The app is notable because it was created by Jyri Engeström, who previously founded Jaiku, a Twitter competitor that Google bought in 2007. Engeström was then Google’s “head of social,” but left dissatisfied in 2009. Pieces of the never-released product he’d been developing at Google showed up in Google Buzz, Profiles and Latitude, according to Engeström.

Engeström, a sociologist by training, said the rise of the mobile touchscreen was part of what brought him back to the game, because he thinks he can create a meaningful and fun experience without requiring users to do much typing.

Ditto users press big colorful buttons to indicate what they want to do–for instance, eat out. Then a user receives recommendations for nearby restaurants directly from friends but also from processing friends’ historical check-in data. That seems similar to Foursquare, but Engeström said it’s more useful, because users turn to Ditto before they make a decision about where to go or what to do. In that way, it’s a bit more like a social Q&A service.

The current Ditto app also supports movie recommendations, and will add other categories like books and music, with the idea that a user could consume recommended content directly on the phone from Netflix, Spotify or Kindle. Engeström also said the company will develop for Android next.

This horizontal approach to discovery will likely be hard to pull off, because users with app-filled smartphones aren’t sitting around waiting for the perfect all-purpose social recommendations app.

So if attracting users does prove to be hard, would Engeström sell out, given his negative experience with Google? What about in the context of Beluga, the group messaging app that already sold out to Facebook this week, before its inevitable larger competitor had even launched anything like it?

Engeström said one advantage he has over Beluga (whose founders worked for and with him at Google) is that recommendations are monetizable through advertising and affiliate relationships–whereas SMS costs money and doesn’t have an obvious business model. He also attested that Ditto has already had acquisition inquiries before it even launched.

Ditto has raised $775,000 from Betaworks and True Ventures, and has a team of three based in San Francisco.

Either way, Assistly helps companies deal with our problems by providing a Web-based customer service and support platform that combines more traditional methods like email, chat and phone with Twitter and, as of today, Facebook. The idea is to make support more efficient and coordinated.

So now, if you post about your problems on the Facebook walls of Assistly customers like 37signals, Vimeo, Rdio, Grooveshark and even Twitter, you might get a quicker and better-delegated response from employees there. (Though the new Assistly Facebook option just rolled out today, so they may not be using it yet.)

There are many (so, so many) social media management tools, but Assistly is more competitive with customer support providers like Zendesk. (Both Zendesk and Assistly already offer Twitter support, but Assistly is first to offer Facebook. Twitter itself uses Zendesk for customer support via email and Assistly for customer support via tweet.)

Assistly CEO Alex Bard and members of his team have been working on customer support software dating back to 1996 with eShare Technologies, followed by eAssist Global Solutions, founded in 1999. More recently they made the Goowy widget analytics platform that was bought by AOL in 2008. Their current company has raised about $5 million from investors True Ventures and Social Leverage.

For its own customers, Assistly starts at $39 per month per full-time user, but it also has an hourly rate so companies can spread the responsibility for customer support across all their employees.

Asked whether creating a real-time search engine is a viable start-up business, Campbell answered quickly: “No.” His company’s pivot is the latest of multiple efforts in the space; last year, OneRiot gave up its search business to pursue real-time advertising, and Ellerdale sold to Flipboard to help add relevance analysis to its social magazine app.

The exit of Collecta and its competitors from real-time search is remarkable given they had swarmed to the space only a couple of years ago.

In 2009, many entrepreneurs and their investors bet that real-time search was the next frontier, recognizing that search engines were having trouble handling the onslaught of status updates and fresh information streaming onto the Web from Twitter and elsewhere.

Given the companies’ emphasis on speed, perhaps it’s not surprising that they failed and moved on so quickly.

Campbell would not say how many employees Collecta had laid off as part of the change, but he maintained the company has plenty of money in the bank from the $4.7 million it raised last spring from Dace Ventures and True Ventures. Mashable reported earlier today in its story about the Collecta changes that co-founder Jack Moffitt is no longer with the company.

Campbell said Collecta will apply its “very serious technology” to other real-time projects, but it will not become a real-time ad engine like OneRiot.

Who’s left in real-time search? There are still a few, including Wowd and Topsy.

Topsy’s tweet search is much more comprehensive than Twitter’s own, and it serves half a billion queries per month, mostly through its API, Topsy co-founder Rishab Aiyer Ghosh told NetworkEffect via email today. And while Google and Bing also index tweets (and Bing has an extensive relationship with Facebook), they have not fully incorporated social updates into their core search engines.

