Content pfp
Content
@
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Matthew pfp
Matthew
@matthew
As I chart the course of eventcaster's future, one exercise I find helpful is to completely remove FC from the value prop / product explanation. For example, can't just be "an event app for people on farcaster". It has to grow into its own unique value prop that someone who doesn't already use farcaster can see. Maybe not right now, but eventually.
7 replies
3 recasts
33 reactions
Garrett pfp
Garrett
@garrett
Why would someone use eventcaster over luma today?
2 replies
0 recast
1 reaction
Matthew pfp
Matthew
@matthew
because you can sign up in one click, right in the feed. And then get a reminder to show up in WC as opposed to email. Off of FC, not a clear enough value prop.
1 reply
0 recast
2 reactions
Garrett pfp
Garrett
@garrett
yeah i totally get it if you’re already on WC But if you’re not on WC then it’s tricker to define why
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Matthew pfp
Matthew
@matthew
yup... here's a bit more of how I'm thinking about it: what I love about partiful is that they've productized the party. it's a specific thing for a specific audience, and they're the "spirit animal" brand for that. by contrast, while Luma is very well designed, I don't know what that unique "thing" is. Maybe it's ticketed events and conferences, or maybe it's something else and I just don't use it enough. But to me it seems much broader than partiful in a way that makes it harder to define a clear audience. For eventcaster / [insert new name here], the single most important thing I can do is carve out a unique vision, something specific I can productize, and a specific group of people I can build it for. I don't want to build a product for all kinds of events and all kinds of people, at least not at first. so anyway, I have lots of respect for those two companies in particular, I think they'll both win. But I need to define my own game, not try to beat them at theirs.
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction