iPad and Apps Economy

January 28th, 2010 by: Jouko Ahvenainen

We all now know officially that Apple launched iPad. It is an interesting new concept between mobile phones and laptops. And definitely it will have and need a lot of applications to be successful. We saw already some games, books, and newspapers that are available.

iPadThe next step is to get developers to make much more apps. Paul Grim, a General Partner at venture capital firm SunBridge Partners, commented the apps business from the traditional VC point of view in Venturebeat’s article, An investor’s take on the iPad — how to parse the hype. In this article Paul Grim says:

Although I do believe there will be many successful apps on the iPad, I don’t believe they are generally venture-backed material. As with most of the iPhone apps, this will be a hits-driven business with little capital intensity; most of the successes will likely be angel or self-funded.”

This is the same point Grow VC has emphasized many times (like yesterday). We have actually divided the mobile startups now into two main categories (there are of course much more segments inside these categories):

  1. Hardware and more demanding technical platform startups
  2. Application startups

The first category includes companies that have been funded by traditional VC’s. But many of those firms also need seed funding before a VC round. The second category is not really for the traditional VC’s. But it doesn’t mean that they are not good business opportunities. But the capital structure and risk profile is different from VC’s targets. They can start with small money, and it is not technology risk, but much more market risk, i.e. can they really get loyal users.

This is one reason, why new models for seed and startup funding are needed. And we believe Grow VC’s concepts, which we have now in beta and especially new ones we launch in this year, will offer a new way to fund these companies.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Risk Assessment of Embedded Mobility Propositions

January 27th, 2010 by: Valto Loikkanen

Today Jouko is giving a speach at the Informa Telecoms & Media’s Embedded  Connectivity conference in London. The conference is about bringing the entire ecosystem together to discuss the  prospects for incorporating connectivity into products and devices of the  future.

The conference will give operators and vendors  the chance to really understand how to deliver the benefits of connectivity to the wider technology industries as well as opening up limitless  possibilities for new consumer markets.

Below is Jouko’s presentation, where the topics include:

  • VC Market
  • Embedded connectivity solutions
  • HW and platform business
  • Web and mobile businesses
  • Go-to-market
  • Challenges of funding market
  • Mobile services funding
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Future of Venture Capital

January 23rd, 2010 by: Valto Loikkanen
Silhouettes representing healthy, overweight, ...

Image via Wikipedia

Today I was reading one of my favorite VC blogs AVC by Fred Wilson about “The Venture Diet is Working“, where he says:

2010 will be an interesting year. If VC investments go back up to $25bn to $30bn per year, then the diet didn’t stick and we are back to an overfunded industry that will produce subpar returns on average.

If, on the other hand, the new normal is $15bn to $20bn per year, then the diet worked and we’ve scaled back the business to healthy levels.

This comment relates to he’s earlier post about the “Venture Capital Math Problem“, where he explains about the problem that – too much money will make the whole VC industry to under perform.

As this is one of the reasons we have started Grow VC, I wanted to point out that things are not the same everywhere. So here’s my take on the topic:

I think this is similar problem than it is with food. In some western countries there is too much food and problems that are associated with that, like obesity. Yet in many parts of the world, people are starving.

So if some markets in the world have too much money in VC, it does not mean there is too much money overall, it’s just wrongly distributed. I do understand that, there are also problems with having too much money per sector, so that nobody is getting good results, but that too is wrong distribution.

Early VC money should always be going towards new innovation and not to be “me too in the popular segment” – there are plenty of problems in the world for entrepreneurs to solve & VC’s to be successful.

If we think that “Four Years After Founding, Kiva Hits $100 Million In Microloans“, I feel that it’s a strong indication that entrepreneurship in all shape and sizes can be instrumental on reshaping our world for the better.

There is a big gap between what Kiva.org is doing and with these problems of having too much money in venture capital in some regions. For us this shows that there needs to be much better distribution, more transparency and more activity in this segment overall – and this is exactly where we are focusing our efforts.

