I am befuddled by how @Twitter can miss some blatant cases of spam accounts. So much that I have come close to conclude that these are paid accounts, thus won’t be removed no matter how much they are flagged and/or blocked. Here are some suggestions, based on what I have observed with spammers on Twitter, for spam-matching rules to improve the catch ratio. The accounts I use as examples have been hand-picked, so my points are open to interpretation, and could be way improved with data that Twitter has, such as tweet rate, number of spam flags and blocks, etc. These checks could be triggered in escalating order according to the number of users flagging an account for spam, as an example.

[Update] @Ed has replied to my tweet and part of this post:

I said “I have come close to conclude…”, not that they are paid accounts. But, it defies all logic how an account like @kredits can still be up and running after close to 64.000 (yes, that’s sixty-four thousand) spam tweets that break many of the rules/filters I have written about below. It is not a question of writing an algorithm for every variation, but a set of rules which give individual scores, and a minimum score to suspend an account. Basically, x-spam-score followed by an x-spam-status that determines account suspension, or lack thereof.

Follower to following ratio

Some spam accounts use aggressive follow techniques to try and spread their trash, and this gets reflected by auto-follow bots. The result are accounts with following/followed ratios close to one. Case examples: @Bqe1212 with a ratio of 1.01, or @vidalconsulting with 1.04. Others do not follow this approach, and only follow few accounts, for example, @kredits, with only 168 followers and following 49.

Tweet rate

One case I observed (the account is now suspended, so kudos there) had the particularity that tweets were pushed out every three minutes exactly. Twenty-four hours a day. This is something -very- easy to catch (and equally easy to defeat, but hey, some spammers are dumb).

Tweet content

We can split this check into various sub-checks:

1. Keywords

In the case of @jenlock1014, the word ‘money’ appears in almost every single tweet pushed out. The actual text of the tweets vary, as do the linked URLs, but the keyword is there. Other usual keywords are ‘free’, ‘cash’, and so on.

2. Linking the same URL

In some cases we see links to the same URL in every tweet, such as @Bqe1212, with tweets like:

http://twttr.me/dbxV Q&A: HOW CAN I MAKE MONEY FAST ON THE INTERNET FOR FREE!! NO …: by Chri… http://bit.ly/aJVi6Whttp://twttr.me/dbxV

and

http://twttr.me/dbxV How to Make Money Online With Online Writing Sites: There are many sites … http://bit.ly/cichxl http://twttr.me/dbxV

The target site’s linked short URL is different, but every tweet contains (two in this case!) copies of the same short link. Again, both tweets would also trigger rule #1 above for keywords.

3. Linking the same URL with differing URL shorteners

One technique often used is to spread the target link among various URL shorteners. This is the case of @kredits, which uses snurl.com, ej.uz, short.ie, bit.ly, and others, all of which redirect to the same final URL. A simple check, once an account is flagged for processing, is to follow all shortened URLs and look for patterns. For example:

• Exactly the same URL.
• Same host, same path, but varying query string (oft used to track sources).
• Same host, varying path, but same query string.
• Same host with both varying path and query string.
• Varying subdomains of the same host.

A combination of the above can be used to determine a spam score for a set of given URLs. An extra check when fuzzing techniques are used on the final URL is to parse the target site’s content, looking for similar headers, keywords, image URIs, Google Analytics account IDs, etc.

Reaction tweets™

Many times a spammer searches for certain keywords, and sends a reaction tweet when one is found. As an example, when I sent this reply to Ed Shahzade (@Ed) in reply to his tweet about auto-follower bots and spam, I received this other tweet from @atraiskredits:

@mikepuchol Problēmu var atrisināt ātrais kredīts? Izvērtēs kredīta piedāvājumu! Atver www.opencredit.lv un gaidi naudu savā kontā.

Obviously this is not English, and thus it was sent as a blind reply to my tweet mentioning @kredits without caring much about my original language, or wether I understand the content of the tweet.

On a flagged account, it should be very easy to check when response tweets are sent, by accumulating the words used in the original triggering tweets, and testing the occurrence of each word in all, or a high percentage, of them. As another case example, 10 minutes after @djsandman813 was sent this tweet by @kredits, and he replied this, @atraiskredits sent this reaction tweet. Screenshots below in case they go missing:

* OK “Reaction tweets” is not really trademarked, but maybe it should be!

