Digg is a waste of a business, News Corp should stay away!

Digg is a total joke of a business & a waste of a few hundred milly if News Corp actually pays that absurd price.

Ok, so I haven’t busted out for a rant in a while. It’s something that’s actually quite a liberating thing. Why not express exactly what you think, unfiltered based on what you expect other people to read, or what is most consumable, or whatever other frankly BS constructs that limit your creativity or expressiveness? Throwing that to the wind, starting now…

So Digg. Rumors has it News Corp wants to pony up hundreds of millions for it. But why? Sure, I’m about to say something you might think is unoriginal. It’s true that many people have harshly criticized Digg for being overly dependent on particular people posting. But just because people have said that before, doesn’t mean it should be dismissed. In fact, I’m saying it’s one of the only points that really matters. Fact is, Digg is a joke, way overly dependent on small percent of users contributing the content.

Problem is it’s run amok. Whereas Wikipedia can have quality controls, somebody like Digg is just let loose with garbage. There’s literally no control. There are no standards. Know what happens when that happens? What you get is filth.  You get lowest common demoninator.

Now, it’s not as if Digg hasn’t thought of that exact eventuality. Fact is they do a pretty good job with their up/down mechanisms for separating crap from the real stuff. But that can only take you so far. Still, it takes a user to actually vote in order to make a difference. But what happens when all the posts are clearly horrible? What when the people voting in fact are not necessarily the right people you want voting? Maybe they vote up comments that are actually not that good? And who is to say what they vote up is necessarily what people care about at all? Yes, that’s right, there’s no telling that. At all. NONE.

What happens is Y! Message Boards. This whole thing has happened before. When you have anonymous people being drawn to a site with a ton of traffic, you end up with a bunch of garbage happening. You get people posting stuff you know really shouldn’t be. You get people trying to game the system b/c they want a piece of the action that goes along with a high traffic site. Garbage, garbage, garbage. Filth.

Again, at least Wikipedia has some standards to figure out what’s right. This is a dramatic oversimplification of the standards in place at Wikipedia, but leave it at this: truth. Ok, the word “truth” in itself inspires a whole rash of definitions, which in itself is a whole shitstorm, so set aside your conceptions about what “truth” is, and at least acknowledge there’s a whole hell of a lot better brightline for something like Wikipedia, where it’s fact-based, and something like Digg, where the headlines are literally designed in order to attract attention.

Here’s another thing. Remember that techcrunch post last week (whenever it was, you think I’m actually going to go find it and link to it? Not gonna happen, this whole post is straight up stream of consciousness and it’s going to be posted that way, errors and all, minus the easy MS Word spellchecker, which you gotta use, ignoring of course the slang I’m using b/c I feel like it). Anyways, that post, it was about YouTube, and how you can game the system. The guy has actually done it before. First of all, bravo. I think he has a great business, and I applaud it. I think it’s a joke that some observers said they were “shocked” to hear it. Please. That’s what happens. There’s a business opportunity. I encourage those people to capitalize. And it’s not ethically wrong at all. The service is basically helping design videos that are more consumable. In other words, it’s understanding the type of content users wants, and telling the big media companies who haven’t figured it out how to do it. That’s a great damn service!

Anyways, to the big point I’m trying to make: YouTube kinda gets gamed. But please, it’s NOTHING like how Digg gets gamed. Digg is like YouTube if the only videos on YouTube that got watched were the ones in the “most popular” section. Makes no damn sense. There’s no damn long tail. YouTube at least has stuff people want to see that gets spread around thanks to email chains. But for Digg? Not so fast, not gonna happen, it plain sucks in comparison.

Ok, so how the hell does this relate to my original point, that Digg is a joke, doesn’t deserve a multi-hundred milly valuation and doesn’t have a sustainable business model? It does relate, and in a big way. Here’s the problem: If you’re dependent on your front page to draw in users, and you don’t substantially benefit from a long-tail, then you are really damn dependent on that. That’d be ok if you’re Yahoo and you have a bunch of highly sustainable properties like Yahoo Mail and shit sending you traffic every damn day. But if you’re Digg, it’s a weakness. ON TOP OF THAT, the weakness gets compounded by the fact I mentioned above that NOT ONLY are they dependent on the front page to entice READERS to their page, they are super dependent on the people who actually SUBMIT content and vote. Shit dude, that’s a dependency on top of a dependency. Factor in the huge historical disadvantages running against them, namely that when anonymous people get together online and there’s traffic, all hell breaks loose and no value is created, then you know you have a serious problem.

