Day 135: Nextdoor Rings the Bell. The Questions Are Still Ringing.
Fifteen years of Nextdoor. A celebration at Nasdaq. A stock price of $2.37. And a research request that remains unresolved.
Today, Nirav Tolia and members of Nextdoor's leadership team celebrated the company's 15th anniversary by ringing the closing bell at Nasdaq.
Look at the photograph. Everyone is smiling, applauding, and celebrating. The Nextdoor logo fills the background. It's a moment designed to communicate achievement, momentum, and success.
Now look at my E*TRADE screenshot.
NXDR closed at $2.37 on October 28, 2026, down $0.04, or 1.66%, for the day.
Two pictures. Two very different messages.
I'm not suggesting that the ceremony caused the stock to fall. There's no evidence of that. Nor does one day's movement tell us whether Nextdoor is succeeding or failing as a business.
But I do think the contrast raises a worthwhile question:
What, exactly, are we celebrating—and how should we measure whether Nextdoor has delivered on its promise?
Day 135: A Thank-You to Nirav Tolia and Nextdoor
I'd like to thank Nirav Tolia and the Nextdoor team.
Seriously.
Thank you for not resolving my original request, made more than a year ago, for the detailed data behind Nextdoor's published research. Thank you for the subsequent communications that directed me back to public blog posts rather than providing the detailed reports I requested.
And thank you for letting that request remain unresolved for 135 days in this chapter of my case study.
I realize that sounds sarcastic. It is.
But there's a genuine point underneath it.
By not providing the information I requested—or clearly resolving the request in a way that ended the uncertainty—you gave me the opportunity to learn a great deal about the company.
I learned more about weekly active users (WAU), revenue, adjusted EBITDA, and the difference between a company's financial performance and its investors' returns.
I've taken a refresher course in stock terminology and the relationship between market performance and corporate milestones.
And today, I learned more about how a company can celebrate an anniversary with a stock-exchange bell-ringing ceremony.
That last lesson was particularly timely.
The ceremony is a public-relations opportunity. It creates photographs, social media content, and a positive story about the company's history. There's nothing inherently wrong with that. Companies use milestones to celebrate employees, attract attention and tell their stories.
But a ceremony is not proof of business success.
And a photograph of executives celebrating doesn't answer questions about users, investors, small businesses, or accountability.
Fifteen Years Later: What Does Nextdoor Have to Show for It?
Nextdoor began operating its platform in 2011. Its business has evolved, and there are real accomplishments worth acknowledging.
In its second-quarter 2026 results, the company reported $75 million in quarterly revenue, up 15% year over year; 22.9 million weekly active users on the platform, up 5%; and a net loss of about $2 million, compared with about $15 million a year earlier. Adjusted EBITDA was approximately $10 million.
Those are measurable improvements. I won't pretend otherwise.
But fifteen years in business should invite a broader examination than a list of quarterly highlights.
Here are the areas where I believe Nextdoor still has serious questions to answer.
1. The Business: Can Nextdoor Turn Its Potential Into a Durable Business?
Nextdoor has built a network spanning hundreds of thousands of neighborhoods. It has local conversations, recommendations, safety alerts, business listings, and advertising opportunities.
That is a valuable foundation.
Yet the company has also acknowledged in its regulatory filings that it is still scaling its monetization efforts and that its ongoing product transformation may not produce the engagement or monetization it expects.
My questions include:
Can Nextdoor consistently convert engagement into sustainable revenue?
Can it make the platform more useful without alienating existing users?
Can it improve trust and moderation while growing its commercial business?
Can it establish a durable path to GAAP profitability?
Can it demonstrate that its strategy produces lasting results rather than periodic bursts of optimism?
These claims don't mean Nextdoor has accomplished nothing. They're questions about whether the company has converted its substantial potential into the durable business its supporters expect.
2. Investors: Where Is the Long-Term Return?
Nextdoor became a publicly traded company in 2021. Investors have had years to evaluate the business, its strategy, and its execution.
But revenue growth and an improving operating picture don't automatically translate into strong returns for every shareholder.
My own experience led me to sell my NXDR shares on October 12. I decided I had waited long enough for the investment case to develop, and I was no longer willing to keep waiting for the outcome I had hoped to see.
Today, the screenshot shows NXDR at $2.37, down 1.66% for the session.
That single day's decline doesn't establish the company's long-term prospects. Similarly, executives ringing a bell doesn't mean shareholders have been rewarded.
