<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Boo.com is back in 2007 (fear the bubble)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.blogherald.com/2006/11/27/boocom-is-back-in-2007-fear-the-bubble/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.blogherald.com/2006/11/27/boocom-is-back-in-2007-fear-the-bubble/</link>
	<description>The leading source of news covering social media and the blogosphere.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:53:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Insider</title>
		<link>http://www.blogherald.com/2006/11/27/boocom-is-back-in-2007-fear-the-bubble/comment-page-1/#comment-135988</link>
		<dc:creator>Insider</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Dec 2006 16:24:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogherald.com/2006/11/27/boocom-is-back-in-2007-fear-the-bubble/#comment-135988</guid>
		<description>Not gonna say alot on this, but the domain was bought by another company and they intend to jump on the Web 2.0 bandwagon and launch in Jan (although I would be surprised if they could get their stuff together in time).
If you ask me, the combo of the domain and the company behind it mean that it won&#039;t work out - watch the money burn again</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not gonna say alot on this, but the domain was bought by another company and they intend to jump on the Web 2.0 bandwagon and launch in Jan (although I would be surprised if they could get their stuff together in time).<br />
If you ask me, the combo of the domain and the company behind it mean that it won&#8217;t work out &#8211; watch the money burn again</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Why the Boo.comeback makes sense</title>
		<link>http://www.blogherald.com/2006/11/27/boocom-is-back-in-2007-fear-the-bubble/comment-page-1/#comment-135591</link>
		<dc:creator>Why the Boo.comeback makes sense</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2006 17:02:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogherald.com/2006/11/27/boocom-is-back-in-2007-fear-the-bubble/#comment-135591</guid>
		<description>[...] There has been much discussion lately, most of it negative, about the comeback of boo.com and once again, I find myself on the opposite side of the shared wisdom. Before I go into reasons as to why I think a comeback by Boo.com (a boo.comeback?) makes sense, let me first go into my unique qualifications to make such an assessment: I happen to have worked at Boo.com in the past and I was the insider who exposed some of the challenges the company had faced. I spent a fair amount of my time, in 2000 and 2001, talking at conferences about the lessons learned from this failure and I think that some of those are now fixed. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] There has been much discussion lately, most of it negative, about the comeback of boo.com and once again, I find myself on the opposite side of the shared wisdom. Before I go into reasons as to why I think a comeback by Boo.com (a boo.comeback?) makes sense, let me first go into my unique qualifications to make such an assessment: I happen to have worked at Boo.com in the past and I was the insider who exposed some of the challenges the company had faced. I spent a fair amount of my time, in 2000 and 2001, talking at conferences about the lessons learned from this failure and I think that some of those are now fixed. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

