That's because profit isn't part of their bet. This is a get acquired bet, plain and simple. Surely they will spin a yarn about charging for premium features, etc -- but that's just because they have to.
Who would buy such a thing? Seems like an interested party might not like the idea that the TOS is so locked down (I'm presuming that the privacy is spelled out in a TOS, I haven't looked). Is a developed social graph really worth that much, especially if (as is mentioned in another thread) the groups are temporary, one-time use? I guess there's always the possibility of buying it and dispensing with the TOS and replacing it with a more open version.
Again, I'm just very curious. Having a hard time wrapping my head around this.
To paraphrase a fake Mark Zuckerberg, "I got people to share their personal information with me because I assured them I believed in privacy. When I found out how much advertisers were willing to pay for that information, I stopped believing in privacy."
EDIT: Link to my question in the previous thread about the fridge: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1628877
monetization is definitely in the works with a few things cooking and not necessarily from freemium offerings only.
while the right acquisition is fine and dandy we are trying to build something that has legs...
Can we expect any kind of data report from you? A growth chart, usage data, anything that might defend the viability of the concept to those who question whether we need another social network?
after the dust settles and we get the fridge humming we should be able to have some meaningful data...
not sure the fridge is "another" social network but rather clusters of networks where people follow interests rather than other people... eh, semantics i guess but feeds into how we are growing the product.