I'm in. I'm definitely in favour of funding >1 startup though. It may be
difficult to get 50 people to agree to pledge money against the same single
startup.
A.
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Cam MacRae wrote:
>
> Agree: better to create a pledge fund (for want of a better term) and
> invest
I'm interested in this too, if it gets off the ground count me in.
KJL
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Silicon Beach
Australia mailing list.
No lurkers! It is expected that you introduce yourself:
http://groups.g
Actually in purely equite terms the instrument that forces Startups to focus
only on the value (and building it) is common stock
that aside, i think the value add from this is the joint expertise from all
the members, but you are right... it would be great to have a more focussed
panel who ca
Theres significant advantage for both in this regard... for one it
effectively gives some possible startups whos ideas arent quite worth
standalone business but that may be perfect for integrating into
something or someone elses work.
and two it gives those companies a valuable method for ga
Whoops, sorry I just remembered Phil Sim already mentioned exactly
what I had said in my last mail.
Memory like a goldfish I tell ya!
I think the real added value of a group investing like this are the
additional skills that could be drawn upon from such a diverse crowd.
Not to mention tha
I don't know if this is something that everyone would be interested
in... perhaps in trade for stock/equity other parties for example
Pollenizer, hosting companies or others would be interested in
_partnering_ with the winning teams?
I just reckon there should be more value-add for the star
Agree: better to create a pledge fund (for want of a better term) and
fund on the individual basis of need. Also reduces investor exposure
to a given startup.
c.
On Feb 12, 12:56 pm, Phil Sim wrote:
> Yeh, it might be worthwhile for us to not limit it. We'll just say
> we've got this much money
Agree: better to create a pledge fund (for want of a better term) and
invest on the basis of individual requirements than an arbitrary
figure like $25k. This also limits exposure of any one investor to a
given startup.
c.
On Feb 12, 12:56 pm, Phil Sim wrote:
> Yeh, it might be worthwhile for us
I'll try and write something a little more formal tonight..
Riges what were the points made by Jordan re: ASIC?
Phil Sim
Chief Executive Officer,
MediaConnect Australia Pty Ltd
www.mediaconnect.com.au
phi...@mediaconnect.com.au
Ph: +61 2 9894 6277
Fax: +61 2 8246 6383
Mobile: 0413889940
On Th
Got it, thanks Rai.
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Rai wrote:
> Heya Julian.
>
> The Confluence page is open to the public - ie viewable by anyone.
> Do you mean that you need something written in a more 'formal' manner?
>
> Rai
>
> 2009/2/12 Julian Tol
>
>> Investor #8 here
>>
>> Is there so
Heya Julian.
The Confluence page is open to the public - ie viewable by anyone.
Do you mean that you need something written in a more 'formal' manner?
Rai
2009/2/12 Julian Tol
> Investor #8 here
>
> Is there someone who can take the proposal and place it on a part of the
> site viewable by non
Just had a chat to Jordan Green of http://www.aaai.net.au/ about this and
he's going to take a look at it. He raised some interesting points about
ASIC's view of this kind of structure but in any event these guys are now
aware of it.
Cheers,
Riges
On 12/02/09 2:31 PM, "casey" wrote:
>
> Ma
Consider my interest registered, too :)
-glen.
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 1:49 PM, Nick Gonios wrote:
> I'm in!
>
> Nick Gonios
> COO
> 3eep
>
> On 12/02/2009, at 2:46 PM, Tyrone Castillo
> wrote:
>
> That's 12, I'll be number 13 :)
>
> So count me in for $500.
>
> Tyrone
>
> On 12/02/2009, at 2:4
I'm in!
Nick Gonios
COO
3eep
On 12/02/2009, at 2:46 PM, Tyrone Castillo
wrote:
> That's 12, I'll be number 13 :)
>
> So count me in for $500.
>
> Tyrone
>
> On 12/02/2009, at 2:44 PM, Sriram Panyam wrote:
>
>> Howdy Folks,
>>
>> I am in too. Great idea.
>>
>> cheers
>> Sri
>>
>> On Thu,
Investor #8 here
Is there someone who can take the proposal and place it on a part of the
site viewable by non-SB members and non-users of Confluence?
Account and login will of course be required for enrollment / expression of
interest, but I see no reason why the program itself cant be widely
di
That's 12, I'll be number 13 :)
So count me in for $500.