“With TweetMeme, CrowdEye and Collecta all pivoting out of it, Topsy may be the only real-time/social search engine left,” Ghosh said. He maintained that there’s still an opportunity to build an independent real-time search engine “done right,” despite the competition dropping like flies. Topsy has raised $15 million in funding from investors including BlueRun Ventures, Ignition Partners and the Founders Fund.

In practice, Sponge appears to be a sort of community-sourced FAQ, where both representatives of a company and users can answer questions posed by users. You can see an example here, for the venture capital firm True Ventures.

Sponge seems somewhat similar to customer service plug-in Get Satisfaction, but with a focus on creating content that will engage an audience on the company’s own site. There’s also a company called Opzi that’s working on “Quora for the enterprise,” though it seems more oriented toward internal communications.

True Ventures, incidentally, appears to have led a $500,000 seed funding round for Sponge this past spring, which also included Matt Mullenweg’s Audrey Capital.

Sponge is led by CEO Krutal Desai, who had previously been with ACS, the SEO and social media advisory company that had helped many top blogs grow their traffic significantly a couple of years back. Web developer Henry Khachatryan is also a co-founder.

According to a published bio for Desai, Sponge was founded in 2009 after he graduated from UC Berkeley, and its customers include Intuit, Eventbrite, Vespa, TechStars and the Red Cross. The company maintains an active blog about building online communities.

Here’s how Sponge describes itself:

Sponge powers question and answer communities for brands, media outlets, and topical sites. Our Q&A platform enables online communities to ask questions and share answers in a structured manner.

Sponge is a proven, successful leader in developing customized communities around Q&A. Our technology unites traditional social features with question-and-answer functionality to foster knowledge sharing, collaboration, and customer engagement.

We believe we are working on the next generation of online community software that millions of people will use everyday to exchange information.

Q&A has been a field of Web development since at least the early days of Ask Jeeves. After the success of sites like Yahoo Answers, it has surged back again, with Quora, Facebook, many start-ups and even Ask.com launching social Q&A products in the last year.

Top-tier funds like Union Square Ventures, Spark and First Round Capital are showing up at AOL’s (AOL) New York headquarters in a couple weeks for what they’re dubbing a “VC Demo Day,” aimed at start-ups looking for seed money. The signup page for the event explains the conceit efficiently: “This will be just like every other Demo Day, only the VCs will be pitching their funds to entrepreneurs looking to raise capital. We’ll have a keg of beer and food available.”

What to make of this? We’re certainly not back in 2000, when Kurt Andersen famously declared that raising money is as “easy as getting laid in 1969.”

But the event, hosted by AOL Ventures and Betaworks, is a good reminder that we’re well past Sequoia’s 2008 “Good Times RIP” admonition. For a certain kind of start-up, there’s a long list of early round investors now clamoring to give you money. Another less visible sign: The prevalence of convertible debt in early round deals, which is supposed to favor entrepreneurs at the expense of investors.

Other VC Demo Day participants: RRE Ventures; Metamorphic Ventures; True Ventures; Venrock; IA Capital Partners; Lerer Ventures; DFJ Gotham.

Not entirely on topic, but this is my favorite pitch scene of all time:

Peter Rojas, 35, and Ryan Block, 27, veterans of tech blogs Gizmodo and Engadget, think so. Last year, they launched gdgt, a new take on a discussion forum for gadget lovers.

Investors appear to believe in it. Spark Capital and True Ventures are leading a $3.165 million round of funding for gdgt. Betaworks, AOL Ventures, Lerer Media Ventures and a bunch of individuals also participated in the round, which closed last month.

It’s the latest sign of momentum for gdgt, which raised $550,000 in initial “seed” financing from Betaworks and True Ventures last year.

Rather than hiring writers, gdgt relies on its users to generate reviews and answer questions about thousands of gadgets. Users create a list of gadgets they own or want. Then gdgt shows them content–such as a brief review or a pertinent product question–that other users have submitted about the item.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

BoomTown finally got to meet Silicon Valley lawyer Ted Wang today, which was kind of a thrill since most tight-lipped attorneys run in the other direction when they see me coming.

But Wang–who works for Fenwick & West and is a popular legal adviser to a spate of digital start-ups, such as Facebook, Aardvark and Twitter–has a lot to talk about with the launch of a new Web site called Series Seed Documents earlier this week.

It’s a laudable effort at simplifying the complex–especially since most lawyers mostly like to complexify the simple.