Account aggregation

Spammers can try to avoid being flagged, or delay detection, by spreading their activity across multiple accounts. The way to detect this is to run a check among flagged accounts for the above filters, eg. catching various accounts all sending reaction tweets with the same short URL.

Account name

Many spammers are not too creative and simply throw random words and letters into the account name – this can also be an indicator of a spammer account.

Reaction flags

When a user receives a spam tweet, his initial reaction may usually be to block flag the sender as spam. An accumulation of such flags, particularly with other indicators such as single tweets towards a user followed by a flag (denoting not a conversation but a directed one-way message), should be enough to suspend an account.

What else?

I’m sure there are many other checks possible, but I have to get back to work – so, @delbius, do I get a job offer? Just kidding – was thinking of the guy who got offered a job at YouTube after writing ‘YouTube Instant’.

A
Joseph Agnello, Lad.118 Lt. Brian Ahearn, Bat.13 Eric Allen, Sqd.18 (D) Richard Allen, Lad.15 Cpt. James Amato, Sqd.1 Calixto Anaya Jr., Eng.4 Joseph Agnello, Lad.118 Lt. Brian Ahearn, Bat.13 Eric Allen, Sqd.18 (D) Richard Allen, Lad.15 Cpt. James Amato, Sqd.1 Calixto Anaya Jr., Eng.4 Joseph Angelini, Res.1 (D) Joseph Angelini Jr., Lad.4 Faustino Apostol Jr., Bat.2 David Arce, Eng.33 Louis Arena, Lad.5 (D) Carl Asaro, Bat.9 Lt. Gregg Atlas, Eng.10 Gerald Atwood, Lad.21

B
Gerald Baptiste, Lad.9 A.C. Gerard Barbara, Cmd. Ctr. Matthew Barnes, Lad.25 Arthur Barry, Lad.15 Lt.Steven Bates, Eng.235 Carl Bedigian, Eng.214 Stephen Belson, Bat.7 John Bergin, Res.5 Paul Beyer, Eng.6 Peter Bielfeld, Lad.42 Brian Bilcher, Sqd.1 Carl Bini, Res.5 Christopher Blackwell, Res.3 Michael Bocchino, Bat.48 Frank Bonomo, Eng.230 Gary Box, Sqd.1 Michael Boyle, Eng.33 Kevin Bracken, Eng.40 Michael Brennan, Lad.4 Peter Brennan, Res.4 Cpt. Daniel Brethel, Lad.24 (D) Cpt. Patrick Brown, Lad.3 Andrew Brunn, Lad.5 (D) Cpt. Vincent Brunton, Lad.105 F.M. Ronald Bucca Greg Buck, Eng.201 Cpt. William Burke Jr., Eng.21 A.C. Donald Burns, Cmd. Ctr. John Burnside, Lad.20 Thomas Butler, Sqd.1 Patrick Byrne, Lad.101
C
George Cain, Lad.7 Salvatore Calabro, Lad.101 Cpt. Frank Callahan, Lad.35 Michael Cammarata, Lad.11 Brian Cannizzaro, Lad.101 Dennis Carey, Hmc.1 Michael Carlo, Eng.230 Michael Carroll, Lad.3 Peter Carroll, Sqd.1 (D) Thomas Casoria, Eng.22 Michael Cawley, Lad.136 Vernon Cherry, Lad.118 Nicholas Chiofalo, Eng.235 John Chipura, Eng.219 Michael Clarke, Lad.2 Steven Coakley, Eng.217 Tarel Coleman, Sqd.252 John Collins, Lad.25 Robert Cordice, Sqd.1 Ruben Correa, Eng.74 James Coyle, Lad.3 Robert Crawford, Safety Lt. John Crisci, H.M. B.C. Dennis Cross, Bat.57 (D) Thomas Cullen III, Sqd. 41 Robert Curatolo, Lad.16 (D)

D
Lt. Edward D’Atri, Sqd.1 Michael D’Auria, Eng.40 Scott Davidson, Lad.118 Edward Day, Lad.11 B.C. Thomas DeAngelis, Bat. 8 Manuel Delvalle, Eng.5 Martin DeMeo, H.M. 1 David DeRubbio, Eng.226 Lt. Andrew Desperito, Eng.1 (D) B.C. Dennis Devlin, Bat.9 Gerard Dewan, Lad.3 George DiPasquale, Lad.2 Lt. Kevin Donnelly, Lad.3 Lt. Kevin Dowdell, Res.4 B.C. Raymond Downey, Soc. Gerard Duffy, Lad.21

