Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ancestry.com being acquired

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • djknox
    replied
    Originally posted by T E Peterman View Post
    Another thing to remember is that with Family Finder, many experienced genealogists are testing an ever broader pool of cousins to sort out their own lines. I've done this.

    Timothy Peterman
    Agreed Timothy... I am also investigating using these tests for that purpose... but to ignore possible connections to others... even if it only benefits that person and not oneself... seems selfish doesn't it? And surely not all 77 matches fall in this category? I try to respond to every contact made to me... and on several different websites too. I help researchers the best I can... I don't get why researchers would ignore contacts. Having said that, I do know some serious researchers who have given up on their dna sites because it doesn't pay off... which was actually the impetus for me to spend some money to see what I can learn about dna testing for ancestry purposes.

    Leave a comment:


  • T E Peterman
    replied
    Another thing to remember is that with Family Finder, many experienced genealogists are testing an ever broader pool of cousins to sort out their own lines. I've done this.

    Timothy Peterman

    Leave a comment:


  • djknox
    replied
    My first sentence miscommunicated my intent. I wasn't commenting on the lack of of matches... I was commenting on the lack of interest of potential matches corresponding with you at familytreedna. Why are so few interested in communicating (0 out of 77)? (if you had taken the time to read the remaining sentences of my post I think the jist would have been ascertained...)

    And I do read the posts of others... ESPECIALLY if I intend to respond to them. You should consider the same.

    The issue raised is why do so few at ftdna actually make the effort to correspond with you? Are they disinterested or do they somehow know that the matches are not valid? What value is there in FF testing if you're not generally interested in the potential relative connections? I guess if I am to take on the persona reflected upon my by others at this forum, I would have to surmise that people think it's a waste of time... but that would be unfairly extrapolating my own experience... so I rather hold optimism that there's another reason? Maybe everyone has their dna so well painted that all 77 just know you're not related? But in that case, I suppose the matching tool ain't worth much then is it?

    So which could it be? 77 matching people all knowing that the results are garbage... or 77 people not giving a rat's arse to make contact with you as a potential cousin? And if the latter... why?

    Leave a comment:


  • MFWare
    replied
    Originally posted by djknox View Post
    I find your situation very interesting... why such a bad success rate at FTDNA? If people are going to make the effort to do these tests, they must be interested in genealogy. Why then are so few engaging? I do not have a 23&me profile... but I know several serious genealogists who tested there and now ignore contact requests because they think its a waste of time - meaning they feel that much of the matching is erroneous or at least out of their validation reach.
    "Bad" is a pejorative that simply does not apply in my case. You are a frequent poster on this forum. Take the time to read the posts of others. You will find posts by FT-DNA customers who have waited years for any match at all. Would I like more matches? Certainly. Would I like for my matches to be more closely related? Of course, I would.

    I have matches at 23&Me who do not share genomes that are closer than any at FT-DNA. Some are so close that I ought to know them already even if I do not. These matches are closer than any of my FT-DNA matches. However, I have 161 matches there who have shared genomes. From each of my matches, I learn something. Among the things that I have learned is that some of my assumptions about my family were wrong. So I accentuate the positive.

    I am African American with substantial European heritage. I have many European matches on 23&Me, FT-DNA, and Ancestry. However, it appears that FT-DNA has substantially less appeal to African Americans than does 23&Me. Fewer people who test means fewer matches for those who do.

    Ironically, mitosearch.org has about six matches to my mtDNA. My FT-DNA match is one of them.

    Leave a comment:


  • djknox
    replied
    Originally posted by tomcat View Post
    Genetic anthropology worked out well for The Genographic Project - half a million participants for Geno 1.0. FTDNA doesn't have the cache of National Geographic but they do have an ongoing relationship.
    I don't dispute that... but I doubt it has staying power over the long run.... but one never knows I suppose...