Here’s my dialog with Fred, on the “Venture Capital Math problem” 8 months ago:

Me:

I think this just shows that money does not solve problems. The problem here is not too much money, but how it’s now distributed.

VC industry is starting to look like the newspaper industry ;) – better to wake up, the blogs are coming…

Fred:

What are the blogs of the VC business?Things like Y Combinator are great but they are feeding us even more opportunities so I see them as additive, Although I also see blogs as additive for the newspaper business if they’d just see themselves as curators and aggregators instead of content creators

Me:

I guess the closest thing to “blogs of VC industry” today are angel investors. But that’s for today. Also Y-combinator and the likes are great too and could be considered as “blogs of VC industry”. However their “next step” need to change away from just VC’s.

The fundamental change will become, when there are “platforms” for anyone to start a “blog for VC industry” and that’s what we are doing in www.growvc.com.

Overall, we feel that in long term the money will be spread to more potential start-ups and more of them will not go via IPO but just buy back of shares, mergers etc. with lower ROI. But that’s OK if the time for ROI is shorter and cost of management is lower.

So – be more direct, spread wider, lower the management cost, speed up the ROI cycle and you can accept lower ROI.

If you think about the structure of today, from where the VC money really comes from, you start to see the “big picture”. – basically it means that individuals like you and me pay for pensions funds etc. and these funds then invest to VC funds. VC’s then make investment decisions and “manage” the investments, all the way to take it public (hopefully). Basically just to sell it back to us…

When more people will start to understand this cycle because of more info and transparency online (if they are interested), people will not accept this structure. Because in the long run what matter is, if the companies in question sell what matters. And that is not a question of size.

Fred:

Got it
I hope this works
It would scale much better

Related to this topic, below is a very interesting speech given by Fred Wilson at talks@google. You need to spare an hour to look the whole video, but I feel it’s well worth it. Just have some popcorn & coke and relax.

What makes it interesting to me, is that those industries that are going to be disrupted by internet in the future, currently have same issues what Venture Capital does, yet for some reason those would not apply to VC industry.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Feature: Market trends

January 22nd, 2010 by: Valto Loikkanen

While we are working hard to get our BIG core feature out really soon, I wanted to highlight one nice little feature in our service that we added in our previous updateThe Market Trends.

When the startup profile is listed in our service with related industries that the startup is working on, we can pull out real time information about what’s being said in twitter about those topics. – So those that are interested to learn more about what going on in each startups industry, will always have easy access to trending information.

Market Trends

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
  • Share/Save/Bookmark

When you have idea and team, what next? Money

January 14th, 2010 by: Jouko Ahvenainen

We have earlier written, how to collect your team for a startup. When you have the team, and of course the idea, you must start to think the next steps. Normally you need money in this point. Basically you have the following options:

1) you and your team can work for free and have some money to pay mandatory things,

2) you have money and you are ready to use it,

3) you get money from people you know,

4) you get loans from banks,

5) you start to look for investors (persons, venture capital firms, or other investment companies).

There are other options too, but I think these are the main options.

InvestorSometimes it makes sense to start with your own money, and try to keep salaries as low as possible. This is especially true for many web and mobile companies, because it is not easy to get money for an idea. First you must prove that you really can execute and get also some users for it. But sooner or later you need money. Normally it is not possible to get a bank loan for a software or web company, when your assets are only the idea and competence.

It is often the easiest option to try to find friends and family members to invest in your company. But you must really consider before you do it. Can they help your business otherwise, do they give credibility to your business, and what happens if you lose the money? I would recommend to find investors that really like your business idea, are ready to support it, and gives credibility to your company. But it doesn’t mean that they must be venture capitalist. They can be business angels, experts of your business area, connected persons in your key markets, or ordinary people who see an opportunity or something important in your venture. You can also think strategic investors, i.e. companies that operate in the same business area and could be also your partners or an exit route in the future.