E
Cpt. Martin Egan, Jr., Div.15 (D) Michael Elferis, Eng.22 Francis Esposito, Eng.235 Lt. Michael Esposito, Sqd.1 Robert Evans, Eng.33

F
B.C. John Fanning, H.O. Cpt. Thomas Farino, Eng.26 Terrence Farrell, Res.4 Cpt. Joseph Farrelly, Div.1 Dep. Comm. William Feehan, (D) Lee Fehling, Eng.235 Alan Feinberg, Bat.9 Michael Fiore, Res.5 Lt. John Fischer, Lad.20 Andre Fletcher, Res.5 John Florio, Eng.214 Lt. Michael Fodor, Lad.21 Thomas Foley, Res.3 David Fontana, Sqd.1 Robert Foti, Lad.7 Andrew Fredericks, Sqd.18 Lt. Peter Freund, Eng.55

G
Thomas Gambino Jr., Res.3 Chief of Dept. Peter Ganci, Jr. (D) Lt. Charles Garbarini, Bat.9 Thomas Gardner, Hmc.1 Matthew Garvey, Sqd.1 Bruce Gary, Eng.40 Gary Geidel, Res.1 B.C. Edward Geraghty, Bat.9 Dennis Germain, Lad.2 Lt. Vincent Giammona, Lad.5 James Giberson, Lad.35 Ronnie Gies, Sqd.288 Paul Gill, Eng.54 Lt. John Ginley, Eng.40 Jeffrey Giordano, Lad.3 John Giordano, Hmc.1 Keith Glascoe, Lad.21 James Gray, Lad.20 B.C. Joseph Grzelak, Bat.48 Jose Guadalupe, Eng.54 Lt. Geoffrey Guja, Bat.43 Lt. Joseph Gullickson, Lad.101

H
David Halderman, Sqd.18 Lt. Vincent Halloran, Lad.8 Robert Hamilton, Sqd.41 Sean Hanley, Lad.20 (D) Thomas Hannafin, Lad.5 Dana Hannon, Eng.26 Daniel Harlin, Lad.2 Lt. Harvey Harrell, Res.5 Lt. Stephen Harrell, Bat.7 Cpt. Thomas Haskell, Jr., Div.15 Timothy Haskell, Sqd.18 (D) Cpt. Terence Hatton, Res.1 Michael Haub, Lad.4 Lt. Michael Healey, Sqd.41 John Hefferman, Lad.11 Ronnie Henderson, Eng.279 Joseph Henry, Lad.21 William Henry, Res.1 (D) Thomas Hetzel, Lad.13 Cpt. Brian Hickey, Res.4 Lt. Timothy Higgins, S.O.C. Jonathan Hohmann, Hmc.1 Thomas Holohan, Eng.6 Joseph Hunter, Sqd.288 Cpt. Walter Hynes, Lad.13 (D)

I
Jonathan Ielpi, Sqd.288 Cpt. Frederick Ill Jr., Lad.2

J
William Johnston, Eng.6 Andrew Jordan, Lad.132 Karl Joseph, Eng.207 Lt. Anthony Jovic, Bat.47 Angel Juarbe Jr., Lad.12 Mychal Judge, Chaplain (D)

K
Vincent Kane, Eng.22 B.C. Charles Kasper, S.O.C. Paul Keating, Lad.5 Richard Kelly Jr., Lad.11 Thomas R. Kelly, Lad.15 Thomas W. Kelly, Lad.105 Thomas Kennedy, Lad.101 Lt. Ronald Kerwin, Sqd.288 Michael Kiefer, Lad.132 Robert King Jr., Eng.33 Scott Kopytko, Lad.15 William Krukowski, Lad.21 Kenneth Kumpel, Lad.25 Thomas Kuveikis, Sqd.252

L
David LaForge, Lad.20 William Lake, Res.2 Robert Lane, Eng.55 Peter Langone, Sqd.252 Scott Larsen, Lad.15 Lt. Joseph Leavey, Lad.15 Neil Leavy, Eng.217 Daniel Libretti, Res.2 Carlos Lillo, Paramedic Robert Linnane, Lad.20 Michael Lynch, Eng.40 Michael Lynch, Lad.4 Michael Lyons, Sqd.41 Patrick Lyons, Sqd.252

M
Joseph Maffeo, Lad.101 William Mahoney, Res 4 Joseph Maloney, Lad.3 (D) B.C. Joseph Marchbanks Jr, Bat.12 Lt. Charles Margiotta, Bat.22 Kenneth Marino, Res.1 John Marshall, Eng.23 Lt. Peter Martin, Res.2 Lt. Paul Martini, Eng.23 Joseph Mascali, T.S.U. 2 Keithroy Maynard, Eng.33 Brian McAleese, Eng.226 John McAvoy, Lad.3 Thomas McCann, Bat.8 Lt. William McGinn, Sqd.18 B.C. William McGovern, Bat.2 (D) Dennis McHugh, Lad.13 Robert McMahon, Lad.20 Robert McPadden, Eng.23 Terence McShane, Lad.101 Timothy McSweeney, Lad.3 Martin McWilliams, Eng.22 (D) Raymond Meisenheimer, Res.3 Charles Mendez, Lad.7 Steve Mercado, Eng.40 Douglas Miller, Res.5 Henry Miller Jr, Lad.105 Robert Minara, Lad.25 Thomas Mingione, Lad.132 Lt. Paul Mitchell, Bat.1 Capt. Louis Modafferi, Res.5 Lt. Dennis Mojica, Res.1 (D) Manuel Mojica, Sqd.18 (D) Carl Molinaro, Lad.2 Michael Montesi, Res.1 Capt. Thomas Moody, Div.1 B.C. John Moran, Bat.49 Vincent Morello, Lad.35 Christopher Mozzillo, Eng.55 Richard Muldowney Jr, Lad.07 Michael Mullan, Lad.12 Dennis Mulligan, Lad.2 Lt. Raymond Murphy, Lad.16

N
Lt. Robert Nagel, Eng.58 John Napolitano, Res.2 Peter Nelson, Res.4 Gerard Nevins, Res.1

O
Dennis O’Berg, Lad.105 Lt. Daniel O’Callaghan, Lad.4 Douglas Oelschlager, Lad.15 Joseph Ogren, Lad.3 Lt. Thomas O’Hagan, Bat.4 Samuel Oitice, Lad.4 Patrick O’Keefe, Res.1 Capt. William O’Keefe, Div.15 (D) Eric Olsen, Lad.15 Jeffery Olsen, Eng.10 Steven Olson, Lad.3 Kevin O’Rourke, Res.2 Michael Otten, Lad.35

P
Jeffery Palazzo, Res.5 B.C. Orio Palmer, Bat.7 Frank Palombo, Lad.105 Paul Pansini, Eng.10 B.C. John Paolillo, Bat.11 James Pappageorge, Eng.23 Robert Parro, Eng.8 Durrell Pearsall, Res.4 Lt. Glenn Perry, Bat.12 Lt. Philip Petti, Bat.7 Lt. Kevin Pfeifer, Eng. 33 Lt. Kenneth Phelan, Bat.32 Christopher Pickford, Eng.201 Shawn Powell, Eng.207 Vincent Princiotta, Lad.7 Kevin Prior, Sqd.252 B.C. Richard Prunty, Bat.2 (D)

Q
Lincoln Quappe, Res.2 Lt. Michael Quilty, Lad.11 Ricardo Quinn, Paramedic

R
Leonard Ragaglia, Eng.54 Michael Ragusa, Eng.279 Edward Rall, Res.2 Adam Rand, Sqd.288 Donald Regan, Res.3 Lt. Robert Regan, Lad.118 Christian Regenhard, Lad.131 Kevin Reilly, Eng.207 Lt. Vernon Richard, Lad.7 James Riches, Eng.4 Joseph Rivelli, Lad.25 Michael Roberts, Eng.214 Michael E. Roberts, Lad.35 Anthony Rodriguez, Eng.279 Matthew Rogan, Lad.11 Nicholas Rossomando, Res.5 Paul Ruback, Lad.25 Stephen Russell, Eng.55 Lt. Michael Russo, S.O.C. B.C. Matthew Ryan, Bat.1

S
Thomas Sabella, Lad.13 Christopher Santora, Eng.54 John Santore, Lad.5 (D) Gregory Saucedo, Lad.5 Dennis Scauso, H.M. 1 John Schardt, Eng.201 B.C. Fred Scheffold, Bat.12 Thomas Schoales, Eng.4 Gerard Schrang, Res.3 (D) Gregory Sikorsky, Sqd.41 Stephen Siller, Sqd.1 Stanley Smagala Jr, Eng.226 Kevin Smith, H.M. 1 Leon Smith Jr, Lad 118 Robert Spear Jr, Eng.26 Joseph Spor, Res.3 B.C. Lawrence Stack, Bat.50 Cpt. Timothy Stackpole, Div.11 (D) Gregory Stajk, Lad.13 Jeffery Stark, Eng.230 Benjamin Suarez, Lad.21 Daniel Suhr, Eng.216 (D) Lt. Christopher Sullivan, Lad.111 Brian Sweeney, Res.1

T
Sean Tallon, Lad.10 Allan Tarasiewicz, Res.5 Paul Tegtmeier, Eng.4 John Tierney, Lad.9 John Tipping II, Lad.4 Hector Tirado Jr, Eng.23

V
Richard Vanhine, Sqd.41 Peter Vega, Lad.118 Lawrence Veling, Eng.235 John Vigiano II, Lad.132 Sergio Villanueva, Lad.132 Lawrence Virgilio, Sqd.18 (D)

W
Lt. Robert Wallace, Eng.205 Jeffery Walz, Lad. 9 Lt. Michael Warchola, Lad.5 (D) Capt. Patrick Waters, S.O.C. Kenneth Watson, Eng.214 Michael Weinberg, Eng.1 (D) David Weiss, Res.1 Timothy Welty, Sqd.288 Eugene Whelan, Eng.230 Edward White, Eng.230 Mark Whitford, Eng.23 Lt. Glenn Wilkinson, Eng.238 (D) B.C. John Williamson, Bat.6 (D) Capt. David Wooley, Lad.4

Y
Raymond York, Eng.285 (D)

The MiFi is sold by Vodafone factory-unlocked, which is also like a good deal as there is no penalty for contract cancellation – naturally, it came with firmware version 5.15, which is ancient, and suffers from many drawbacks, one of which is poor HSUPA support. The one that caught my eye however was that the MiFi comes with a built-in GPS, which in theory provides positioning data to devices such as the WiFi-only iPad.

Googling a bit resulted in this post by MPX Systems, sellers of various 3G data devices, and who also provide an excellent support service via Twitter, without asking questions about the origin of your device – they’re honestly out to help, which is really welcome. My next purchase may well be from their online shop – but I digress (again).

Having found the latest firmware release, 5.26.2, I pinched my nose and dove into the upgrade process, which was not without trouble. Here are the steps to upgrade your own MiFi. Before you start, note that upgrading the firmware in a virtual machine is NOT recommended. In my case, I tried this on a Windows 7 VM under VMWare in Mac OS, and it failed at various steps. Once in native Bootcamp running XP, everything went fine.

1. Find the v5.26.2 firmware updater

You’ll need to search. You can also try to ask @mpxsys.

2. Find the Novatel USB native drivers

See step 1.

3. Remove any connection manager that came with your device, eg. Vodafone’s Mobile Connect

It helps to reboot after you do this to make sure you’ve cleared things out. Unplug your MiFi before rebooting.

4. Install the Novatel USB drivers

5. Plug in your MiFi using the USB cable, and let the drivers for the various services install

6. Run the firmware updater, this will take up to 20 minutes to complete while it upgrades the firmware and settings. Do not unplug your MiFi!

7. Once the updater finishes, the modem will be re-installed with extra devices – you will see the “New hardware found” balloon popup a few times

8. Install Novatel’s MobiLink 3

See step 1. I recommend you go directly for the Windows version, the Mac OS version seems to be very unstable, in beta, or both.

9. In the pop-down menu, choose “GPS”:

10. In the window that appears, click ‘Start GPS’

Here it is shown with the GPS started and with a location acquired.

Under ‘Settings’ you can find a combo box that sometimes shows ‘Standalone’ as the mode, although I’m not sure on what does this depend.

11. Done!

You should now have a serial port with NMEA data at 9600bps, 8N1, such as:

$PSTIS,*61

$GPGSV,4,1,16,03,82,344,31,07,08,289,27,21,11,063,27,22,56,090,25*74

$GPGSV,4,2,16,18,31,052,25,19,51,307,25,16,36,180,22,06,75,084,21*7C

$GPGSV,4,3,16,08,05,322,21,24,78,000,19,11,03,261,,14,01,130,*75

$GPGSV,4,4,16,15,,,,32,,,,31,,,,30,,,*7A

$GPGGA,202902.2,XXXX.557392,N,00XXX.863631,E,1,09,1.1,23.0,M,50.0,M,,*69

$GPVTG,259.5,T,260.8,M,0.0,N,0.0,K,A*24

$GPRMC,202902.2,A,XXX.557392,N,00XXX.863631,E,0.0,,040810,,,A*45

$GPGSA,A,3,03,06,07,08,16,18,19,21,22,,,,1.6,1.1,1.2*39

which are enough for any navigation app to function.