The questions remain:
Has Nextdoor delivered the long-term shareholder value investors expected?
Can the company sustain revenue growth and improve profitability?
How should investors evaluate management's promises against actual results?
What milestones would demonstrate that the business has reached a new level of maturity?
A corporate anniversary is a calendar milestone. Shareholder value is measured over time.
3. Small Businesses: Are They Getting Enough Value?
Local businesses are a central part of Nextdoor's appeal. Neighbors recommend contractors, restaurants, service providers, and other local businesses. Those recommendations help people decide and can help businesses win customers.
Nextdoor has opportunities to monetize this local commercial activity through advertising and business products.
But one important question remains: how does the platform balance its commercial interests with the interests of the businesses and neighbors who make it useful?
I want to know:
Do local businesses clearly understand the value they receive from paid products?
Can they determine whether advertising generates meaningful results?
Does the platform provide a useful experience for businesses that rely on organic recommendations and free tools?
How does Nextdoor maintain trust when it monetizes local attention and community-generated knowledge?
Nextdoor offers free business tools, so it's inaccurate to say every business must pay to participate. The question is whether businesses of different sizes can understand and access meaningful value from the platform.
4. Users: Who Creates the Value, and Who Benefits?
This has been one of my central questions throughout the case study.
Neighbors create the content that makes Nextdoor useful. They recommend businesses, share local information, warn others about safety concerns, answer questions, and contribute knowledge about their communities.
Without those contributions, the platform would have far less value.
Yet users have raised concerns about content moderation, inconsistent decisions, communication, and the handling of appeals. I've documented my own experiences and the questions they have raised.
My questions include:
Are moderation decisions consistent and understandable?
Can users obtain meaningful explanations when content is removed?
Are appeals reviewed effectively?
Does Nextdoor communicate clearly when users raise substantive concerns?
Does the company recognize the value of the contributions that keep the network useful?
I don't expect every post to remain online or every appeal to succeed. A community platform needs rules.
But users should understand how those rules are applied and how they can challenge decisions.
And when community-generated knowledge becomes a commercial asset, I believe it's reasonable to ask whether the people contributing that value should have more choices about how it is used.
5. Leadership and Accountability: Who Answers the Difficult Questions?
This is where my personal case study comes back into focus.
I've spent months asking questions about Nextdoor's moderation, communication, research transparency, and leadership accountability.
One unresolved issue has been my request for the detailed data behind two Nextdoor Insights studies. The public posts described additional research details as available through contact with Jacob Chavis. I asked for the underlying detailed reports—not another link to the public summaries.
I have received communications directing me to those public summaries, but I have not received the detailed reports I requested.
As of Day 135, that request remains unresolved.
I recognize that the company may have restrictions or reasons it cannot share particular materials. If so, it can explain that. It can say the reports are unavailable, access is restricted, or someone else is responsible for the request.'
A clear resolution would help.
This isn't about demanding that a CEO personally answer every question sent to the company. It's about whether an organization has a reliable process for responding to substantive requests and closing the loop.
And that’s why today's celebration feels so disconnected from my experience.
The company can coordinate a public ceremony, publish a celebratory announcement, and put its leadership team in front of cameras. Those are visible activities.
But an unresolved research request reminds us that important work also happens outside the spotlight.
6. Transparency: Publicity Is Not the Same as Accountability
The bell-ringing ceremony is a publicity opportunity. I don't mean that as an accusation of wrongdoing. Public companies routinely use ceremonies and anniversaries to celebrate their history.
But publicity and accountability serve different purposes.
Publicity tells the world what a company wants people to see.
Accountability gives people ways to evaluate whether the company is delivering on its commitments.
Nextdoor can celebrate fifteen years of connecting neighbors. It can highlight its growth, products, and financial progress. It can point to new advertising initiatives and improved operating results.
And those accomplishments deserve to be assessed on their merits.
But there are other measures of progress:
Whether users trust the platform.
Whether moderation works consistently.
Whether businesses receive meaningful value.
Whether investors can see a credible path to sustained performance.
Whether leadership responds constructively to difficult questions.
Whether the company resolves legitimate requests for information.
A closing-bell pt captures all of that.
My Suggestion: Celebrate a Milestone That Means Something
Here's my suggestion to Nirav Tolia and Nextdoor.
Rather than making the bell-ringing ceremony the centerpiece of a fifteen-year celebration, I would prefer the company set clear, measurable milestones and celebrate when it achieves them.