Tyrone
On 12/02/2009, at 2:44 PM, Sriram Panyam wrote:
> Howdy Folks,
>
> I am in too. Great idea.
>
> cheers
> Sri
>
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Phil Sim wrote:
>
> I think that makes ten. $5k raised in about an hour!
>
> I
Howdy Folks,
I am in too. Great idea.
cheers
Sri
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 2:22 PM, Phil Sim wrote:
>
> I think that makes ten. $5k raised in about an hour!
>
> I would encourage anyone on the group who have contacts within the
> angel/vc/investor community to pass this message on and encou
Make that $5500. I'm in
On Feb 12, 2:22 pm, Phil Sim wrote:
> I think that makes ten. $5k raised in about an hour!
>
> I would encourage anyone on the group who have contacts within the
> angel/vc/investor community to pass this message on and encourage
> involvement. Part of the attraction of t
I think that makes ten. $5k raised in about an hour!
I would encourage anyone on the group who have contacts within the
angel/vc/investor community to pass this message on and encourage
involvement. Part of the attraction of this idea is that there are
people within the 50 who might be potential
> | grep "I'm in" :-p
Great idea!
mspecht wrote:
I am just catching up on this thread & really like the idea, of course
the devil is in the detail. Having said that I'm in.
On Feb 12, 1:41 pm, Rai wrote:
I've started a page in SB Confluence:http://confluence.siliconbeachaustra
Happy to help where I can. I'm in too.
Riges
On 12/02/09 1:57 PM, "mspecht" wrote:
>
> I am just catching up on this thread & really like the idea, of course
> the devil is in the detail. Having said that I'm in.
>
> On Feb 12, 1:41 pm, Rai wrote:
>> I've started a page in SB
>> Confluence
I am just catching up on this thread & really like the idea, of course
the devil is in the detail. Having said that I'm in.
On Feb 12, 1:41 pm, Rai wrote:
> I've started a page in SB
> Confluence:http://confluence.siliconbeachaustralia.org/display/general/Silicon+B...
>
> I think it might be be
I've started a page in SB Confluence:
http://confluence.siliconbeachaustralia.org/display/general/Silicon+Beach+Startup+Syndicate
I think it might be best for registrations of 'I'm in' to go in there.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are
I like it - count me in also.
Michael
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 1:04 PM, David Jones wrote:
> I'm in.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Phil Sim wrote:
>
>>
>> Yeh, it might be worthwhile for us to not limit it. We'll just say
>> we've got this much money to spend and will investing in u
I'm in.
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Phil Sim wrote:
>
> Yeh, it might be worthwhile for us to not limit it. We'll just say
> we've got this much money to spend and will investing in up to 3
> startups. Startups could ask for how much they want and want equity
> they were willing to give u
Yeh, it might be worthwhile for us to not limit it. We'll just say
we've got this much money to spend and will investing in up to 3
startups. Startups could ask for how much they want and want equity
they were willing to give up for that as part of the application
process.
On capping, I think its
$25K is sizeable chunk... you could probably fund 2 - 3 start ups with
that money (of course depending on the idea). Wouldn't it be risky to
be putting all our eggs in the one basket?
Quoting from ycombinator [1]:
"We usually invest $5000 + $5000n, where n is the number of
participating fou
I'm in.
47 to go Elias :)
So if we keep the number of investors under 50, does that mean that we can
do a round of another 50 for a second start-up once this first round is
'settled'?
Rai
2009/2/12 Elias Bizannes
> Legal and finance can be taken care of by my old man and myself
> respectively.
On Thu, Feb 12, 2009 at 12:15 PM, Elias Bizannes
wrote:
> Legal and finance can be taken care of by my old man and myself
> respectively.
> I'll put $500 to be an investor and help you find another 48.
> Three questions:
> 1) What proportion of the equity do the investors put in and how much is
>
Legal and finance can be taken care of by my old man and myself
respectively.
I'll put $500 to be an investor and help you find another 48.
Three questions:
1) What proportion of the equity do the investors put in and how much is
retained by the founders?
2) What will be the selection process?