    Leave a comment:


  • djknox
    replied
    Originally posted by MFWare View Post
    With all of the dissing of 23andMe in some quarters, a counter view is in order:

    23andMe Total Matches: 641
    23andMe Communicating: 161

    FT-DNA Family Finder Total Matches: 77
    FT-DNA Family Finder Communicating: 0

    FT-DNA Full Mitochondrial Sequence Matches: 1 (HVR1)
    FT-DNA Full Mitochondrial Sequence Communicating: 0
    23andMe Maternal Haplogroup Matches: 2
    23andMe Maternal Haplogroup Communicating: 2

    FT-DNA Y-DNA 111-Marker Matches: 1
    FT-DNA Y-DNA 67-Marker Matches: 6
    FT-DNA Y-DNA 37-Marker Matches: 3
    FT-DNA Y-DNA 25-Marker Matches: 15
    FT-DNA Y-DNA 12-Marker Matches: 317
    FT-DNA Y-DNA Communicating: 1 (67-Markers)

    23andMe Paternal Haplogroup Matches: 7
    23andMe Paternal Haplogroup Communicating: 7

    The bottomline is that roughly twice as many 23andMe matches communicate with me than FT-DNA customers have relevant matches with me. This is not a knock on FT-DNA. To the contrary, I just sent off my Geno 2.0 sample this morning. This is to say that biomedical research focus notwithstanding, 23andMe does a fantastic job in DNA genealogy.

    I find your situation very interesting... why such a bad success rate at FTDNA? If people are going to make the effort to do these tests, they must be interested in genealogy. Why then are so few engaging? I do not have a 23&me profile... but I know several serious genealogists who tested there and now ignore contact requests because they think its a waste of time - meaning they feel that much of the matching is erroneous or at least out of their validation reach.

    Leave a comment:


  • tomcat
    replied
    Originally posted by djknox View Post
    ... That leaves FTDNA to specialize in genetic anthropology and/or genealogy. The first I don't think is big enough to sustain a healthy business ...
    Genetic anthropology worked out well for The Genographic Project - half a million participants for Geno 1.0. FTDNA doesn't have the cache of National Geographic but they do have an ongoing relationship.

    Leave a comment:


  • tomcat
    replied
    Originally posted by djknox View Post
    ... FTDNA would be well-served to tap-into the Ancestry customer base.
    Just read the Ancestry TOS that mentions the importation of genome scan data, no promises, just a mention. Expect their preference is to sell their own test but if sales slow, importation is a way to pump-up the db and the subscription rolls.

    Leave a comment:


  • tomcat
    replied
    Originally posted by MFWare View Post
    With all of the dissing of 23andMe in some quarters, a counter view is in order:

    23andMe Total Matches: 641
    23andMe Communicating: 161
    About 25%, one of the better success rates for 23&Me, many others' are lower.

    Leave a comment:


  • MFWare
    replied
    With all of the dissing of 23andMe in some quarters, a counter view is in order:

    23andMe Total Matches: 641
    23andMe Communicating: 161

    FT-DNA Family Finder Total Matches: 77
    FT-DNA Family Finder Communicating: 0

    FT-DNA Full Mitochondrial Sequence Matches: 1 (HVR1)
    FT-DNA Full Mitochondrial Sequence Communicating: 0
    23andMe Maternal Haplogroup Matches: 2
    23andMe Maternal Haplogroup Communicating: 2

    FT-DNA Y-DNA 111-Marker Matches: 1
    FT-DNA Y-DNA 67-Marker Matches: 6
    FT-DNA Y-DNA 37-Marker Matches: 3
    FT-DNA Y-DNA 25-Marker Matches: 15
    FT-DNA Y-DNA 12-Marker Matches: 317
    FT-DNA Y-DNA Communicating: 1 (67-Markers)

    23andMe Paternal Haplogroup Matches: 7
    23andMe Paternal Haplogroup Communicating: 7

    The bottomline is that roughly twice as many 23andMe matches communicate with me than FT-DNA customers have relevant matches with me. This is not a knock on FT-DNA. To the contrary, I just sent off my Geno 2.0 sample this morning. This is to say that biomedical research focus notwithstanding, 23andMe does a fantastic job in DNA genealogy.

