How to Making Money

Does respecting the opinions of others include despising others, of implying that others will be at fault if the awful Rethugs, whom Obama has been, you will recall, courting with “bipartisanship”?

Does respect entail telling us that what we saw, in print, of Obama’s clear promises, what we heard with our own ears, of Obama’s promises, an Obama many worked for thinking that, as a black man, Obama would be good for the country, and the vote alone, by itself, Was and IS a sign of the good of the country … does respect mean telling us we never saw or heard such things … that we are lying and making things up?

Does respect mean telling people who have watched, closely, the political scene for longer than Obama has been alive, people who were willing and happy to donate time and effort and ideas, people who had and have good, indeed wonderful, ideas, ideas that still must be implemented to avert serious economic and social disaster, that they are “effing r*****s”, in need of a drug test, and of “getting” a “real” life?

Does respect mean peddling fear?

Or does “respect” mean something else perhaps, like appreciation, or at least, tolerance AND the understanding that people who do not agree with you are, possibly, neither stupid nor uninformed?

Apparently, what phred suggested, regarding a party having actual accomplishments and a moral compass is less important than “winning”, when such “winning” simply means more of the same.

Frankly, AC2, it matters little who is in power because the “system” is so corrupt, economically and legally, specifically as regards the rule of law, as Obama has continued and extended the worst of the Bush-Cheney Executive power grab, and the military has far to much power, politically and, in terms of the amount of the nation’s “wealth and treasure”, a stranglehold on the nation’s “looking forward” future, that regardless of who is in “power”, as they are both essentially the same, in spite of YOUR assertions that, somehow, they are not … our society faces very hard times … and to be brutally honest … the pain ought to be shared equally, and the blame, let’s not put it on “progressives”, or even the T-baggers, but on those who have had and do have power, especially Obama who had, despite those who dispute it, a genuine and heartfelt mandate to actually make some changes, which as President, with majorities in both the House and Senate, as well as each and every one of those “Democratic” Senators and Representatives, he and the Democrats COULD have done?

At the very least, respect means not calling others stupid or blaming them for the failures of others.

When the spill in the Gulf occurred, certain pundits intoned, “We are all responsible for this catastrophe.”

But look who is still in business, the largest supplier to the US military, aka Bee Pee.

When the economic meltdown occurred, certain pundits intoned, “It was those who could not afford these homes, but really we are all to blame.”

But look who is getting huge, actually obscene, “bonuses”?

Now you can say, “It’s systemic, and the D’s can’t fix it over-night”

Righto, AC2, righto.

Wonder when they plan to start?

Righto, right after they defeat the awful, evil R’s … well soon thereafter, anyhow.

But it’s hard, doncha know?

Righto.

Now, you will note, AC2, that at no point did I take you, personally, to task or suggest that it will be your fault if disaster befalls us? Nor did phred, for that matter.

Those who differ from you have never said you are to blame, yet you, and other partisans who agree with your viewpoint, charge us with such “responsibility” constantly and consistently,

Nobody “lost” 2000, but the Dems, Gore and Lieberman.

Frankly, AC2, I voted AGAINST Lieberman AND Gore’s apparently happy choice of Lieberman as his running-mate.

And, you know, just between us, AC2, Gore’s behavior, during Bush v. Gore, was not inspiring, to say the least.

Kind of cowardly, like the D’s in general, and certain ones, in particular.

These times, clearly, call for courage and bold innovation, not capitulation to selfish greed, mindless fear, and state secrecy, “secret” law and killing at a distance on the whims of one man or woman. Democrat or Republican. The President of the United States of America.

In my opinion.

DW

This post originally appeared on Forbes.com, where Mashable regularly contributes articles about social media, business and technology.

Why do web startups raise money? And how? These are two questions that account for a huge corpus of tech and financial discussion. Despite the complexity involved in these questions, their answers can be condensed into an eight-word statement: Someone somewhere thought he’d make his money back.

If you consider a few notable fundraising efforts from popular web startups, you begin to see how this aforementioned hypothetical “someone” might think his investment would be prudent and even profitable. Here are five popular web startups we’ve seen raising large amounts of money since the 2008 downturn, and a quick look at how they were able to do so.

1. Groupon

Groupon offers daily discounts for local businesses; these coupons can be redeemed only when a significant number of people choose to use them. For example, Groupon recently partnered with Gap to offer shoppers $50 worth of clothing and accessories for $25.