Ok, gotta at least give credit to Digg for riding the coattails of Fb to a nice little guaranteed (at least I assume it’s guaranteed) ad deal with MSFT. Prob doesn’t cost MSFT a damn thing, but props up the financial condition of Digg in the meantime, perhaps providing sufficient confusing propping up for News Corp to foolishly purchase them.

Damn, this post is getting long and my hands are starting to hurt, but I just remembered something I should probably point out, b/c it’s relevant to the fact that Digg could get really lucky here. It’s about how desperate News Corp is to make a purchase. Think about it. First they hit a quadruple grand slam by buying MySpace and riding out its success, WITHOUT DOING ANYTHING beyond buying it. Now of course, they’re f’ing it up completely, as demonstrated by their sagging US traffic (and I don’t mean a temporary blip, I mean a legitimate significant decrease in traffic that is non-reversible and permanent).

Ok, just made a new paragraph for no reason other than the last one was getting a little long winded. Anyways, the POINT: News Corp is desperate to bump their traffic, Digg’s high unique visitor count would let them “declare victory” on having a huge number of unique visitors they connect to, but WITHOUT actually giving them a sustainable business worth a shit. So in other words, the purchase would be more about justifying the jobs of the people at News Corp in Fox Interactive, temporarily getting a PR boost b/c they can add the unique visitor count to their total, and foolishly buying into whatever propped up revenue they’re getting now.

Phew, ok that was nice. Anyways, that’s what I really think. I don’t mean to offend anyone. I figure no one reads this blog anyway, so I might as well say what I really think. But what do you think? Please let me know, I’d appreciate it. It would actually be pretty neat if posting something like this – long-winded, pretty much unedited (actually, a lot unedited, I’m talking just spell check edited), and without thorough research other than what I just think is going to happen, would turn out to be worthwhile reading for at least a few people. I don’t mean a ton of people, but at least a few people who might really care about getting that sort of opinion. My hope then is that this is a pretty differentiated style of writing.

So, please send me your feedback. Until then, this is Mr. Wall signing out.

The meebo Games Platform: it’s gonna happen cuz it’s gotta happen (hopefully)

Platforms are great. Everybody and their Mom are making one. Facebook, LinkedIn, MySpace, Bebo, Tagged, Orkut/Google… etc. Of course you need scale and to provide a business opportunity to developers to make it work. The result thus far has been a lot of random fun app’s. Add favorite friends, quotes, tic tac toe, throw sheep at people. That’s good. Games are most fun of all and go viral because they promote interaction amongst users. Throw a sheep, then the person does something back. Casual games online are really popular because of interaction. But that’s real time. A platform needs “presence” to really unlock value in developer games. That is, users know what other users are online. Meebo can do that. They have millions of users IM’ing back and forth and it’s accepted practice to share your presence with friends. Meebo’s still growing fast. Imagine the top 100 casual games get attached to meebo. Say you use meebo. You’ll want to invite your friends to play chess/tic tac toe/checkers/whatever. So you invite them, and they join meebo. The result? Tons of people get exposed to meebo who never before heard of it. Switching cost is zero because IM’ing is IM’ing, plus meebo is a sweet product by itself. Do a deal with AOL to allow sending mass invites to people via IM (it’s been done before, so follow in those footsteps). The result is a massive community of game developers and tons of people playing highly engaging casual games. Monetization of that is a topic for another post. The point is you amass a huge number of users who become really sticky because the games are built on the meebo platform. The switching cost from meebo back to regular AIM is huge because you can’t play games. Now we’re talking about some sustainability, some long-term value!

 

Thanks for reading. I’m trying to make my posts brief and with a focus on one point. Otherwise the post can easily become confusing and ideas trip over themselves. That makes them easier to write, and hopefully easier/more enjoyable to read. To be sure, the point of this post was meebo can get a ton more users by making a game platform. (By the way, Facebook should do the same thing with presence to promote games. Of course say the Poker app does that, but there’s probably more to do.) What’s your feedback? If you write something thoughtful, I’ll definitely post my comments back. Thanks, tell your friends, sign up for my RSS feed, and keep coming back!