Instead, Wang has made templated but flexible legal documents available for free for entrepreneurs to use in seed-stage deals, and his effort is getting support from the top venture and angel investors in the arena, such as Andreessen Horowitz.

The point: So new companies don’t waste time and money negotiating often unnecessarily complicated–but usually standard–legal papers.

Wrote Wang in a blog post on the Series Seed site, titled “For the Faithful”:

Up until now, various smart people have talked or blogged about reducing the transaction costs associated with seed stage investment without rallying around a particular attack. Of course both entrepreneurs and investors would rather see their investment dollars used toward developing a new product and bringing it to market than toward what are usually routine transaction costs. The problem has been crafting a set of documents that provide adequate protections without being unduly burdensome. While traditional financing documents give broader rights and protections to investors, for a seed stage investment the benefits of simplification in the Series Seed documents outweigh the value of these additional rights and protections…

This endeavor will only be successful if the Documents gain widespread adoption–and that will require lawyers to get out of their comfort zones and think about the trade-offs suggested in the Documents. It will not be easy, but once a practitioner takes the plunge and makes the effort to think through the changes, I am convinced that a well thought-through standard set of seed documents will emerge. Moreover, if folks in our line of business do not come up with a set of documents that enable seed financings at a reasonable cost, the market is going to solve this problem in another way. To quote Gen Shinseki “[i]f you don’t like change, you are going to like irrelevance even less.”

Andreessen Horowitz, which was the first to agree to use Series Seed Documents, has been joined by a spate of high-profile angel and early-stage venture investors.

The group includes SV Angel’s Ron Conway, First Round Capital, “micro-cap” investor Mike Maples, SoftTechVC’s Jeff Clavier, True Ventures, Polaris Ventures, Charles River Ventures and Harrison Metal.

For a legal look-see, I embedded the four documents from Seed Series Documents below, which include: A Restated Certificate of Incorporation, an Investors’ Rights Agreement, a Series Seed Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement, and a Terms for Private Placement of Series Seed Preferred Stock of [Insert Company Name], Inc.

And here’s Wang talking about the effort–which he has been blogging about since 2007, actually–at Fenwick’s Mountain View, Calif., offices, with an impressive range of legal tomes behind him:

SeriesSeedFormCOI

SeriesSeedIRA

SeriesSeedFormSPA

SeriesSeedTermSheet-1

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100304/series-seed-documents-legal-guru-ted-wang-speaks-plus-get-your-free-term-sheet-here/feed/ 3 http://allthingsd.com/20100301/series-seed-documents-with-a-big-assist-from-andreessen-horowitz-set-to-launch-to-help-entrepreneurs-with-legal-hairballs/ http://allthingsd.com/20100301/series-seed-documents-with-a-big-assist-from-andreessen-horowitz-set-to-launch-to-help-entrepreneurs-with-legal-hairballs/#comments Mon, 01 Mar 2010 17:03:48 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=24896 Series Seed Documents, templated documents for entrepreneurs to use for seed-stage deals, will be launched today, part of an effort by Silicon Valley lawyer Ted Wang and pushed by venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz.

The point: So new entrepreneurs don’t waste time and money negotiating often unnecessarily complex legal papers.

Series Seed Documents was planning its announcement tonight, after briefing reporters. But BoomTown was alerted to the move by a tweet last week from Fenwick & West lawyer Wang that read: “Excited about launching Series Seed documents next week.”

Oops!

The Twitter post has since been taken down (but here is an image of it, below, natch!).

“Who even knew that a corporate attorney would have a Twitter account?” joked Marc Andreessen of Andreessen Horowitz in an interview this morning.

Actually, Wang (pictured here) is Twitter’s lawyer!

His practice, which focuses on representation of “emerging companies,” as noted on his Fenwick & West Web site, also includes Aardvark, Billshrink, Clicker, Facebook, Flixster and Widgetbox.

Andreessen Horowitz, which was the first to agree to use Series Seed Documents, will be joined by a spate of high-profile angel and early-stage investors.

The group includes SV Angel’s Ron Conway, First Round Capital, “micro-cap” investor Mike Maples, SoftTechVC’s Jeff Clavier, True Ventures, Polaris Ventures, Charles River Ventures and Harrison Metal.

“We want to make the process as transparent as possible, which is to say, we want to take all the mystery out it,” said Andreessen. “And it is online for everyone to understand.”

Of course, noted Andreessen, the price for the round is still open to negotiation, but wrangling over typically standard legal issues often hurts deals.