While daily deals and critical-mass coupons are fine and dandy for retailers and consumers, Groupon also takes its cut. The company usually keeps half of the coupon price and is expected to report $400 million in revenue for 2010.

Groupon has brought in increasing interest from investors. Since its relatively modest $1 million angel round in 2007, this startup has gone on to garner a total of $173 million over the past three years, the vast majority of which was raised after the 2008 economic crash. After collecting $6.8 million during its Series A round of funding, Groupon managed to bring in $30 million during its Series B round in December 2009, which was led by Accel Partners. Its headline-making $135 million Series C was led by Digital Sky Technologies, the famous investors behind Zynga and class='blippr-nobr'>Facebookclass="blippr-nobr">Facebook.

Without question, having a revenue stream as a core part of the company’s main product is a popular feature (with VCs) of funded startups. Groupon has that covered. Aside from the value the product offers, at scale, it also is intended to generate massive amounts of revenue. Unlike some social networking apps that require partnerships and advertising dollars to support an unrelated product for end users, generating revenue is Groupon’s most basic function.

2. Zynga

Zynga, creator of popular casual games, including FarmVille and Mafia Wars, boasts a revenue model based on small end-user transactions in virtual currency, which users spend on virtual goods. Zynga has proved that microtransactions at the scale of Facebook’s platform are big business worth serious investment.

Despite violating a core tenet of web startup wisdom: Never build your business on someone else’s platform, Zynga has racked up huge rounds and equally huge valuations. All told, Zynga has taken $519 million in funding, the bulk of which was raised after December 2009. In that month, the company closed a $180 million Series C from such firms as Andreessen Horowitz, Digital Sky and others. And in June 2010, Zynga took a $300 million Series D from class='blippr-nobr'>Googleclass="blippr-nobr">Google and SoftBank. With more than 56 million Americans playing social games, it’s no wonder why investors are putting down serious money in this industry.

3. Twitterclass="blippr-nobr">Twitter

Since its launch in 2006, micro-blogging service Twitter has become a social media darling, raising a total of $160 million since its 2007 Series A. The company raised $135 million over two rounds in 2009 from such firms as Benchmark, Morgan Stanley, Union Square and others.

Notably, all this money was raised before Twitter had found any significant source of revenue. This fact bucks a major trend in investment (that VCs like to see clear revenue stream before investing), but Twitter pulled it off because of one major factor: People.

Not only was the service growing exponentially, but it also had the endorsement (and daily usage) of pop culture celebrities such as Ashton Kutcher and Justin Timberlake. But nothing topped Twitter’s Oprah appearance, a watershed moment that brought a deluge of mainstream attention and a glut of new users.

Between the escalating adoption and increasing media attention, Twitter has become an opportunity investors can’t turn down.

4. Asana

Facebook Co-Founder Dustin Moscovitz and Facebook engineering lead Justin Rosenstein teamed up after leaving Facebook to found Asana, a startup that is reportedly building project management software. It is still in early development and hasn’t launched a product yet. This is one case where the product is presumed to be a sure bet because of the past experience and intellectual caliber of its creators.

Sometimes, a startup can raise money with nothing but pure pedigree. When a handful of big tech company engineers leave the mothership to found a startup, as happens in Silicon Valley from time to time, they can often drum up a round of funding before pencil meets paper.

Over seven months in 2009, the team was able to raise $10.2 million in two rounds of funding. In this case, investors are banking on Moscovitz’s and Rosenstein’s past successes. In a way, it’s as if they are investing in Beethoven’s next symphony or Van Gogh’s next canvas (i.e. the next Facebook).

5. Ustreamclass="blippr-nobr">ustream

Finally, there’s Ustream, a live interactive broadcast platform, which raised an impressive $75 million round of funding earlier this year from SoftBank. Previously, the startup had brought in nearly $13 million between a small 2007 seed round and a 2008 Series A. That’s a huge jump.

Despite a range of competitors in the online video world, including class='blippr-nobr'>YouTubeclass="blippr-nobr">YouTube, Ustream has made its mark on the live video market. Ustream has demonstrated mass-scale success in this arena by brokering deals to show live online footage of red carpet events, celebrity press conferences and even the 2008 Presidential Inauguration.

While challenging an industry leader like YouTube isn’t usually a prudent path to funding, doing so successfully through innovative technologies and user acquisition strategies can pay off.

