An Asian startup’s reaction to the Web Summit controversy
In this op-ed regarding Web Summit’s overly aggressive marketing tactics, startup marketer Wei Leen asks the question: How much is too much?
By now, the entire startup world has heard about the controversy triggered by a Neil Murray article in Tech.eu titled, Why I’m Not Going To Web Summit.
Web Summit Founder Paddy Cosgrave naturally felt the need to respond.
Finally, the end of the saga appears to be a post from Tech.eu Editor Robin Wauters that both defends his writer and none too subtly associates Web Summit with being a scam.
As someone who works actively with startups, I received free tickets to Web Summit’s Hong Kong sister event RISE in August. This came about because of my brief email exchange with Cosgrave about the startup scene in Singapore. Later, I’ll describe how this happened in detail.
But from where I am sitting, the short answer is that the issue has been overblown and that Web Summit is being demonised unfairly.
The main points of contention for Robin and Neil are that Web Summit uses misleading ads and pitches that inflate expectations for attendance, as well as lead startups to believe that they won’t have to pay for attendance.
The examples given are fairly detailed, and the tactics used by Web Summit are pretty indisputable.
Wauters links to a blog post about the experience of Lenny Teytelman from Protocols.io. In the post, Lenny addresses the phenomenon of mixed, confusing messages from organisers of Keiretsu Forum (an investor pitching organisation) and Collision Conf, which was also addressed in the original Tech.eu articles.
Lenny says that he’s received many pitches from event organisers about speaking at or pitching at their events. He also makes it clear that he’s against pay-to-pitch events. His criticism includes copies of email exchanges and website screenshots that leave no doubt about the actual words used.
I, for one, like this clarity.
This, and the content of some Facebook ads, are what form half the core of Tech.eu’s stand against Web Summit. The other half is the insistence (debatable in my opinion) that it isn’t ethical to make money off startups in the first place.
Most prominent among the advocates of free pitching for startups is Jason Calacanis, Founder of Mahalo.com and the popular ‘This Week in Startups’ podcast. He has been a vocal critic of both Web Summit and Keiretsu Forum.
But while Jason and Tech.eu’s principled stand against profiting off startups is admirable, their objections are problematic.
Nobody is arm-twisting startups into paying for Web Summit attendance after all. The best way to protest a poor event is to vote with the wallet and never attend again.
Crusading against Web Summit on a paternalistic pretext doesn’t cut it.
Mark Suster of Upfront Ventures waded in with his observation that the scam accusation leveled at Web Summit is wrong.
“I found it to be most meticulously planned, intent upon serving its audience of any major event I had attended, ” said Suster. “The dog pile of negativity feels like a witch-hunt to me. Legitimate criticism of one’s marketing technique has turned into an online community of bullying,” he added.
‘Bullying’ is not the word I would have chosen, but Web Summit has definitely been on the receiving end of some very harsh PR.
Despite its penchant for overly aggressive marketing, I concur with Mark Suster that the organisation and execution of the Web Summit team is exemplary. I received an email from Paddy Cosgrave once when he was keen to learn more about startups in Singapore.
In it, Paddy told me that he noticed that I follow tech personalities such as @domleca (Sparrow), @gaberivera (Techmeme) and @fredwilson (AVC) who have been guests at his events. He then extended an invitation to me to meet up when he’s in Singapore so he could learn more about the local startup ecosystem.
I was impressed that Paddy had set up a (probably) automated process where people with the right interests on Twitter were shortlisted and contacted about the possibility of meeting up.
That, for me represented a level of meticulous preparation that spoke well of his team’s ability to execute.
Ultimately we didn’t meet up, as there was no follow up on my email reply. However, there was nothing at stake so I wasn’t overly concerned. But small details, such as the email, is why I could see what Mark Suster meant when he praised the team’s execution. A personal email makes a world of difference.
I did find some commenters on Reddit and Hacker News who say that they have gotten good value out of their visit to Web Summit or one of it’s sister conferences, Collision. Jaime Jorge of Codacy, winner of Web Summit’s pitch competition in 2014, writes favourably about the experience at Web Summit on Hacker News, saying that his startup also got a free upgrade on the ticket.
Is Web Summit perfect? No. There is no doubt that Web Summit:
Charges startups for attending
Uses a pitch that strokes the egos of founders
Uses aggressive marketing tactics
If we’re honest with ourselves, we need to ask: Can we really get mad at a company for overly aggressive marketing? Ours is the industry that consistently uses technology like retargeting — skirting the limits of business tolerance.
What about email marketing policies? It isn’t hard to imagine a few of us have gotten itchy on the trigger finger when sales are dipping.
I must confess that even though I have nothing against aggressive marketing, I dislike the marketing and pitches used by the Web Summit team.
They should give founders more time to consider and probably a little more floor space. But, I do not see justification for condemnation.
The views expressed here are of the author, and e27 may not necessarily subscribe to them. e27 invites members from Asia’s tech industry and startup community to share their honest opinions and expert knowledge with our readers. If you are interested in sharing your point of view, please send us an email to writers[at]e27[dot]co
The post An Asian startup’s reaction to the Web Summit controversy appeared first on e27.