For example:
Sustained GAAP profitability.
Consistent user growth accompanied by stronger retention and trust.
Clear evidence that local businesses are getting meaningful value.
Transparent and effective moderation and appeals processes.
A track record of responding to substantive questions and resolving them.
Demonstrable long-term value creation for shareholders.
These are examples, not a claim that the company has made no progress toward them. Some may already be improving; others will require time and evidence.
But they are the kinds of outcomes that would make a celebration especially meaningful to me.
A bell-ringing ceremony is a moment. Building a durable, trusted, and financially sustainable company is the achievement.
And a fifteenth anniversary is a fine time to reflect on both.
Day 135: The Bell Rang. My Questions Remain.
Nirav and the Nextdoor team were smiling in the photograph. I don't begrudge them the celebration. Employees deserve to celebrate the work they've done, and a company is entitled to mark its history.
But the market closed at $2.37 that day, according to my E*TRADE screenshot, and my questions about the company remain.
I am not suggesting that the stock decline was caused by the ceremony, nor am I claiming that one closing price defines Nextdoor's future.
I'm asking for a more meaningful standard of success than the ability to arrange a public celebration.
Fifteen years after launching the platform, Nextdoor has a substantial network, growing revenue, and recent improvements in its financial results. It also still needs to demonstrate durable profitability, build user trust, deliver value to businesses and shareholders, and ensure legitimate questions get clear answers.
I will keep documenting the gap between the company's promise and its execution.
So, congratulations to the employees who helped build Nextdoor over the past fifteen years.
As for the next milestone, I'd suggest choosing one that reflects measurable progress.
Don't ring the bell just because the calendar says fifteen years. Ring it when you've built something that stands up to the questions.
👉 Follow my continuing Nextdoor case study at NielFlamm.com/blog.
Day 128: Control Is Not the Same as Leadership — What Nirav Tolia Could Learn About Scaling Nextdoor
The interesting thing about scaling a company is that the very habits that build it can eventually hinder its growth.
Control can help establish consistency. Clear rules can help an organization operate. But when control outweighs adaptability, feedback, and accountability, a company risks losing sight of what it needs to improve.
That’s why this Inc. article caught my attention: To Scale Your Company Without Losing Control, Follow These 3 Hard-Won Lessons.
It raises a question I think is relevant to Nirav Tolia and Nextdoor:
When does maintaining control stop helping a company—and start preventing it from changing?
I can't know Nirav's personal motivations. But I can look at the public-facing decisions, communication patterns, and business challenges I've been documenting and ask whether Nextdoor is responding to feedback as effectively as it could.
Lesson 1: You Can't Control What the Market Thinks
The Inc. article emphasizes choosing investors carefully, treating them as teammates, and recognizing that raising money comes with responsibility.
That's a fair point. But control has another side.
You can control who invests in your company. You cannot control what the market thinks of it.
Nextdoor went public in 2021. Since then, the company has faced questions about growth, engagement, profitability, and the platform's reputation. When Nirav returned as CEO in 2024, he took on the challenge of moving the business forward.
You can't fix those problems by controlling the message.
They require results.
Lesson 2: Know When to Let Go
One of the most revealing points in the Inc. article is Tolia's acknowledgment that the CEO he needed to be when he returned wasn't the CEO he had been when Nextdoor was starting out.
He discussed moving from doing work himself to accomplishing work through other people—hiring the right team, aligning leadership and establishing meaningful metrics.
That's an important admission: scaling requires changing how you lead.
So here's my question: Does that same willingness to change extend to how Nextdoor handles criticism, user feedback, and accountability?
I've spent months raising concerns about moderation, communication, and transparency. I've requested detailed research that Nextdoor's own posts described as available. I've offered to talk.
Nirav has blocked me on social media. He's entitled to do that, and I can't claim to know his reasons.
But blocking an individual doesn't resolve the underlying questions.
A CEO doesn't have to answer every criticism personally for a company to have a process that addresses legitimate questions.
The test of leadership isn't whether you can keep criticism out of your feed. It's whether your organization can learn from feedback.
Lesson 3: Growth Isn't Everything
The article also emphasizes that growth alone isn't enough. A company needs a path to profitability and the ability to sustain itself.
That matters for Nextdoor.
The company has spent years building a neighborhood network, collecting recommendations and developing local advertising opportunities. Its Neighborhood Intelligence initiative is an example of trying to turn that distinctive asset into a stronger commercial business.
