<?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: Vonage Lawyer Equates Ruling to &#8216;Cutting Off Oxygen&#8217;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.crunchgear.com/2007/04/06/vonage-lawyer-equates-ruling-to-cutting-off-oxygen/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.crunchgear.com/2007/04/06/vonage-lawyer-equates-ruling-to-cutting-off-oxygen/</link>
	<description>Gadgets, gear and computer hardware.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 09:17:45 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Michael Urlocker</title>
		<link>http://www.crunchgear.com/2007/04/06/vonage-lawyer-equates-ruling-to-cutting-off-oxygen/comment-page-1/#comment-177935</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Urlocker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Apr 2007 01:39:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://crunchgear.com/2007/04/06/vonage-lawyer-equates-ruling-to-cutting-off-oxygen/#comment-177935</guid>
		<description>Last May two days after the IPO, we rated Vonage a &#039;C&#039; using our Disruption Scorecard, still the lowest of any company we have ranked. Many enthusiasts thought this view was absurd... after all Vonage was the definition of &quot;disruptive,&quot; wasn&#039;t it? And how could a subjective spreadsheet scorecard produce anything of value?

Why did Vonage rate so low?  Vonage seemed to have a dot-com business model and its service had no unique attributes of value.

Details:
http://www.ondisruption.com/my_weblog/2006/05/vonage_disrupti.html</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Last May two days after the IPO, we rated Vonage a &#8216;C&#8217; using our Disruption Scorecard, still the lowest of any company we have ranked. Many enthusiasts thought this view was absurd&#8230; after all Vonage was the definition of &#8220;disruptive,&#8221; wasn&#8217;t it? And how could a subjective spreadsheet scorecard produce anything of value?</p>
<p>Why did Vonage rate so low?  Vonage seemed to have a dot-com business model and its service had no unique attributes of value.</p>
<p>Details:<br />
<a href="http://www.ondisruption.com/my_weblog/2006/05/vonage_disrupti.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.ondisruption.com/my_weblog/2006/05/vonage_disrupti.html</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