    Leave a comment:


  • vinnie
    replied
    I've just sold three of my five Geno 2.0 kits to people who never would have tested with Ancestry because they have absolutely no interest in finding new cousins. However, all of them are in academe, they're interested in deep ancestry, and they're familiar with National Geographic; that's what convinced them to test. I hope they'll transfer their results here, and then do the STR testing as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • djknox
    replied
    I think there is no hope for 23&me to play in both health and genealogy markets. They will converge to health testing only... and I think in that market they can do very very well. Geneaology is already dominated by Ancestry... and their success should continue. That leaves FTDNA to specialize in genetic anthropology and/or genealogy. The first I don't think is big enough to sustain a healthy business... so that means they must be viable in the latter: genetic genealogy. They had a big head start on Ancestry.com... but IMHO they are losing it very fast for the simple reason that Ancestry IS IN THE GENEALOGY BUSINESS... and for the reasons i've discussed (see Success Stories under Family Finder board), genetic genealogy alone is very very weak. Genetic Genealogy NEEDs traditional genealogy to be of benefit... thus Ancestry will pull away fast UNLESS FTDNA develops more advanced technologies... but that can be very slow and expensive - thus back to my assertion that FTDNA would be well-served to tap-into the Ancestry customer base.

    I think its a shame that Ancestry is trying to develop its own autosomal mousetrap when the two companies could have worked out an agreement to be collaberative, building on FTDNA's tools. If collaberation is not on the menu, then acquisition or decline ultimately will be... and for reasons just stated above, FTDNA are more vulnerable than is Ancestry. Forget about 23&Me... they're soon out of the genealogy game.

    Leave a comment:


  • tomcat
    replied
    Originally posted by gtc View Post
    However, the problem I see for them is that 23andMe's business raison d'etre is to mine personal genomes for medical purposes, so their key selling messages are based around that and that's what's built their business and I think continues to build it.
    Last time I checked the TOS testees agree by default to allow such genomic mining without subsequent notification or any promise of benefit, so that part of the business plan is baked-in for all users.

    What I am suggesting is that the Ancestry/Genealogy side be as open as FamilyFinder or AncestryDNA while the Health stay locked-down. Any testee could elect to play in both the Health and Ancestry/Genealogy sandboxes, or just one. If they elect both they select different usernames for each sandbox.

    23&Me could even knock-out from Ancestry/Genealogy genomes those SNP's associated with health traits, reserving the total genomic profile for Health alone, and reducing the Ancestry/Genealogy genomes to the coverage offered by Family Finder.

    Leave a comment:


  • gtc
    replied
    Originally posted by tomcat View Post
    In my opinion, in order for 23&Me to advance in the genealogy market, they need to erect a 'Chinese wall' between Health and Genealogy with different sets of privacy rules on either side.
    I agree 100%.

    However, the problem I see for them is that 23andMe's business raison d'etre is to mine personal genomes for medical purposes, so their key selling messages are based around that and that's what's built their business and I think continues to build it.

    (And I think that FTDNA has been very wise to make the clear distinction that it's not in the health business.)

    Leave a comment:


  • tomcat
    replied
    Originally posted by djknox View Post
    SURVIVAL. Once the cat's out of the bag on the serious limitations current genetics has to helping mainstream genealogy, only through the pooling of research efforts and the sharing of market access via a common database will sufficient advances sustain growth. The current "dna" products are woefully weak to sustain the business otherwise.
    Your argument, other than your argument from your own interests, seems to be that better tests and/or better test analytics will grow the genealogical testing market. I don't see the evidence for that, what I see is a very small enthusiast market, slowly growing and served by boutique providers.

    There was nothing in the world like the 23&Me test when it launched at a retail price of $1000. and four years in, after numerous price discounts, repeated sales and distribution of thousands of free kits, 23&Me numbers just 150,000 users MOST OF WHOM ARE NOT INTERESTED IN GENEALOGY.
    Last edited by tomcat; 30 October 2012, 02:10 PM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X