“The big reason we are doing it is that we think for these early stage round, bashing over these terms does damage only brings mistrust,” he said.

Andreessen noted that this template approach is only appropriate for small, early rounds of about $500,000 to $1 million.

“VCs who do angel rounds should be acting like a VC in a VC round and acting like an angel in an angel round,” he said. “The problems come when VCs act like VCs in angel rounds.”

Andreessen said using Series Seed Documents would cost start-ups about $7,000 compared with a low of $15,000 and up to $100,000 in many similar deals.

“It helps streamline the process and makes starting a company easier and more efficient,” said Conway of SV Angel, who is a well-known angel investor. “And cheaper–all in all, it is a benefit to both the entrepreneur and the investor.”

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100301/series-seed-documents-with-a-big-assist-from-andreessen-horowitz-set-to-launch-to-help-entrepreneurs-with-legal-hairballs/feed/ 4 http://allthingsd.com/20091104/sphere-leader-exiting-aol-but-staying-on-as-special-venture-advisor/ http://allthingsd.com/20091104/sphere-leader-exiting-aol-but-staying-on-as-special-venture-advisor/#comments Wed, 04 Nov 2009 17:30:28 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/?p=20267

Tony Conrad, CEO and co-founder of Sphere–the contextually relevant content engine AOL bought in the spring of 2008 for upward of $25 million–left the Time Warner (TWX) online unit last month, several sources have told BoomTown in recent weeks.

But, in an effort by AOL’s CEO Tim Armstrong to hold onto entrepreneurial talent, Conrad (pictured above) has agreed to become “Special Advisor” to its AOL Ventures Unit, headed by Jon Brod.

Conrad, who also works as a partner at San Francisco venture firm True Ventures, is also apparently looking to launch a new start-up.

These many moves have now been confirmed by a blog post–obtained by BoomTown–set to be published by Conrad at Sphere, which has recently changed its name to Surphace (a goofy moniker that still makes me weep, and not for joy).

Titled, “Next,” the post will also be appearing on the True Ventures site.

In it, Conrad outlined the changes and also gave big thanks all around.

You can read the whole thing below. In the post, Conrad noted that “I also find myself with a burning need to start another company…[and] I’ve decided that I need to move on from Sphere to figure it out.”

Sphere was founded in 2005 and raised about $4.25 million from many investors, some of which included Radar Partners, Trident Capital and well-known Web players Scott Kurnit and Will Hearst.

Conrad, who was involved with Webmail and RSS aggregator Oddpost (acquired by Yahoo in 2004), is also on the board of Automattic/WordPress, the blog publishing system this site uses.

This kind of history gives him a lot of Silicon Valley cred to help AOL, which also recently hired former Yahoo (YHOO) exec Brad Garlinghouse to run its communications arm and be its “CEO of Silicon Valley.”

Both will be working with Brod, who came to AOL via its acquisition of hyperlocal community news start-up Patch Media.

Brod has previously worked closely with Armstrong, who was a major Patch investor.

All these players will have their hands full trying to push AOL’s reputation among entrepreneurs, which is–how can I put it delicately?–pretty nonexistent.

But boosting innovation will be key to success as AOL prepares to spin off from Time Warner later in the year.

And that was not exactly helped by its recently released slate of board picks, who are a little light on fast-paced, Web 2.0 entrepreneurial skills.

So, keeping someone like Conrad in the AOL tent is a good move, especially since several similar execs at start-ups bought by the online giant have left.

They include Michael Jones of Userplane, who is now COO of News Corp. (NWS) social networking unit MySpace, as well as many others.

Here is a video interview I did with Conrad in mid-2007 (which also includes a visit with GigaOm’s Om Malik):

And here is Conrad’s blog post:

Next

It’s been almost five years since Martin Remy, Steve Neiker, Toni Schneider and I started working on Sphere. For me, it’s around 10% of a life. And it’s a time when I find myself thinking a lot about a particular question: What do I want to do next?

In 2005, I had the good fortune of being on the founding team of Sphere and joining True Ventures simultaneously. I always thought that I’d eventually focus all of my attention on one or the other, but both were too much fun and I guess I’m selfish in that way. As time passed, I went deeper into each role and I never got around to choosing one or the other. It worked out nicely. True is on its second fund and Sphere had a successful sale to AOL in 2008. Most importantly, Sphere’s business and team are both thriving within AOL. While I’m proud of my contributions to both, the heroes in this equation are Martin, Steve, Toni, Shea DiDonna, Braughm Ricke, Om Malik, Puneet Agarwal, John Burke, Phil Black, Jon Callaghan, Marty Moe, Bill Wilson and AOL–they trusted and empowered me to pursue both. I am extremely grateful.