I want that to work.
But a new product doesn't automatically solve a business problem. Nextdoor still has to demonstrate that it can translate its reach and data into sustainable profitability and long-term shareholder value.
It also needs to retain the trust of the people who make the platform useful.
Control over a platform isn't the same as control over its future.
Day 128: Where Has Nextdoor Lost Control?
I'm not claiming Nirav has lost operational control of the company. I don't have evidence for that.
But I see several areas where Nextdoor appears to have less control than its leadership might want:
Its public narrative: Nextdoor can publish its message, but it can't dictate how customers, shareholders, and former users interpret their experiences.
Its reputation: Concerns about moderation and platform usefulness aren't automatically erased by a redesign or a new marketing campaign.
Its relationship with users: Neighbors can stop contributing, stop participating, or decide another platform better meets their needs.
Its financial future: Investors judge the business on performance and prospects, not just the story management tells.
Its feedback loop: When people raise concerns and don't see a clear resolution, those questions can persist and become a public case study of their own.
These don't prove every Nextdoor decision is wrong. They're risks any company faces when its ambition outpaces its ability to respond to feedback.
The Lesson for Nirav Tolia
Nirav, I think this article offers a useful framework:
Choose the right people. Adapt as the company grows. Focus on sustainable business results.
I'd add one more lesson:
Don't confuse control with the absence of disagreement.
A strong leader doesn't need everyone to agree. A strong organization needs ways to hear feedback, distinguish useful criticism from noise, and take action when something genuinely needs fixing.
I'm no longer a Nextdoor shareholder, but I still want to see the company succeed.
I'd like to see it become the kind of business that can accept difficult questions without treating the questions themselves as the problem.
Because sometimes, the thing a leader most needs to control is not the conversation.
It's the instinct to shut the conversation down.
👉 Read more of my ongoing Nextdoor case study at NielFlamm.com/blog
Day 90: What If Nextdoor Is Trying to Serve Too Many Customers at Once?
Day 90.
Ninety consecutive days of looking at Nextdoor from different angles.
Yesterday, NXDR closed at $2.27. That's up from the $2.23 close I discussed on Day 88, but I'm not going to spend Day 90 dissecting four cents.
Instead, I want to ask a completely different question:
Who exactly is Nextdoor's customer?
Sounds simple.
I'm not sure it is.
Meet the Nextdoor Family
Think about all the different people Nextdoor is trying to satisfy.
There's the neighbor who wants to know why three police cars just went down the street.
There's the small-business owner who wants customers.
There's the advertiser who wants access to those neighbors.
There's the moderator trying to keep everyone from digitally strangling each other over political signs and dog poop.
There's the researcher or marketer interested in Nextdoor's Insights.
There's the shareholder—hello!—who wants the company to create sustainable value.
And then there's Nextdoor itself, which has to somehow turn this entire neighborhood block party into a profitable business.
That's a lot of people sitting at one table.
And they don't necessarily want the same meal.
The Neighbor Doesn't Wake Up Thinking About Monetization
I doubt many people roll out of bed thinking:
“I hope Nextdoor improves its advertising yield today.”
Neighbors want utility.
What's happening?
Who can fix my air conditioner?
Did somebody find my dog?
Why is the power out?
Is that restaurant any good?
What's being built down the street?
And, naturally:
“Did anyone else hear that boom?”
That's the product from the neighbor's perspective.
But there's a problem.
The neighbor may be the person using the product...
without being the person primarily paying for it.
That's where things get interesting.
The Advertiser Wants Something Completely Different
The advertiser doesn't necessarily care whether Karen and Steve finally resolve their six-day dispute over Steve's garbage cans.
The advertiser wants:
Attention.
Preferably local attention.
And preferably attention from people likely to buy something.
That creates a balancing act.
Nextdoor needs enough people using the platform to make the audience valuable to advertisers.
But if monetizing that audience makes the experience less useful, those people may use Nextdoor less.
And then the audience becomes less valuable.
Welcome to the social-media hamster wheel.
Then Along Comes the Small Business
This is where Nextdoor has another interesting relationship.
The local business can simultaneously be:
Content creator.
Advertiser.
Community participant.
Recommended business.
Potential paying customer.
That's a lot of hats.
Nextdoor wants neighbors to recommend local businesses organically because those recommendations build trust and create useful content.
