Joining costs nothing. You can earn shares by referring persons or by direct purchase. The workings are explained on the site. Posted below are items that are both critical and positive.
July 16, 2012
I posted this at Zurker today
I have not been overly active here. My main activities remain my blog and my Twitter work, focusing on the current presidential campaign. But Zurker is in my thoughts for one main reason. I think it has a sensible basis which is not shared by Tumblr, Facebook, Pinterest or Twitter. Obviously our ownership is key, but that is not the whole reason. The reason is entities. As I see it, these could be tasteful extensions of who we are when it comes to how we wish to make a living online. I want to do it by selling books I have written (I have about 30 of them ready to go) and maybe selling my graphics affixed to products (easily achieved at CafePress). I am a pauper in terms of my desires and needs but I have always thought the whole world would move in the direction of making a living for everyone online. All we need is a way to understand and do it. It may take centuries, but that is where we may be headed. So I await the entities. And I have a wrinkle to suggest. We should pay Zurker part of the revenue we generate. That would reverse the usual model and make us the boss of our entities. It would be an incentive for others to join. It might transfer the headache of managing transactions away from us to Zurker. I think entities could turbo-charge Zurker growth. But I am in no hurry for them to arrive. All in good time.
July 6, 2012
(Rumored) Winklevii's Social Network "Zurker" For The People & Of The People (Models too!): "Not content to sit on their laurels, nor the $65 million they pocketed from their lawsuit against Mark Zuckerberg for allegedly stealing their Facebook idea - the Winklevoss twins have launched their own network, named Zurker. Part investment opportunity, part chic-magnet, part-democratic social community, their innovative new wrinkle is to convince members they can become joint owners of their company.
UPDATE (July 6): After using the Khaleej Times and correspondent Prashant Vadgaonkar's report titled, "Zuckerberg Zurked," as my source for this post, I've researched further to learn that the Winklevoss twins may not have been involved with this start-up at all. In a Wired post, it appears that a serial entrepreneur by the name of Nick Oba may be the actual founder. However, Oba's past dealings are suspect as well, according to Lea Simpson, strategy director at digital agency TH_NK. "
July 5, 2012
I found Zurker recently and joined. The following comments are random and rely somewhat on things already expressed.
What strikes me is that Zurker appparently has none of the usual financial elements of a startup. From all I can gather it is just a few folk. It is hard to imagine a viral success that could operate without somehow crashing sans financial underpinning. It is also hard to imagine how such underpinning would not emerge if the model proves durable. So my real "fear" about Zurker is that it will have difficulty growing from its present smallness to anything like a competive social network without considerably more heft programming-wise that it may actually possess.
Still I am always interested in anything online with potential to change trajectories.
The idea of Zurker in itself is a game changer. Is it a valid idea? I think anyone would hope so.
If users provide the essential content needed to give value to a web enterprise, then it makes sense that they/we have ownership. Why, as one who gives time to Twitter, for example, should one not be rewarded on the basis of a formula made up of the number of followers, the number of retweets and so forth?
But no one seriously expects Twitter or companies of similar heft to do anything like that. Arianna Huffington reckons she can continue not paying a large aggregation of content providers. So when Zurker comes along and says you can gain shares by referring folk (carefully eliminating the possibility of forming downlines - it is one level) that will make complete sense to almost anyone who has ever been in an online business.
And when Zurker offers share purchases for a buck each, it can hardly be more absurd than paying a social network for virtual goodies that are part of a game.
I like Zurker because it seems to have solved some usability problems. It makes distinctions between varieties of interaction that to me are sensible. I particularly like their graphic display element.
The most alluring element is not yet available as of 4 July, 2012. It is called Entities. These will be stand alone pages that are different than FB pages which I find cumbersome. These (unlimited in number) will be connected to the single account you are allowed to set up at Zurker. I intend to use these to market my extensive Kindle catalog. If it works for me, I am sure others will have similar interest in a social network that frankly serves the business interests of users over those of advertisers.
Since I believe I can add to this note over time, I will close by saying that a thread such as this is germane to the stage we're at now online. Quora is an essential means of evaluating things early on. I found this thread because I assumed if Zurker had any legs at all, I would find some reference here.