev-share is the innovation.

By: ilamont

ilamont — Thu, 20 May 2010 18:33:06 +0000

Agree with the other commenters. What’s the business model? Who would pay for a brand that’s never been profitable, is surrounded by a multitude of blog-based competitors, and is trying to make headway in an advertising market that is characterized by an endless supply of inventory and low prices?

By: JC Hewitt

JC Hewitt — Thu, 20 May 2010 17:48:37 +0000

This is bizarre. I’m all for people getting paid, but businesses have revenue. As far as I can tell, True/Slant has none.

I’ve watched plenty of media startups become profitable in recent years with little-to-no investment. Why are they focusing on building content when they should be creating a business model?

By: Harold

Harold — Thu, 20 May 2010 15:29:10 +0000

This sounds like one of those cases of it’s not what you know, but who you know. 1.5m uniques is something many under-funded or not-funded sites can get to. Writers are a commodity and the True/Slant brand is meaningless. The only reason anyone gets any money out of this deal is because the founder is well connected.