But Nextdoor also needs to make money from businesses.
That's not inherently wrong.
Nextdoor is a public company, not a neighborhood charity.
The interesting question is where the line sits between:
Helping local businesses participate
and
Monetizing their need to reach neighbors.
That's a strategic question worth watching.
And Then There Are Shareholders
This is the group I belong to.
I don't need Nextdoor to be free of advertising.
I want revenue growth.
I want profitability.
I want innovation.
I want management making intelligent investments.
And yes...
I want NXDR worth more than $2.27.
But here's the catch.
If Nextdoor squeezes too much money out of the platform and damages the neighbor experience, that isn't necessarily good for shareholders long-term.
If Nextdoor focuses exclusively on making neighbors happy but can't build a profitable business around them, that's not particularly helpful either.
The interests are connected.
Maybe Nextdoor Isn't One Product
This is the thought that really interests me on Day 90.
Maybe we're evaluating Nextdoor incorrectly by thinking of it as one product.
It may actually be several products sharing the same neighborhood.
To the neighbor, Nextdoor sells connection and information.
To the local business, it sells visibility and potential customers.
To the advertiser, it sells access and attention.
To researchers and marketers, it offers neighborhood insights.
And to shareholders, management is ultimately selling something else:
The promise that all of those pieces can become a valuable business.
That's a difficult puzzle.
Imagine Trying to Run This Restaurant
Imagine opening a restaurant where one customer wants steak.
Another wants vegan.
Another wants breakfast.
Another wants cocktails.
Another wants everything free.
And there's a shareholder standing near the kitchen asking why the margins aren't better.
Hi. I'm the guy near the kitchen.
Meanwhile, the chef is doing podcasts explaining the future of restaurants.
At some point somebody has to decide:
What's our signature dish?
That's what I'm asking about Nextdoor.
What Is the One Thing Nextdoor Must Be Exceptional At?
Not 17 things.
One.
Is Nextdoor primarily:
The place to discover what's happening nearby?
The place to connect with neighbors?
The place to discover trusted local businesses?
A hyperlocal advertising platform?
A neighborhood recommendation engine?
A source of uniquely valuable local data?
Maybe it can eventually be all of those things.
But companies usually become indispensable because they're exceptionally good at something.
Then they expand.
And That Brings Me Back to $2.27
NXDR closed yesterday at $2.27.
Four cents higher than the $2.23 close I discussed earlier this week.
Good.
As a shareholder, I'll happily take the four cents.
But Day 90 isn't about whether the stock moved four cents.
It's about what eventually moves it forty cents, a dollar, or several dollars—and keeps it there.
That requires more than announcements.
It requires a business people understand.
A product neighbors value.
An ecosystem businesses value.
An audience advertisers value.
And a strategy shareholders believe will eventually create sustainable returns.
That's a lot of customers to keep happy.
Day 90: Who Gets the Best Seat at the Table?
So after 90 days, here's today's question:
When the interests of neighbors, businesses, advertisers, and shareholders collide, who comes first?
Because saying everyone comes first sounds wonderful.
Until two of them want completely different things.
That's when corporate strategy stops being a mission statement and becomes a decision.
And those decisions may ultimately tell us far more about Nextdoor's future than whether NXDR closed yesterday at $2.27 or $2.23.
Ninety days down.
And somehow, I still haven't run out of doors to open.
Follow my continuing Nextdoor case study at NielFlamm.com/blog.
Day 76: Maybe I’ve Been Asking the Wrong Question
For 76 days, I've been asking some version of the same question:
Where is the detailed data?
Today, I'm changing the question.
Why advertise something as available if you're not prepared to provide it?
That's a much more interesting question.
Nextdoor published Insights articles that don't simply say, “Here's our research. Hope you enjoyed it.”
They specifically invite readers who want more to reach out.
The language is pretty clear: if you want “detailed data, additional audience segments, and strategic recommendations,” contact the person Nextdoor identifies.
So I did.
And here we are.
Day 76.
Imagine This Anywhere Else
A restaurant puts this on the menu:
“Ask your server about today's desserts.”
You ask.
The server hands you the dinner menu again.
You explain:
“No, I already read this. I'm asking about the desserts you told me to ask about.”
They hand you the dinner menu again.
You clarify exactly what you're requesting.
You point to the sentence telling you to ask.
You eventually send them a picture of the sentence.
And then...
Nothing.
At some point, you're no longer wondering what's for dessert.