3)
NEW PROPOSAL:
Silicon Beach Startup Syndicate
50 shares @ $500 = $25,000
Invested in 1 startup
We invite any startup to apply
We have a meetup to let a shortlist present
We select a startup
We set up a mail group/blog/facebook group whatever to keep everyone
in touch with progress and to provid
threatmetrix has whiteboards, bandwidth, space for 20 - we are in chatswood
(15mins on train from CBD and 10mins from station) so not too central but in
the absence of other offers its a potential venue. I'd need the agenda to be
focussed and interesting for me to turn up and unlock the doors.
On
Couldn't agree more. We should not be trying to recreate Silicon
Valley in Australia- we should be trying to make something better.
We're supposed to be innovators! Silicon Valley has been done. If you
really want that culture, you can go there. Personally, the idea of
building to flip makes me wa
Hi Deniss,
I like your meetup idea but for different reasons - let me explain why.
First of all, it all boils down to this:
- entrepreneurs complain there is not enough capital
- financiers complain there are not enough quality entrepreneurs
- Owners complain there is not enough talent
- Employee
I second this... Online connection for something like this would be
very important... In addition, it would be best if it were at a time/
date when it was possible for people working 9-5 in Perth to not miss
the entire thing due to being at work/behind firewalls.
On 11/02/2009, at 8:05 PM,
As long as you stream the session for those of us not in Sydney,
otherwise keep those emails coming.
Pieter
On 11/02/2009, at 21:55, Deniss wrote:
>
> So we've got 80 something messages and already last Friday most of the
> people couldn't keep up with the discussion.
> Would it be possibl
So we've got 80 something messages and already last Friday most of the
people couldn't keep up with the discussion.
Would it be possible for everybody who had strong opinion about the
topic to meet somewhere (maybe with the white board) and have a
discussion about that?
If somebody could lead the
I think the issue with unit trusts which I was not aware of when I
mentioned them was there is a limit of 50 unitholders per trust?
Also, there was the issue of ASIC rules around solicitation of
investment that someone else raised? These would seem to be the only
structural blockers to the setup
Phil,
I like the racehorse analogy.
Given that model, easiest structure is probably a unit trust per round, with
a separate body (the actual incumbator group) acting as the administrator...
With the right setup that's reasonably scalable.
I think capping the shares is a good idea - you might inc
"nobody REALLY needs money in Australia to do a startup because you
can go on the dole and just code until you've got something to show
for it"
Thats a very sweeping statement... One I find kinda offensive...
To put it into perspective...
Assuming I bail on my apartment, move back home where
Warren, yep I think just treating each round as a separate entity is
absolutely the way to go! Simplicity rules.
So I'm trying to keep the momentum on this going and evolve something
as dead simple as possible, without it falling into a whole or
differing opinions.
1. 500 shares at $500. People
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 4:46 PM, silky wrote:
>
> I personally don't see the point of creating yet another VC firm,
> which is what you guys are talking about with the investment-based
> approach ...
I'm feeling the same, I think this discussion is drifting towards a
miniature version of that mod
Silky, it's not a VC firm because VC firms don't invest seed money.
The problem with running it how you're proposing with lots of
networking events and so forth and incentivising people to become
members based on benefits is that it becomes a business in itself -
and those type of things don't run
-australia@googlegroups.com
[mailto:silicon-beach-austra...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jonathan Williams
Sent: Friday, 6 February 2009 4:45 PM
To: silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com
Subject: [SiliconBeach] Re: question about startup funding in Australia
Really an investor is buying to this round
I personally don't see the point of creating yet another VC firm,
which is what you guys are talking about with the investment-based
approach ...
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Silicon Beach
Australia mailing list
t; >> "book value"...
> >>
> >> These problems have solutions, and I've got a few ideas, but I was
> >> wondering if you had some comments to make about how this sort of thing
> >> would go over time since you've certainly already put a lot
t;>
>> -----Original Message-
>> From: silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com
>> [mailto:silicon-beach-austra...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Phil Sim
>> Sent: Friday, 6 February 2009 3:21 PM
>> To: silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com
>> Subject: [S
ems have solutions, and I've got a few ideas, but I was
>> wondering if you had some comments to make about how this sort of thing
>> would go over time since you've certainly already put a lot of thought into
>> it...
>>
>> Geoff
>>
>> -----Original Messa
agreement more conducive to the network stuff?