 

Posts that reference meebo but don’t speak about the potential for a meebo platform (will someone pleases drive this conversation?):

http://mashable.com/2007/08/19/meebo-sponsors/

http://mashable.com/2007/05/27/meebo-facebook/

http://www.downloadsquad.com/2007/09/11/meebo-adds-file-transfer-to-web-im/

 

Ning provides a new definition for “money pit”

Oh, I can feel a rant coming on. I really can’t even believe this site exists. I commented in an earlier post that I wasn’t sure I could bring myself to write about it. You know those things you read that immediately cause you to say, “AHSA*(&(@(&@ Wahhhhhhhhhh?” Or otherwise burst into loud noises of total shock? The ones where it’s so absurd you gotta find somebody pronto to spread the word just b/c you know it’s bankable their jaw will drop to the ground in giggly disbelief? UNREAL! Well, that happened in spades when Ning raised $40 plus mill from Legg Mason. Made me wonder is that the money Legg pegged to either throw in the ocean, burn, or invest in Ning? I mean really they’re equivalent from the eyes of a value shop like Da Mason. When the shock of that wore off about a month, I went back to see Ning. What’s new? Their major backer always blogs and gets cited around, so I read about it. More about politics or some general tech trend than Ning itself. Goes to show investing happens a lot based on how much spin can be generated.

 

Now Ning starts trumpeting “hey, we’ve got 100,000 social networks on our site!” Are you KIDDING me? We’re not 5 years old or born yesterday. Unless of course each network gets a WHOPPING visitor or two PER MONTH as per this quantcast graph. It’s not just Ning’s fault though. Tons of start-ups do that. Why throw out so much garbage? It’s as blatantly misleading and self-serving as a post by “stockdude1818” or some random hype machine stock picker on Yahoo Finance message boards. C’mon. I mean, when this gets written, does the company actually believe it’s relevant and representative, or just that other people will think it, or what?

Ning.com:

Legg, drop your $40 mill blank check money off to Bebo, Slide, Hi5, Rockyou, Flixster, Tagged or iLike WAY WAY WAY before you ever go drop it in Ning. The site’s shown little to no willingness to evolve. It’s in the process of getting destroyed by all the platforms that will inevitably emerge from the aforementioned megaplayers of social sites. (Facebook is the obvious example, and they’re the real player, but you gotta include the above guys too b/c they’re all legit too). Why oh why would you ever put any time or effort at all to develop on NING? It’s like saying here’s a ranch in the middle of no where with the nearest well 100 miles away and a population density of 0.1 people per square mile and expecting big business to move in. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN. You gotta provide some business opportunity here, folks. Throwing up a town general store and calling it support plus throwing up dirt roads and calling it “infrastructure” isn’t fooling people used to running water and pavement. (Ok, I’m extending this absurd comparison too much, but I like doing that, so I’ll keep trying, even if it falls flat).

 

Not only is Ning irrelevant b/c it has no users, it’s destroying hope of overcoming that because each social network requires it’s own log-in. It’s as if it’s designed to make it as hard as possible for Ning to be relevant in any lasting regard.

 

Sheesh. So this post is turning into a rant. I apologize, it’s nothing against Ning as a company, I’m just expressing my real opinion about their prospects. Honesty is the best policy right? Let me know what you think. I’m trying to be as candid as possible. I find too many bloggers think brevity works, but it actually cuts out the heart and personality of the post, and in the process throws the baby out with the bath water. How can you really know what someone thinks unless they go beyond describing things in general terms and instead offer up more expressive, colorful terms? I find a lot of blogs really boring b/c for many reasons they get reduced to the lowest common denominator of one’s opinion. Now one could argue this blog is not so great itself in its lack of structure and sacrificing numbers for expression, but hey, I gotta counterbalance all the other blogs out there so it takes some work. J

There are tons of reasons Ning’s not gonna make it. If it wasn’t for the above mentioned social networks building substantial businesses on social networks, Ning prob wouldn’t be talked about by anybody. Unless they change up dramatically, Ning simply won’t be around in a few years. Sadly. But I’m holding out hope they’ll change it up and rather than try to do everything at once (which is kind of what that one Google/SixApart guy sounded like recently in his indecipherable paper on open ID/platforms) at least do one thing really well. Start with that. Maybe? Who knows. Sheesh.