TODO:

- Figure out how to enable GPS over WiFi. In theory, the MiFi implements a CGI method to get the current location, although on mine it is not enabled.

- Fully test if the GPS remains active throughout shutdowns and soft resets (battery removal).

After an exchange on Twitter during which I stated my views on the Mosque / Islamic cultural center going up near the New York WTC, he unfollowed and blocked me from following him. After posting this on his blog post regarding the subject:

“Now that you have not only unfollowed me (whatever) but also blocked me (?!) on Twitter, I guess it can only mean that I’m a right-wing extremist that hates Muslims and goes shooting traffic signs on weekends for fun. For the record, I’m not trying to give lessons around religious beliefs, and thus will replace the word “Christian” by “other religions” below. Maybe you will find the words more suitable, or maybe you will say “thank you for the lesson in arrogant other religions superiority”.

Instead of trying to prove a point through whatever means possible, and silencing those who do not think the same way as you do, maybe you should try to do a little fact-checking before you post on a sensitive subject.

Cordoba is a city in Spain which was the symbol of Islamic rule over most of the Iberian peninsula (known as Al-Andalus) between 711 and 1492. It is also marked as the origin of the bulk of Islamic law, having hosted a library with half a million books. Calling this center “Cordoba” has very strong implications as to historic and current claims by a sizable chunk of Muslims.

Al-Andalus was established as an independent emirate, which lasted 780 years until it was taken over in 1492. This emirate is the very reason 192 people died, and over 1000 were injured, in the Madrid train bombings in 2004. Islamic theologists hold the theory that any land that once was Muslim, belongs to Islam forever. Thus, there are Muslims who still claim that most of Spain is in fact their land, and will go to violence to retake it. I fail to see other religions claiming that land occupied in past ages still belongs to them, and taking violent actions to re-claim it.

Recently, during the World Cup, 73 people were killed in a suicide attack in Uganda, for the crime of watching soccer. It is considered un-Islamic by some Muslim extremists. I fail to see similar attacks carried out by suicide bombers of other religions, or other religions prohibiting soccer and other forms of entertainment.

When the 9/11 terrorists crashed the aircraft into the WTC, they were most likely shouting “Allahu Akbar”, meaning “Allah is the Greatest” (it’s safe to assume this as we have seen it on countless terrorist attack videos, pre and post event). They were at least certainly not shouting “my superior being from another religion is the greatest”. They crashed those aircraft, and killed those people, believing they were defending Islam. We can argue all we want about wether they were not really Muslims, as some claim, but the fact is that there are -many- people out there willing to kill and die to defend Islam. And they don’t care what religion you follow, or even if you are agnostic, if you are not Muslim, you are an infidel. Your choice is to convert or die.

Having said all this, I do believe there is a large majority of Muslims who are NOT terrorists, who do NOT condone violence, and who would like to see extremism end. What is sad is that they have to endure the wrath of extremists from other religions who cannot distinguish the facts. What is also sad is that once you take sides, even in the most moderate form, the other side (and I’m looking at you Dave) automatically classifies you as the enemy.

As for your arrogant and insulting comment “you have a lot of brothers!” (it became arrogant and insulting once you put it in context along with your other comments and actions), maybe you can drop by Ten House on Liberty Street and ask the guys there to explain you the concept of brotherhood in the fire service. They lost six guys on 9/11, and had their firehouse destroyed. It was damaged again a few years later, during the Deutsche Bank fire where two firefighters also died. Maybe you can also watch the 9/11 documentary, it also provides a good insight into the meaning of brotherhood in the fire service.”

he has now also banned me from posting comments on his blog. Dave, do you consider yourself open-minded, tolerant and willing to respect and discuss other people’s points of view? Or do you simply live in your own world, where the only reality that counts is what you think and write? I think you should get back down to Earth and shed the prima-donna attitude, frankly. What is more amusing is that I’m reading comments on the blog post that are not much different from what I am saying, I guess I have now been moved to the Dark Side of Dave Winer’s world.