As I’ve thought through the question of what’s next, I’ve realized that I love the complementary perspectives acquired from building a company as an entrepreneur and investor. They are symbiotic roles and it’s really hard to say which has influenced me more. While my role at True as a Venture Partner will continue to deepen (because there is nothing more rewarding than working with people you admire and trust), I also find myself with a burning need to start another company. I’ve discovered my formula and doing both makes me happiest.

As for my next company, I’m not sure what the answer to that question is, but I’ve decided that I need to move on from Sphere (now Surphace) to figure it out. This may feel like old news as I’ve been working to make myself obsolete as Josh Guttman transitioned into the CEO role. My decision is easy as I know that Surphace is in excellent hands. I wouldn’t feel comfortable leaving if I didn’t believe that Josh was the right leader for the business today. He’s a natural leader and has a strategy for the future that I believe is going to accelerate growth for Surphace and AOL. I couldn’t be more pleased for Josh and excited for the Surphace team.

As for my thoughts about Surphace and AOL’s future, I’m more optimistic than ever. We joined AOL at an opportune time. AOL is doing what great, sustainable businesses do every so often – they’re reinventing themselves. As the business model of the oldest and one of the biggest Internet businesses evolves, Sphere/Surphace has become an important piece of their strategy to reach across and engage the web. In the past year, we’ve had an insiders’ view into how AOL’s new leadership team has moved aggressively to engage their audience (new vertical focused websites; a focus on engagement and not page-views for page-views sake; hiring leading journalistic talent when others downsized; acquisitions in the local content space; shorter development cycles with an emphasis on release, iterate and release). There is nothing like winning and the AOL publishing business is winning. As a result, I’m pleased to also announce that I’ve agreed to serve as a Special Advisor to AOL Ventures as they reinvent themselves. I am thrilled at this opportunity to evolve my relationship.

I want to give a huge thanks to the people who’ve made the last few years what they were: my family tops the list, an entrepreneur is only as good as their support system and this is my secret sauce. My co-founders, Martin and Steve, who trusted me to play a role in helping them get the tech they invented the exposure it deserved. Toni and Phil who taught me about generosity at a moment when I was able to learn. Matt Mullenweg who opened up my thinking of how a start-up operates. Marty and Bill who have been consistently supportive since Day One–I can’t underscore enough how much I appreciate the manner in which they’ve empowered us to thrive in an appropriately independent environment. They have treated me (and the Sphere team) with enormous respect for which I am both thankful and flattered. The original Sphere team, the current Surphace team who have embraced AOL. Our investors and advisors who supported and helped shape our vision. The True team and entrepreneurs who have taught me about sacrifice, vision, execution and the value of pursuing your dreams–and, of course, Lewis Dvorkin, Kevin Lockland and Bill who paid us the nicest compliment of all in offering to acquire our company and then doing so.

It’s been a thrilling, at times difficult, always rewarding and lucky ride I’ve been on. Thanks to all.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20091104/sphere-leader-exiting-aol-but-staying-on-as-special-venture-advisor/feed/ 1 http://allthingsd.com/20090701/gadget-gods-peter-rojas-ryan-block-finally-unveil-their-newest-gadget-site-gdgt-get-it/ http://allthingsd.com/20090701/gadget-gods-peter-rojas-ryan-block-finally-unveil-their-newest-gadget-site-gdgt-get-it/#comments Wed, 01 Jul 2009 18:00:42 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=8856 Does the world need another gadget site? Yes, say two of the gadget world’s biggest stars, who are launching gdgt.com today.

The site is the work of Peter Rojas, who helped build Gizmodo and Engadget, and Ryan Block, who took the torch from Rojas after he moved on. Gizmodo and Engadget are the best known and most powerful of the new generation of gadget sites, which makes Rojas and Block revered by the gadget gang. That’s why we’ve been hearing about gdgt, in dribs and drabs, for many many months.

But as well known as Rojas and Block are, they’re still going to have to work hard to make a dent in the crowded field. In addition to the two blogs they created, the gadget spectrum includes everyone from staid players like CBS’s (CBS) CNET to rumor sites for Apple (APPL) obsessives, like MacRumors, to sites for real obsessives, like the handful of people who still own Palm (PALM) Treos. (And, of course, there’s All Things Digital’s Walt Mossberg, who bestrides all of this like the colossus he is, and is also my boss. Hi, Walt!)