The haters are wrong, meebo is a goldmine!

Wow, seems like everyday there’s some company funded with millions of dollars that has little to no traction. That’s really just the name of the game. You invest early in hopes of a big payoff. Keyword there is “hopes.”

 

There’s not much “hoping” needed to bet that meebo is going to turn into an extremely valuable company. Over the last few years, meebo has kicked Cerulean Studios’ butt and built out a substantial online presence. Cerulean’s Trillian product has become less and less relevant, best represented by the attached Google Trends chart. People care less about Trillian, and more about meebo. Ah, the graph has gotta be a masterpiece to the eyes of meebo employees/backers.

 

Trillian (blue) vs. meebo (red):

So if meebo is so great, why doesn’t it get more press? Search Google News: there’s nothing going in the news really. On the blogs, you see posts from the official meebo blog about their bday, then some guy ripping meebo as representing everything that is wrong with web 2.0. Geez, those haters could not be more wrong. What meebo has built is a massive audience. With a massive sticky loyal audience, you can do a lot of things. PLATFORM people, hello!?!

Yes, the word “platform” is thrown around far too loosely these days. It seems everybody wants to be a platform. You have Google saying they’re building a competing platform (by the way, what’s the big deal? Sounds like just a catch up move to Facebook’s Platform), then LinkedIn said they’ll do one. By the way, who cares about LinkedIn’s platform? Just look at the quantcast: nobody returns to the site daily, and the people that do have *nothing* to do on the site except check out acquaintances – that’s right, not real friend or real business contacts – and their half year old profiles! (Seriously, does *anyone* actually update their LinkedIn profile? They better go IPO and dump shares fast before that site falls apart thanks to Facebook creating privacy tools).

LinkedIn’s quantcast graph:

 Note: don’t be fooled by the graph. People don’t actually use LinkedIn that much when they get there! Plus I still think this recent growth is window dressing for the IPO. We’ll see what happens afterwards! 

Whew, that was a bit of a sidetrack. Back to meebo! What could meebo platform have that would be really sweet? PRESENCE! Your friends can tell when you’re online. It’s already an accepted part of IM, so it’s not a gamble for somebody like Facebook where do you really want your friends knowing how much time you spend stalking around? Probably not as much. (By the way, Facebook should do presence b/c it’d help people build out more cool applications, and just allow people to opt-out, it’s that easy!)

 

So yea, with meebo you can make cool games. Forget this netvibes.com garbage (and all the other pointless web start pages). Meebo can become a start page built off real cool applications built by great developers vs. plugging in some pointless/not useful widget on netvibes. (By the way, I’ve barely used netvibes, but it looks pretty pointless from a distance).

 

Check out meebo’s growth. There’s a solid business opportunity here for developers. People go IM *A LOT* throughout the day. So give them something to do! Plus, HERE’S THE KICKER: you get developers building sweet applications, and then meebo users use it and invite their IM buddies to use the app on meebo , and since IM’ing on meebo is as easy as using a client, PEOPLE WILL SWITCH TO MEEBO! It’s not the same friction/cost associated with leaving Facebook and going to some other service. People will never leave Facebook. But IM networks give you total transportability of your friends lists, so just transfer them over to meebo baybee! The result is tons of people switch to meebo to get the additionally really sweet platform experience like games, accelerating meebo’s growth even more!

 

meebo’s quantcast graph:

Note: Don’t be fooled by the numbers, this is just for the US. meebo is HUGE globally and the engagement level by meebo users is really intense!

Damn, this is inevitable if meebo actually builds a platform, but it seems like they’ve been alluding to it since they started, so will it actually happen? WHO KNOWS! But it certainly should, and I really do think it will happen. Another thing I don’t understand: why do talented engineers work for companies that aren’t on a great growth trajectory? Go check out meebo if you want a place that’s going to make a serious impact (and who doesn’t want that?).

 

Posts I Disagree With (Not Necessarily On the Details Because I Probably Didn’t Read Them, But Just Because They Are Generally Negative on meebo) (aka, PIDWNNOTDBIPDRTBJBTAGN):

1. http://www.techcrunch.com/2007/01/17/meebo-announces-9-million-series-b-round/#comment-738082

2. http://www.uncov.com/2007/4/11/meebo-is-what-s-wrong-with-web-2-0.