>
>
>
> *From:* silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com [mailto:
> silicon-beach-austra...@googlegroups.com] *On Behalf Of *Jonathan Williams
> *Sent:* Friday, 6 February 2009 3:42 PM
>
> *To:* silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.
om
[mailto:silicon-beach-austra...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jonathan Williams
Sent: Friday, 6 February 2009 3:42 PM
To: silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com
Subject: [SiliconBeach] Re: question about startup funding in Australia
Makes it complex - by investing are you investing in any re
egroups.com [mailto:
> silicon-beach-austra...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Phil Sim
> Sent: Friday, 6 February 2009 3:21 PM
> To: silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com
> Subject: [SiliconBeach] Re: question about startup funding in Australia
>
>
> I think anyone would agree tha
Behalf Of Phil Sim
Sent: Friday, 6 February 2009 3:21 PM
To: silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com
Subject: [SiliconBeach] Re: question about startup funding in Australia
I think anyone would agree that the benefit of being a part of a
scheme like this, would be the advice and mentoring you wo
I'm behind this idea. It's really exciting tbh.
You can have my money and (although I'm a relative n00b with these
things) am happy to pitch in wherever needed.
Rai
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Silicon Beach
Au
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 3:21 PM, Phil Sim wrote:
>
> I think anyone would agree that the benefit of being a part of a
> scheme like this, would be the advice and mentoring you would get from
> some of the 500 'shareholders'' who all have an interest in helping
> you to succeed. Suddenly, you've go
I think anyone would agree that the benefit of being a part of a
scheme like this, would be the advice and mentoring you would get from
some of the 500 'shareholders'' who all have an interest in helping
you to succeed. Suddenly, you've got a crowd of people who you can go
for advice, guidance, et
licon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com [mailto:
> silicon-beach-austra...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Deniss
> > Sent: Friday, 6 February 2009 11:24 AM
> > To: Silicon Beach Australia
> > Subject: [SiliconBeach] Re: question about startup funding in Australia
> >
> >
ruary 2009 11:24 AM
> To: Silicon Beach Australia
> Subject: [SiliconBeach] Re: question about startup funding in Australia
>
> what drinks are you talking about?
> I know that everybody know what and where, but I'm unfortunately not
> sure.
>
> D.
>
> On Feb 5, 11
nal Message-
From: silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com
[mailto:silicon-beach-austra...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Deniss
Sent: Friday, 6 February 2009 11:24 AM
To: Silicon Beach Australia
Subject: [SiliconBeach] Re: question about startup funding in Australia
what drinks are you talkin
what drinks are you talking about?
I know that everybody know what and where, but I'm unfortunately not
sure.
D.
On Feb 5, 11:12 pm, Jason Langenauer wrote:
> I agree that it should be for-profit too - Not only for the reasons
> Mick lists below, but because I will absolutely guarantee any not-
Indeed Bart. Your post still makes for a very good reality check as I see
much the same here in Adelaide.
Yep, just do it.
Start-ups will still always have to do the old juggling strategy of any
..yes..business. Needs innovation, businesses development, marketing,
chasing the occasional Governme
On 5 Feb 2009, at 23:12, Jason Langenauer wrote:
>
> I agree that it should be for-profit too - Not only for the reasons
> Mick lists below, but because I will absolutely guarantee any not-for-
> profit association will degenerate into chaos and infighting should
> they suddenly find they have $
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 10:23 AM, Bart Jellema wrote:
>
> Have been following this thread for a while. Mick and David, some
> excellent input! Having been around the community for a while now I
> keep hearing this argument over an over that what Australia need is
> more access to funding. This is
Have been following this thread for a while. Mick and David, some
excellent input! Having been around the community for a while now I
keep hearing this argument over an over that what Australia need is
more access to funding. This is bugging me for a few reasons:
- I feel that many use this as an
Mike,
While EO is a fine legitimate operation; I was just highlighting it's
existence and the fact that it's *different* to what I was proposing.
I'm not suggesting an "investment club", as I hope can be seen. EO
and any other organisations and the one I am proposing can live in
harmony togeth
HI Guys
I am an EO Allumni after being a member for 5 years, its definitely not free
but it is some of the best money you will spend, I think the current rates
are ~$3k pa.
Its somewhat like finding the mothership full of other entrepreneurs.
In the fee you get monthly high quality educational e
I was at a dinner last night (prior to a somewhat disappointing Top Gear Live)
and spoke to a few traditional business types. I was surprised at the level of
interest they had with startups. One guy in particular stated that he and some
of his colleagues, had been thinking about investing in tec
I've finally caught up with this thread and I am very excited with
this idea.