More Business Resources from Mashable:

- 10 Emerging Social Platforms and How Businesses Can Use Them/> - 10 Free WordPress Themes for Small Businesses/> - The Future of Ad Agencies and Social Media/> - HOW TO: Run Your Business Online with $10 and a Google Account/> - 5 New Ways Small Business Can Offer Location-Based Deals

Image courtesy of iStockphotoclass="blippr-nobr">iStockphoto, Sage78

For more Business coverage:

class="f-el">class="cov-twit">Follow Mashable Businessclass="s-el">class="cov-rss">Subscribe to the Business channelclass="f-el">class="cov-fb">Become a Fan on Facebookclass="s-el">class="cov-apple">Download our free apps for iPhone and iPad

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 announced and previewed: Digital <b>...</b>

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 announced and previewed: Photokina 2010: Panasonic has announced the DMC-GH2 Micro Four Thirds camera. The successor to the GH1 continues with its 'hybrid' stills/video philosophy but adds a host of tweaks and ...

How the WSJ has drunk the <b>News</b> Corp. Kool-Aid « Talking Biz <b>News</b>

Bill O'Reilly may not savage Keith Olbermann and GE boss Jeffrey Immelt the way he used to, but behind the scenes, the Fox News PR machine remains on the lookout for any opportunity, however tiny, to stick it to NBC and MSNBC. ...

Survey: AT&amp;T to keep 63% of iPhone customers | iLounge <b>News</b>

iLounge news discussing the Survey: AT&T to keep 63% of iPhone customers. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

robert shumake

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 announced and previewed: Digital <b>...</b>

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 announced and previewed: Photokina 2010: Panasonic has announced the DMC-GH2 Micro Four Thirds camera. The successor to the GH1 continues with its 'hybrid' stills/video philosophy but adds a host of tweaks and ...

How the WSJ has drunk the <b>News</b> Corp. Kool-Aid « Talking Biz <b>News</b>

Bill O'Reilly may not savage Keith Olbermann and GE boss Jeffrey Immelt the way he used to, but behind the scenes, the Fox News PR machine remains on the lookout for any opportunity, however tiny, to stick it to NBC and MSNBC. ...

Survey: AT&amp;T to keep 63% of iPhone customers | iLounge <b>News</b>

iLounge news discussing the Survey: AT&T to keep 63% of iPhone customers. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

Does respecting the opinions of others include despising others, of implying that others will be at fault if the awful Rethugs, whom Obama has been, you will recall, courting with “bipartisanship”?

Does respect entail telling us that what we saw, in print, of Obama’s clear promises, what we heard with our own ears, of Obama’s promises, an Obama many worked for thinking that, as a black man, Obama would be good for the country, and the vote alone, by itself, Was and IS a sign of the good of the country … does respect mean telling us we never saw or heard such things … that we are lying and making things up?

Does respect mean telling people who have watched, closely, the political scene for longer than Obama has been alive, people who were willing and happy to donate time and effort and ideas, people who had and have good, indeed wonderful, ideas, ideas that still must be implemented to avert serious economic and social disaster, that they are “effing r*****s”, in need of a drug test, and of “getting” a “real” life?

Does respect mean peddling fear?

Or does “respect” mean something else perhaps, like appreciation, or at least, tolerance AND the understanding that people who do not agree with you are, possibly, neither stupid nor uninformed?

Apparently, what phred suggested, regarding a party having actual accomplishments and a moral compass is less important than “winning”, when such “winning” simply means more of the same.

Frankly, AC2, it matters little who is in power because the “system” is so corrupt, economically and legally, specifically as regards the rule of law, as Obama has continued and extended the worst of the Bush-Cheney Executive power grab, and the military has far to much power, politically and, in terms of the amount of the nation’s “wealth and treasure”, a stranglehold on the nation’s “looking forward” future, that regardless of who is in “power”, as they are both essentially the same, in spite of YOUR assertions that, somehow, they are not … our society faces very hard times … and to be brutally honest … the pain ought to be shared equally, and the blame, let’s not put it on “progressives”, or even the T-baggers, but on those who have had and do have power, especially Obama who had, despite those who dispute it, a genuine and heartfelt mandate to actually make some changes, which as President, with majorities in both the House and Senate, as well as each and every one of those “Democratic” Senators and Representatives, he and the Democrats COULD have done?

At the very least, respect means not calling others stupid or blaming them for the failures of others.

When the spill in the Gulf occurred, certain pundits intoned, “We are all responsible for this catastrophe.”

But look who is still in business, the largest supplier to the US military, aka Bee Pee.