Me apena decir adiós a series como Cálico Electrónico, que en sus inicios nos hizo contactar con Albert sobre la posibilidad de que nos creasen un video animado de introducción a Whisher – aunque al final no se hizo por cambios sustanciales en nuestra página web. El cierre de Nikodemo & Co. viene forzado por no encontrar financiación que pudiese sostener el proyecto, que todavía tenía resultados económicamente negativos – aunque positivos en cuanto al público y lo social. Albert se queja de la falta de “riesgo” en la ecuación “capital riesgo”, aunque quizás el primer error fue la elección de las fuentes de financiación. El capital riesgo (en adelante, VC, como en los contratos) puro, tal y como se entiende en el mundo de los emprendedores, es desgraciadamente muy escaso en España. Me vienen a la cabeza unos pocos fondos, como Nauta, Debaeque, Adara, o Perennius. Más abundantes son los “business angels”, que son como un VC pero sin un garrote tan gordo para cuando van mal las cosas. Por debajo de aquí tenemos ya a los innumerables fondos, créditos, ayudas, viveros, parques tecnológicos, y pseudo-VCs. Los más preocupantes son éstos últimos, ya que en los primeros casos las cosas están bién claras desde el principio. Cuando accedes a un préstamo tipo NEOTEC, los términos son claros:

La empresa devolverá la ayuda a CDTI según vaya generando cash-flow positivo. Para ello, la empresa se compromete a facilitar a CDTI anualmente las cuentas anuales cerradas. La cuota anual de devolución será de hasta un 20% del cash-flow positivo generado hasta la amortización total del crédito.

Es decir, no corres riesgo. Si la empresa no llega a afianzarse, no tienes que hipotecar o vender la casa e irte a vivir debajo de un puente para devolver préstamos. el CDTI también se blinda un poco en cuanto a su riesgo de esta forma:

CDTI anticipa a la empresa, a la firma del contrato que regula la ayuda NEOTEC, entre el 40 y el 60% de la ayuda aprobada. El resto se entregará a la empresa a la finalización y justificación técnica y económica del proyecto-plan de empresa aprobado.

Si tus cuentas no dan resultado, el CDTI habrá perdido un máximo del 60%, de a su vez el 70% del coste total del proyecto, que es lo que otorgan. Otros tipos de ayudas oficiales se rigen por términos similares, y se convierten en una buena opción de capital semilla. El único problema es el arduo proceso de solicitud y trámite, que en ocasiones, puede alargarse meses, demasiado para una startup. Para solucionar en parte este problema, han aparecido una serie de empresas que se dedican a asesorar a startups en el proceso, a cambio de cuotas mensuales y/o porcentajes del capital conseguido – también otro tema para tratar en otro momento.

Los pseudo-VCs, o el nacimiento de una nueva palabreja en el mundo de los emprendedores.

El gran problema de los pseudo-VCs es que actúan como si tratasen con capital riesgo, cuando en realidad ofrecen créditos blandos convertibles. El gran riesgo de éstos créditos es que son como una enorme espada de Damocles que se balancea sobre la cabeza del emprendedor. El pseudo-VC se reserva el derecho a exigir la devolución del crédito en el momento que considere oportuno, y no en el momento en que la empresa sea “cash-flow positive”, ni tampoco con una restricción en cuanto al porcentaje de “cash-flow” destinado a la devolución. Por otra parte, también pueden convertir el crédito en participaciones en la empresa, en términos que pueden poner a los fundadores en minoría sin capacidad de recurso. El ejemplo de pseudo-VC en el caso de Nikodemo es Caixa Capital Risc, que se posiciona como VC, pero que en realidad tienen sus intereses bancarios en la retaguardia. Los bancos y cajas son la cosa más contraria al riesgo del mundo mundial, y por definición, no deberían ‘vender’ capital riesgo.