3. http://programming.reddit.com/info/1gxti/comments.

4. http://www.uncov.com/2007/5/15/meebo-yahoo-chat-was-awesome-in-1997.

Snapvine is a garbage company

No Summary This Time:  

In the latest sign of a frothy market, Snapvine raised $10 million from venture firm I’ve never heard of (where do these guys come from? Totally out of the woodwork it seems… then again I haven’t memorized the lastest list of fourth/fifth/sixth tier firms to get there yet). (Ah, correction, just read Bridgescale is a new firm. Plus I see they invested in Digital Chocolate, which is solid I heard, but have no idea really. IMVU I know is solid, I hope at least, so whatever, that doesn’t excuse this investment! If they keep up Snapvine type investments, they better hope their Bridgescale doesn’t collapse under the weight of falty investments. Ok, bad joke, but seriously, Bridgescale’s bridge is probably only as strong as that one in Pirates of the Caribbean part 2 or 3, one of those two, or those other absurd rickety bridges… I’m still talking about this? Now I know this blog is going down before it even starts…).

 The Wow This Company Sucks Reasons List: 

(1)   Anyways, Snapvine is so pathetic I find it hard to zero in on a particular weakness, so let’s start with the most obvious one: no unique competitive advantage people! None, at all! It’s comical reading what the original VCs plus their angels said when they raised their first round. No, I’m not going to take the time to dig up that link and provide it here. Frankly it’d be a waste of your time. But if you’re in the mood to see some of the most bizarre babble about revolutionizing communications, read that, then go to Snapvine and listen to the inane crap people post there.

(2)   Snapvine basically takes all the worst parts of MySpace. The anonymity, the sex banter, the desperation, the stalking. All while taking none of the good of Facebook. (Yes, I just wrote a couple incomplete sentences, so sue me?)

(3)   The only thing you need to know about Snapvine is that the business as it is today is very weak. There’s no reason for someone to leave voice comments on peoples’ profile pages. If there is, then they’re not going to make money on it, or someone else is going to compete with them and do it better.

(4)   Where the heck is the $10 million going to go? A yacht? Seriously people. Absurdity! I hope you guys have a Google Alert for your company and read this post. Please post in the comments how you feel about my sentiment. Other than the clips of a few thousand people saying absolutely nothing of value to anyone including their friends, what’s the deal for Snapvine? (Seriously, go use Snapvine for a sec. People say stuff on there that is not specific to their friends because it’s posted for everyone to hear, and so the result is it’s totally irrelevant to everyone!)

(5)   It’s very hard to impossible to monetize that and the worthlessness of companies like Snapvine is going to become apparent as more social networks open up their platforms. Yea sure Snapvine did a deal with Bebo? So what? Build an app on Facebook that let’s you record your voice and store it. Then build an app on Bebo and Orkut when they open up. Does it matter it’s not calling long distance and leaving it on a machine? Let the users decide. Companies that have to survive by getting into feature wars fail. Yea, maybe Snapvine can buy some partnerships with their $10 million, but “buying” things isn’t sustainable without cash flow in.

(6)   Seriously, unbelievable. The only thing more stomach turning was Ning raising $40+ million. The Ning fundraising is so outrageous that even with the Mr. Wall blog’s dedication to the great and worst companies it is hard to find a low enough peg to place Ning. Anyways, I’ll figure out later if I really want to post about Ning.

 

Does this post have structure? Not really. Is it a list of reasons? Hardly. It’s as meandering as the investors sound in describing what they expect out of it. All I have to say is thank goodness the original VCs didn’t lead the next round, and I’m sorry to the latest group of investors. Because I don’t want to drag their firms’ names through the mud, I will not mention the first round investors. Hey, I guess that’s why early stage is a bitch sometimes. I just have to wonder what institutions invested in the fund that led the second round, because really at some point you should just return your money to investors rather than put it in hail mary garbage like this. I mean c’mon, it’s the SECOND ROUND, you have a chance to see it’s garbage, so why invest? Was it between this and funding a funnyordie.com clone? Shucks.