You're wondering why the restaurant put the sentence on the menu.
That's essentially where I am with Nextdoor.
This Isn't Really About a Report Anymore
The research is almost secondary now.
What fascinates me is the disconnect between invitation and execution.
If an organization publicly tells people:
Contact us for X
there should probably be a process for what happens when someone actually...
contacts you for X.
Who qualifies?
What gets sent?
Is there a sales requirement?
Is it only available to advertisers?
Is there a minimum advertising spend?
Is it proprietary and unavailable to the general public?
Is there an NDA?
Is it simply not something Nextdoor wants to provide to me?
Any of those answers would at least be an answer.
And if there are conditions attached to receiving the information, why not disclose those conditions when inviting people to request it?
Maybe There's a Bigger Marketing Lesson Here
Calls to action are promises.
Download the guide.
Request a demo.
Contact us for more information.
Reach out for detailed data.
Every one of those statements creates an expectation.
Marketing gets someone through the door.
Operations determines what happens after they walk through it.
And when those two things don't connect, the customer discovers the gap.
This has become much more interesting than my original request.
I didn't have to uncover some hidden Nextdoor process.
I followed Nextdoor's own call to action.
So Day 76 Has a New Question
I'm not asking Nextdoor where the detailed data is today.
I've asked that plenty.
Instead:
Nextdoor, what is supposed to happen when someone does exactly what your marketing tells them to do?
Because I did.
And 76 days later, I'm still trying to figure it out.
Maybe the most important data I've collected during this experiment isn't contained in the reports at all.
Maybe it's the 76 days of customer experience generated while trying to obtain them.
That's becoming quite a dataset in its own right.
Day 76.
The research request continues.
But apparently, so does the research on Nextdoor.
My LinkedIn posts are the condensed version. The full continuing Nextdoor case study is at NielFlamm.com/blog.
And subscribe at NielFlamm.com to follow along.
Day 62: What Do Nextdoor’s Partners Think?
It's Day 62.
I'm not surprised.
And somehow, I'm still surprised.
Sixty-two days since I requested a study from Jacob Chavis without receiving the study—or a response.
62 days. Unbelievable.
Yesterday I wrote about Nextdoor reposting content from Groundworks Commercial. Since Jacob seems to have vanished from the Insights landscape—perhaps abducted by aliens 👽—I've started watching what Nextdoor is publishing.
Something is interesting about reposts.
When Nextdoor publishes its own LinkedIn content, comments are typically disabled.
When Nextdoor reposts someone else's content, the original post's comments may remain available.
And, well...
I do what I do.
I commented on the Groundworks Commercial post about my experience with Nextdoor.
Then last night, I noticed Josh Jones from Groundworks Commercial viewed my LinkedIn profile.
Hello, Josh. 👋
I'm genuinely curious:
What do you think about all of this?
Not just Josh, either.
That has me thinking about Nextdoor's broader network of partners.
Nextdoor works with businesses, advertisers, local organizations, news outlets, government agencies, and other companies.
Those organizations lend something besides money or content.
They lend their names.
So what are decision-makers at these organizations seeing?
Do they look only at Nextdoor's WAU, advertising opportunities and neighborhood reach?
Do they examine the moderation controversies?
Do they look at how critical feedback is handled?
Do they notice comments are disabled on corporate posts?
Do they examine how small businesses experience the platform?
Do they care how shareholders are treated?
And does corporate culture factor into deciding whether another organization wants its brand associated with Nextdoor?
I'm not suggesting Groundworks Commercial—or any Nextdoor partner—agrees with my views.
I have no idea what Josh thinks.
That's why I'm asking.
But partnerships work both ways.
When two brands associate publicly, each company's reputation becomes part of the other's equation.
I've spent 62 days asking questions on Nextdoor.
Maybe there's another group worth asking:
What do Nextdoor's partners think?
Local news organizations.
Small businesses.
Advertisers.
Corporate partners.
Public agencies.
What are their experiences behind the scenes?
After 62 days, I'm increasingly interested not only in what Nextdoor says about itself...
but what organizations doing business with Nextdoor say about Nextdoor.
Josh, since you stopped by my profile, I'd welcome your perspective.
And if anyone from another Nextdoor partner is reading this, yours too.
Day 62. The conversation keeps getting bigger, even if Nextdoor isn't participating.
Join the discussion at NielFlamm.com/blog.
Leave some feedback—I'd love to hear your perspective.