When the economic meltdown occurred, certain pundits intoned, “It was those who could not afford these homes, but really we are all to blame.”

But look who is getting huge, actually obscene, “bonuses”?

Now you can say, “It’s systemic, and the D’s can’t fix it over-night”

Righto, AC2, righto.

Wonder when they plan to start?

Righto, right after they defeat the awful, evil R’s … well soon thereafter, anyhow.

But it’s hard, doncha know?

Righto.

Now, you will note, AC2, that at no point did I take you, personally, to task or suggest that it will be your fault if disaster befalls us? Nor did phred, for that matter.

Those who differ from you have never said you are to blame, yet you, and other partisans who agree with your viewpoint, charge us with such “responsibility” constantly and consistently,

Nobody “lost” 2000, but the Dems, Gore and Lieberman.

Frankly, AC2, I voted AGAINST Lieberman AND Gore’s apparently happy choice of Lieberman as his running-mate.

And, you know, just between us, AC2, Gore’s behavior, during Bush v. Gore, was not inspiring, to say the least.

Kind of cowardly, like the D’s in general, and certain ones, in particular.

These times, clearly, call for courage and bold innovation, not capitulation to selfish greed, mindless fear, and state secrecy, “secret” law and killing at a distance on the whims of one man or woman. Democrat or Republican. The President of the United States of America.

In my opinion.

DW

This post originally appeared on Forbes.com, where Mashable regularly contributes articles about social media, business and technology.

Why do web startups raise money? And how? These are two questions that account for a huge corpus of tech and financial discussion. Despite the complexity involved in these questions, their answers can be condensed into an eight-word statement: Someone somewhere thought he’d make his money back.

If you consider a few notable fundraising efforts from popular web startups, you begin to see how this aforementioned hypothetical “someone” might think his investment would be prudent and even profitable. Here are five popular web startups we’ve seen raising large amounts of money since the 2008 downturn, and a quick look at how they were able to do so.

1. Groupon

Groupon offers daily discounts for local businesses; these coupons can be redeemed only when a significant number of people choose to use them. For example, Groupon recently partnered with Gap to offer shoppers $50 worth of clothing and accessories for $25.

While daily deals and critical-mass coupons are fine and dandy for retailers and consumers, Groupon also takes its cut. The company usually keeps half of the coupon price and is expected to report $400 million in revenue for 2010.

Groupon has brought in increasing interest from investors. Since its relatively modest $1 million angel round in 2007, this startup has gone on to garner a total of $173 million over the past three years, the vast majority of which was raised after the 2008 economic crash. After collecting $6.8 million during its Series A round of funding, Groupon managed to bring in $30 million during its Series B round in December 2009, which was led by Accel Partners. Its headline-making $135 million Series C was led by Digital Sky Technologies, the famous investors behind Zynga and class='blippr-nobr'>Facebookclass="blippr-nobr">Facebook.

Without question, having a revenue stream as a core part of the company’s main product is a popular feature (with VCs) of funded startups. Groupon has that covered. Aside from the value the product offers, at scale, it also is intended to generate massive amounts of revenue. Unlike some social networking apps that require partnerships and advertising dollars to support an unrelated product for end users, generating revenue is Groupon’s most basic function.

2. Zynga

Zynga, creator of popular casual games, including FarmVille and Mafia Wars, boasts a revenue model based on small end-user transactions in virtual currency, which users spend on virtual goods. Zynga has proved that microtransactions at the scale of Facebook’s platform are big business worth serious investment.

Despite violating a core tenet of web startup wisdom: Never build your business on someone else’s platform, Zynga has racked up huge rounds and equally huge valuations. All told, Zynga has taken $519 million in funding, the bulk of which was raised after December 2009. In that month, the company closed a $180 million Series C from such firms as Andreessen Horowitz, Digital Sky and others. And in June 2010, Zynga took a $300 million Series D from class='blippr-nobr'>Googleclass="blippr-nobr">Google and SoftBank. With more than 56 million Americans playing social games, it’s no wonder why investors are putting down serious money in this industry.

3. Twitterclass="blippr-nobr">Twitter

Since its launch in 2006, micro-blogging service Twitter has become a social media darling, raising a total of $160 million since its 2007 Series A. The company raised $135 million over two rounds in 2009 from such firms as Benchmark, Morgan Stanley, Union Square and others.

Notably, all this money was raised before Twitter had found any significant source of revenue. This fact bucks a major trend in investment (that VCs like to see clear revenue stream before investing), but Twitter pulled it off because of one major factor: People.