I was at a dinner last night (prior to a somewhat disappointing Top
Gear Live) and spoke to a few traditional business types. I was
surprised at the level of interest they had with startups. One guy in
particular
Some similar organisations:
MegaMobile - http://www.mega.org.au/
I think it's free, it offers a fully-mentored program to the members.
But it's a nice effort to help projects, basically for free.
EO - http://www.eonetwork.org/
I don't know much about it, but a few people I know are members, I
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 10:43 PM, Elias Bizannes
wrote:
> I like how you're thinking Silky, but it's more a practicality to get the
> funds in the first place. It's not the board that are the problem, but the
> members themselves.
> Think of it this way:
>
> - for profit: you have a membership, an
This is the kind of thing i would love to get in on the ground floor of.
the crowdsource/community aspect would solve what concerns me the
most, covering this very wide country effectively.
Ive spent most of my life in Perth, and it would be a little hard to
bear the notion that if this kind
Elias' post about structure is also important for possibly other
reasons. Need legal advice here.
ASIC rules on raising capital may kick in - you are basically allowed
to ask family and friends etc, but in Oz outside of that if you seek
more than 20 people who are not sophisticated (thats define
I agree that it should be for-profit too - Not only for the reasons
Mick lists below, but because I will absolutely guarantee any not-for-
profit association will degenerate into chaos and infighting should
they suddenly find they have $10m because they made an good early
stage investment in an Au
I agree with the thread in general.
David made some really good points about the YC / TS / SC models - they run
on the prestige, high quality mentoring and pre-build networks they offer.
The problem is that - if you forget about VCs - what are the startups
getting by giving you x%?
The real valu
Great discussion. My very late and loopy thoughts.
It should be for-profit. Micro-finance works because it is a loan not
a donation.
Seriously forget about VC's. If they knock on your door, great, but
otherwise, just do what every you can to build your business. I guy I
saw talk last night gave
I like how you're thinking Silky, but it's more a practicality to get the
funds in the first place. It's not the board that are the problem, but the
members themselves.
Think of it this way:
- for profit: you have a membership, and a board of directors making
executive decisions on their behalf. A
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:28 PM, David Jones wrote:
> I had come to the conclusion that a community driven y-combinator model was
> the best in the context of this country and investor ecosystem, so to see
> the conversation evolve to this is pretty exciting for me. So for fun I will
> call this S
I had come to the conclusion that a community driven y-combinator model was
the best in the context of this country and investor ecosystem, so to see
the conversation evolve to this is pretty exciting for me. So for fun I will
call this ScuBinator (a very poor pun on silicon beach and incubation).
Great email David, Appreciate your thoughts
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 9:28 PM, David Jones wrote:
> I had come to the conclusion that a community driven y-combinator model was
> the best in the context of this country and investor ecosystem, so to see
> the conversation evolve to this is pretty exc
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 7:31 PM, Elias Bizannes wrote:
> Yes policy is crucial. However, I can see something like that getting
> extremely complicated. Community-driven decision making models are not easy
> to design: I spent 50+ hours creating the DataPortability Project's model
> with five super
Crowd-sourcing angel investment - I like this idea, it seems like a
logical extension of microcredit sites like kiva.org that focus on
loans in the developing world.
I presume you would need to set it up like a proper VC fund in terms
of operation? Does that sort of structure scale down to a fund
Yes policy is crucial. However, I can see something like that getting
extremely complicated. Community-driven decision making models are not easy
to design: I spent 50+ hours creating the DataPortability Project's model
with five super-intelligent & wise men - and I was ready to kill someone by
the
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 6:45 PM, Elias Bizannes wrote:
> > If you had a yearly fee of just 500, you'd only need about 50 members
> > to make it worth-while (give away 10k each 6 months). Adjust as the
> > organisation grows; or adjust the fee, or potentially scale the fee to
> > allow larger corps
>
> If you had a yearly fee of just 500, you'd only need about 50 members
> to make it worth-while (give away 10k each 6 months). Adjust as the
> organisation grows; or adjust the fee, or potentially scale the fee to
> allow larger corps to give more money.
>
I like it. The devil is always in the
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 3:33 PM, Phil Sim wrote:
[snip]
> Every person on this list should be making a pact to themselves that
> if they do hit a paydirt, they will give back to the community by
> putting some time and money into at least one local startup.