Rojas and Block argue that their site is different because it’s not going to be driven by editors but by the site’s users, who will gather there to swap info, stories, rumors, opinions, etc. In other words, Facebook for gadgets, though I gather they’d recoil if they heard that. The other pitch, though they won’t spell this out, either: Their site takes a bunch of features and content that you can find other places and presents them in a better way.

There’s a bunch of nifty features, like a gadget-finder that lets you find products via specs instead of brands, and the site seems to be pretty slick. But it’s better if you have a look yourself instead of having me describe it. And gdgt.com won’t really hit its stride until actual users start using it. I look forward to hearing what they have to say about my upcoming phone dilemma: iPhone 3GS, Palm Pre or Blackberry Tour?

But as much as Rojas and Block argue that this is a community site, it’s their names and reps that have people interested in the project. And that’s what has convinced investors to plow money into an ad-supported Web site in an era when the economy sucks and there are way too many ad-supported Web sites.

The duo won’t discuss funding, but I’m told that last fall they were discussing investments of up to $1 million, but ended up taking less than that via a group of VCs and angel investors. I don’t have a complete list of investors, but people familiar with the company tell me that early-stage investor True Ventures led the round, which also included New York-based incubator Betaworks and Mahalo’s Jason Calacanis.

Calacanis’s name will resonate with longtime followers of the tech blog world: He was one of the founders of Weblogs Inc., which created Engadget as a rival to Gawker Media’s Gizmodo, and hired Rojas away from Gizmodo. Calacanis eventually sold Weblogs Inc. to Time Warner’s (TWX) AOL for a decent pile of cash, some of which I believe ended up in Rojas’s lap.

Click the image below to see a screenshot of what gdgt’s homepage ought to look like.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090701/gadget-gods-peter-rojas-ryan-block-finally-unveil-their-newest-gadget-site-gdgt-get-it/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20090518/twitter-app-investors-still-writing-checks-stocktwits-raises-a-round/ http://allthingsd.com/20090518/twitter-app-investors-still-writing-checks-stocktwits-raises-a-round/#comments Mon, 18 May 2009 10:00:51 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=7450 Nope, Twitter still hasn’t trotted out a business model yet–a couple of sponsorships from the likes of an AT&T (T) don’t cut it. And that may or may not be a problem for potential acquirers like Google (GOOG) or Microsoft (MSFT). But it’s a nonissue for a growing number of start-ups hoping to succeed simply by positioning themselves in Twitter’s general vicinity.

Today’s example: StockTwits, a day trader-meets-Twitter site that just raised $800,000 from venture capital firm True Ventures. It’s not a ton of money, but StockTwits doesn’t need a ton of money. The site, which launched last fall with an $800,000 angel round, employs all of four people.

And it’s yet another bet that investor Howard Lindzon has made in Twitter: He’s also put money into bit.ly, a Twitter-centric url-shortner, and Tweetdeck, a useful Twitter client, alongside incubator Betaworks, which in turn invested in the StockTwits angel round. Cozy! (Cozier: Lindzon was an early investor in Silicon Alley Insider, my former employer).

Like all of those companies and just about every other company that’s trying to make money from Twitter, StockTwits doesn’t have any kind of formal relationship with Twitter. It doesn’t need one: If you want to take advantage of Twitter’s data and users, you can just plug right in for free via its open API.

As a wise man once said: “All of [these companies] are part of the burgeoning ecosystem that revolves around Twitter, which powers all of their companies by letting them plug into its data stream. In exchange, all of these companies make Twitter more successful, by bolting on frills and features to its bare-bones service.”

Name aside, StockTwits may be less dependent on Twitter than any of the other Twittery start-ups. StockTwits users employ Twitter to pass along investment ideas, but beyond that, it’s a fairly straightforward stock message board, the kind we’ve seen since the first Web boom.

Lindzon and co-founder Soren Macbeth plan to make money via ads and by publishing newsletters/blogs on behalf of some StockTwits users, (two of whom are already selling their investment advice for $60 a month). Basically, Twitter is a lead-generator for the site.

Come to think of it, that could be a business for the Twitter team. Right?

Here’s a video interview I shot with Lindzon last week in which he declined to hand out any stock tips of his own. Presumably he’ll rectify that today.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090518/twitter-app-investors-still-writing-checks-stocktwits-raises-a-round/feed/ 0