Not only was the service growing exponentially, but it also had the endorsement (and daily usage) of pop culture celebrities such as Ashton Kutcher and Justin Timberlake. But nothing topped Twitter’s Oprah appearance, a watershed moment that brought a deluge of mainstream attention and a glut of new users.

Between the escalating adoption and increasing media attention, Twitter has become an opportunity investors can’t turn down.

4. Asana

Facebook Co-Founder Dustin Moscovitz and Facebook engineering lead Justin Rosenstein teamed up after leaving Facebook to found Asana, a startup that is reportedly building project management software. It is still in early development and hasn’t launched a product yet. This is one case where the product is presumed to be a sure bet because of the past experience and intellectual caliber of its creators.

Sometimes, a startup can raise money with nothing but pure pedigree. When a handful of big tech company engineers leave the mothership to found a startup, as happens in Silicon Valley from time to time, they can often drum up a round of funding before pencil meets paper.

Over seven months in 2009, the team was able to raise $10.2 million in two rounds of funding. In this case, investors are banking on Moscovitz’s and Rosenstein’s past successes. In a way, it’s as if they are investing in Beethoven’s next symphony or Van Gogh’s next canvas (i.e. the next Facebook).

5. Ustreamclass="blippr-nobr">ustream

Finally, there’s Ustream, a live interactive broadcast platform, which raised an impressive $75 million round of funding earlier this year from SoftBank. Previously, the startup had brought in nearly $13 million between a small 2007 seed round and a 2008 Series A. That’s a huge jump.

Despite a range of competitors in the online video world, including class='blippr-nobr'>YouTubeclass="blippr-nobr">YouTube, Ustream has made its mark on the live video market. Ustream has demonstrated mass-scale success in this arena by brokering deals to show live online footage of red carpet events, celebrity press conferences and even the 2008 Presidential Inauguration.

While challenging an industry leader like YouTube isn’t usually a prudent path to funding, doing so successfully through innovative technologies and user acquisition strategies can pay off.

More Business Resources from Mashable:

- 10 Emerging Social Platforms and How Businesses Can Use Them/> - 10 Free WordPress Themes for Small Businesses/> - The Future of Ad Agencies and Social Media/> - HOW TO: Run Your Business Online with $10 and a Google Account/> - 5 New Ways Small Business Can Offer Location-Based Deals

Image courtesy of iStockphotoclass="blippr-nobr">iStockphoto, Sage78

For more Business coverage:

class="f-el">class="cov-twit">Follow Mashable Businessclass="s-el">class="cov-rss">Subscribe to the Business channelclass="f-el">class="cov-fb">Become a Fan on Facebookclass="s-el">class="cov-apple">Download our free apps for iPhone and iPad

robert shumake

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 announced and previewed: Digital <b>...</b>

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 announced and previewed: Photokina 2010: Panasonic has announced the DMC-GH2 Micro Four Thirds camera. The successor to the GH1 continues with its 'hybrid' stills/video philosophy but adds a host of tweaks and ...

How the WSJ has drunk the <b>News</b> Corp. Kool-Aid « Talking Biz <b>News</b>

Bill O'Reilly may not savage Keith Olbermann and GE boss Jeffrey Immelt the way he used to, but behind the scenes, the Fox News PR machine remains on the lookout for any opportunity, however tiny, to stick it to NBC and MSNBC. ...

Survey: AT&amp;T to keep 63% of iPhone customers | iLounge <b>News</b>

iLounge news discussing the Survey: AT&T to keep 63% of iPhone customers. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.

robert shumake

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 announced and previewed: Digital <b>...</b>

Panasonic Lumix DMC-GH2 announced and previewed: Photokina 2010: Panasonic has announced the DMC-GH2 Micro Four Thirds camera. The successor to the GH1 continues with its 'hybrid' stills/video philosophy but adds a host of tweaks and ...

How the WSJ has drunk the <b>News</b> Corp. Kool-Aid « Talking Biz <b>News</b>

Bill O'Reilly may not savage Keith Olbermann and GE boss Jeffrey Immelt the way he used to, but behind the scenes, the Fox News PR machine remains on the lookout for any opportunity, however tiny, to stick it to NBC and MSNBC. ...

Survey: AT&amp;T to keep 63% of iPhone customers | iLounge <b>News</b>

iLounge news discussing the Survey: AT&T to keep 63% of iPhone customers. Find more iPhone news from leading independent iPod, iPhone, and iPad site.