Pretty good idea.
I think a not-bad
No arguments, but where we need to focus is opening up the angel
community. We need people who have been there, done that to have the
opportunity to sift through the ideas and put a bit of mentoring and
money behind them.
The Australian VC industry should be doing its part to encourage this
as we
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 1:27 PM, Nathan de Vries wrote:
>
> On 05/02/2009, at 11:51 AM, silky wrote:
> > > I guess you're saying that the strategy sucks for people like
> > > yourself
> > > who are after investment
> >
> > I'm not after investment.
>
> Whether or not you're looking to take on vent
On 05/02/2009, at 11:51 AM, silky wrote:
>> I guess you're saying that the strategy sucks for people like
>> yourself
>> who are after investment
>
> I'm not after investment.
Whether or not you're looking to take on venture capital is
irrelevant. What I meant is that you're more likely to be
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Nathan de Vries wrote:
>
> On 05/02/2009, at 11:23 AM, silky wrote:
> > Exactly. Personally, if I tried something 10 times and failed 9, I
> > wouldn't consider that a good method of operation. I would say "okay,
> > something is wrong here, what do I need to chan
On 05/02/2009, at 11:23 AM, silky wrote:
> Exactly. Personally, if I tried something 10 times and failed 9, I
> wouldn't consider that a good method of operation. I would say "okay,
> something is wrong here, what do I need to change ...".
I guess you're saying that the strategy sucks for people
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Nathan de Vries wrote:
[snip]
> Half? Not even close. If VCs had half their investments "succeed",
> then I guess your point on being less risk averse makes sense, but I
> don't think that's reality. I've been told the number is closer to 90%
> failure, 10% succ
On 05/02/2009, at 9:16 AM, silky wrote:
> I mean, no offence to them, but they aren't really investing in
> ventures. They're investing in proven businesses.
They're looking for signs of a valuable investment. You can show signs
of having a valuable investment very early in the game. You don'
On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Mike Nicholls wrote:
> Hi Silky, neither Mick nor myself are VCs, we have just worked with them and
> know what they are like.
Oh yes, I know, wasn't meaing to suggest you were.
> Frankly the amount of crazy half arsed ideas that get presented with wild or
> no
Hi Silky, neither Mick nor myself are VCs, we have just worked with them and
know what they are like.
Frankly the amount of crazy half arsed ideas that get presented with wild or
non existent ideas on a business model is staggering.
They look for a team who knows what to do, the credibility of th
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 11:37 PM, Mick Liubinskas wrote:
> Mike's feedback is right. Unless you're a serious management team with
> good traction (making a few thousand a month, or over 100,000 users
> per month) then you can't talk to professional investors or VC's.
Not to pick on you, but I fel
Mike's feedback is right. Unless you're a serious management team with
good traction (making a few thousand a month, or over 100,000 users
per month) then you can't talk to professional investors or VC's.
These investors only invest to expand an already good business. Having
an idea or a prototype
Second the idea.
On Feb 3, 5:29 pm, Phil Sim wrote:
> Okay, here's a proposal...
>
> What we need is something akin to the TechCrunch50 event and Demopit.
> I did the Demopit last year and it was an awesome experience and I
> think its a fantastic model to borrow from.
>
> We have somewhere betw
The feeder type program raises an interesting point.
Given the difficulty for some people to make trips across the country
for events based in the east or the west specifically. A feeder
mechanism is probably going to be essential to get the absolute best
ideas together.
I will blanket outri
This may be a naive suggestion.
but an alternative route could be to approach Rachel Slattery who's in
the business of running events like FundingConnect that put investors
on a panel in front of entrepreneurs.
She's no doubt considered or even run a Pitchfest-type thing in the
past, where
Oh I've been doing since i started getting the ideas.
Ive got proof of concept code snippets coming out of my ears now,
having to implement a system just to keep track of them now. Client
side code to prove so many little things, server side code to do a
dozen more. Issue seems to be having
Samuel -
I sat down with some of the Pollenizer boys to understand their business
model and something I didn't realise that they did was help connect
entrepreneurs with a team. Meaning they'll introduce you to the right
investors, developers, and whatever else to push you up and spit out a
genuine
1 - 100 of 110 matches
Mail list logo