 

Yes, this is my second post and yes I’m saying things without spending a lot of time writing supporting statements. But you know what I kind of enjoy this free flow of writing. Does it capture “voice”? Let me know in the comments. I do genuinely appreciate you stopping by to read this. This blog is still taking shape, and you have a chance to make a big impact, so let me know if this blog post is a waste of your time, really great, or somewhere in between. Admittedly the stream-of-consiousness approach understandably creates a lot of filler words. My defense of filler words is that without them it just becomes a boring post summarized as “Snapvine sucks.” My hope is to add some personality to this blog. It’s supposed to entertaining. If it’s not, tell me what you want to see or how it can be entertaining. Thanks!!

 

This is Mr. Wall signing out. Remember, I’m doing this because I want to provide a frank, candid and personal perspective on some of the great and pathetic companies out there. Help show your support by returning to this page, adding my RSS feed and telling your friends. No, Mr. Wall will never have ads. I said it — *never*. By the way, I actually spent 30 minutes writing this post. Honestly I probably should have just said “Snapvine sucks” and been done with it. Agree?

 Posts I Disagree With (Not Necessarily On the Details Because I Probably Didn’t Read Them, But Just Because They Are Generally Supportive of Snapvine) (aka, PIDWNNOTDBIPDRTBJBTAGS):

1. http://mashable.com/2006/07/27/snapvine-adds-voice-comments-to-myspace/
2. http://mashable.com/2007/09/21/snapvine-funded/
3. http://facereviews.com/2007/06/28/snapvine-facebook-app-allows-people-to-leave-voice-comments/

How Yahoo could transform itself (emphasis on “could”!)

Summary:

Yahoo is one of the most popular destinations on the web. Then why has it struggled so? (Need I count the ways? The list is too long for a blog like this that aspires to be brief). I’m not going to invent reasons that it is failing. Many conjectures can be back fit to apparent perfection (but not necessarily with accuracy). Let’s just get down to what they need to do.

 

The To Do List:

(1)   Make Jeff Weiner the CEO. I think ValleyWag cited performance stats of units under his capable management hands. In short, stellar. Give him the reins!

(2)   Make Yahoo Mail a Platform! It brings in 40 million plus people PER DAY in the US alone. The stickiness rivals social networks. Yea sure, Yahoo’s afraid of messing with the golden goose because the reality is their Mail product enabled them to survive the Google Nuclear Winter – ie, Google’s rise and Yahoo’s scramble to build a search engine that didn’t suck. (It goes without saying that Lycos and Excite – formerly multibillion dollar market cap companies – bit the dust during the Winter.) Back to the case for the Platform: people do their mail thing, then what? Developers can do stuff. Let developers do all the things they can do on F8, for starters. Give them “presence” so they can build games that can tell when friends are online. (I think meebo should do all these same things, by the way). Why might Yahoo not do this? Again, Mail is the golden goose. Plus in their eyes, F8 might not prove anything, so they wait a few years until it’s obvious it does create enormous value, and then what? It’s a lot harder to build a relevant platform, even with the traffic Mail generates. (Of course, Mail recently sunk below Hotmail in popularity, so there’s no guarantee the golden goose will stay so healthy).

(3)   Whew, that second one was a long one. Frankly, it didn’t do it justice, but you get the idea: embrace developers to help you figure it out! Now the third one: aggressively pitch Yahoo Mail to universities (and anybody who will listen!). I don’t know much about the mail company they just acquired other than their revenues are quite small relative to the purchase price. Anyways, this point is obvious: you get the students while their young, they’ll use your mail for a long time! And we know how great it is to have a golden goose like that, especially when who knows when Winter 2.0 might occur? Why might Yahoo note do this? Well, it’s really hard to convince them to do it, so it seems given Google has tried this for the past couple years. Schools don’t necessarily have as intense privacy concerns as companies, but who exactly can make a decision on the mail system for the entire school? It’s a toughy, but a goody.

 

Posts I Disagree With (Not Necessarily On the Details Because I Probably Didn’t Read Them, But Just Because They Are Generally Negative on Yahoo) (aka, PIDWNNOTDBIPDRTBJBTAGN):

A.    http://blog.seorevolution.com/2007/01/26/how-yahoo-screwed-itself/

B.     http://www.offeroftheday.com/post/woot-yahoo-deal/

C.     http://www.kbcafe.com/iBLOGthere4iM/?guid=20040830072916

 

A Picture (And Not Necessarily A Pretty One):

 

 

 

The “Winter” is the downslope off that huge matterhornesque peak in the middle there. Yahoo knows the Golden Goose saved them.