Los condicionantes que imponen los pseudo-VCs pueden también condicionar seriamente las posibilidades de financiación por parte de VC real en etapas de crecimiento y necesidad de financiación de la empresa. Imaginemos por un minuto que somos un VC, y se nos presenta una empresa con un éxito razonable, y que cumple con la mayoría de objetivos marcados en el plan de negocio. Analizando la estructura de la empresa, nos damos cuenta que han recibido 500.000€ de un pseudo-VC. La empresa nos pide 1M€ sobre una valuación de 2M€. En el momento del cierre de la operación, el crédito del pseudo-VC representa un 25% del valor de la empresa “pre-money”, y tras el cierre, representará casi un 17%. En condiciones normales, el préstamo se devolvería en el momento oportuno, sin afectar la composición de porcentajes de los socios. En cambio, con un pseudo-VC de por medio, existe la posibilidad de que los socios se diluyan un 17% en cualquier momento. Para el VC que pone el millón de Euros, esto representa ‘perder’ unos 170.000€ de golpe. Pocos VCs van a invertir en una startup con un riesgo así. Como dicen, “new money, new rules”.

Si, en el título también menciona WebTV…

No tengo muy claro que el modelo de WebTV (y que conste que tomo el término de forma un tanto liberal, para que se entienda a lo que me refiero) pueda llegar a funcionar con los modelos de ingresos actuales, que son, básicamente, la publicidad. Tal y como reconoce Gonzalo Martín en su blog, tener ingresos suficientes de publicidad exige unos volúmenes de tráfico muy elevados. Véase como ejemplo YouTube, que todavía pierde dinero y no sabe exactamente cómo monetizar más allá de los anuncios in-line. Otros medios como la prensa intentan los anuncios pre-roll, aunque desconozco su éxito. No creo que sea muy elevado ya que todos otorgan una pequeña ‘x’ que permite saltarse el anuncio. En mi opinión, desde que empezó el mundillo Web 2.0, la publicidad se tendría que haber considerado como un extra, que en caso de ser sustancial, bienvenido, pero en caso de no existir, no tuviese como resultado la muerte de la startup. En los años que duró Whisher, me cansé de preguntar a otros emprendedores “y cuál es el modelo de negocio?”, siendo la respuesta incontables veces “la publicidad”. Me imagino que de ser más realistas con las cifras, muchos proyectos ni siquiera se hubiesen lanzado. Hemos pasado de la exuberancia irracional de las punto-com a la estupidez irracional de la Web 2.0.

La primera víctima sonada del ajuste en las startups WebTV fue Mobuzz. Acabó de la peor manera, con denuncias y sentencias favorables a los empleados para poder cobrar sus últimos sueldos e indemnizaciones (con resultado de que la empresa y sus representantes se encuentran en paradero desconocido). Sonada, porque murió tras una intensa campaña de marketing viral destinada a sacarla del agujero, que generó ríos de tinta a favor y en contra. Lo que pocos se pararon a pensar es si el modelo encajaba dentro del mercado, es decir, si existía mercado de pago suficiente para sustentar a la empresa. Buscando referencias al caso Mobuzz, he encontrado una web curiosa, Fiasco Awards 2010, donde Mobuzz es una de las pretendientes. Lo curioso es que votaron el iPad como ganador, cuando está batiendo récords de ventas…pero eso es, de nuevo, otra historia.

Tal y como también menciona Albert en su comentario al post de Gonzalo, las empresas de WebTV sufren de una competencia por parte de una serie de receptores de ayudas públicas a fondo perdido, como es la industria del cine. Cierto, pero es un factor a tener en cuenta cuando realizas tu plan de empresa – hay competencia que tenga fondos y/o recursos ilimitados? Voy a luchar en un campo de batalla neutral, o tengo una parte de posibles acuerdos ‘amañada’ de antemano? A mí me ha pasado el perder un contrato público contra alguien que presupuestaba ocho veces más que el resto, sin ninguna otra explicación lógica que la del maletín. Es algo a tener muy en cuenta.

En cualquier caso, como emprendedor, deseo mucha suerte a todos los que estáis luchando día a día por llevar adelante vuestros sueños, independientemente de lo que digan los demás (o casi!). Eso es lo que realmente hace que el ser humano progrese, de otra forma, seguiríamos en una cueva.

Enough said.

Google search for “trust”:

Must be a pretty important thing.

Trust is something that can take years to build, but only a second to destroy.

Few things are more painful than someone breaking your trust.

It so happens that some people feel it’s their duty to attack with empty words, without any substance or fact, in defence of what they believe is “right”. They will post a comment, with false names and email addresses, not revealing for who they are actually posting. They are called trolls. Thus, my new policy on troll comments will be this: I will approve the comment, and ask for an explanation to the attack (as in, actual facts), plus a real identity behind the commenter. If either fails to turn up in three days, the comment will be deleted. Let the retard games begin!