There is no right or wrong investors. But what I really want to emphasize, you must consider, what kind of investors you want, and what does it mean to your company and for yourself too.

Too many entrepreneurs just take money if they get something from someone. It is an easy and nice way to start a company and pay salaries. But seriously, if you get wrong investors, it can also kill your company, or one day you notice that you are outside the company, or your idea actually was never implemented. Of course, companies must change a strategy, if the old one doesn’t work, so you as entrepreneur must be flexible with your ideas. At the same time you must remember, when you select investors, it can be the most important decision you make in your company. That’s why you should really try to find investors you want to get and with whom you can make a success story!

Next time I write more about investment instruments.

You still have three weeks to register into Grow VC’s free beta, do it now!

If you have some good “war stories” about this topic, you can share those with other readers in the comments below. I would love to hear about your experiences.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

How to approach “protecting the idea” -problem?

January 4th, 2010 by: Valto Loikkanen

Image by stevendepoloDuring the past 18 moths or so, while developing Grow VC team, company, service and pitching with various people about our service and business model, there have been a certain feedback given about the obstacles that we can expect to face for our service.

One of them that we have gotten more than few times is the issues of “How to protect the idea?” in a very transparent service like Grow VC. Mainly we have got this feedback from those people that have not build their own startup before and/or have not done any investing. Few days back there was a related question about this topic in linkedin that I tweeted about.

Also few days back there was a feedback in our service, asking:

Could you please advise who would evaluate my startup idea? And how my idea is protected? Normally, if I go to a VC, do they sign an NDA or something? I think entrepreneurs are reluctant to release info to the public without protection (in this case, a closed group of people… but still public). Thanks again for your advices. Happy New Year!

and my answer to this was:

In first place it’s evaluated by us (grow VC) and if it’s approved then people with active funder, expert or entrepreneur (that have active/approved startup) will see the information you choose to provide.

In today’s world, VC and more professional Angel Investors don’t sign NDA’s and the reason is simple, they see same ideas many times over and don’t really want to be in trouble by some NDA – much easier just not to sign NDA.

I also pointed to that LinkedIn question for more reading about the subject, where some of the answers point out the following things to think about:

  • If the idea is truly disruptive, you can be pretty sure that large companies would not come anywhere near it
  • Fear is a great motivator to perform. Use this fear to your advantage in design, strategy and execution.
  • Market forces even destroy patentable ideas , their is least you can do if somebody copies your idea and starts producing it
  • Get out of this is to reach to market faster and tie up with VC’s/big organisations who can support you with some stake in your profits
  • If you are in the process of raising funds and presenting business plans for the same here is what I suggest take all that is propriety out of the biz plan and replace it with a teaser instead, when talks have moved to the nest level and trust is built in represent the biz plan with its key elements
  • Ensure you have a great team and that the goals, vision and responsibility of all is clear.

Bottom line is that usually “the idea alone” is not that interesting for anyone seriously thinking of acting on it. Some of the other things to consider is that there are plenty of proven and successful business models to copy. So if someone is into copying, they can just opt to copy these business models and take those to new markets. Those can have much less risk and can actually even be acquired by the company that came up with the original idea. Few links: Facebook copies, Graics list (video), and there is plenty more if you want to google them.

Also being first to market is not always the best position to be in. Google is probably one of the most know example of the company that was not first to market (not even close), yet managed to become the most dominant player in Internet, while starting as a new startup, going against the big companies.

If in deed your startup is all alone first in market, that can also be a bad thing, either there is NO market, or it can be way too costly to educate everyone to create and/or wait for the market. IE. wrong market timing.

So how to approach the “idea protecting”- problem?

When you come up wit the idea that you are seriously thinking of acting on, you should:

  1. make a simple plan and move forward with it
  2. note that most ideas evolve to something else as the plan is moved forward

If you are not going after the idea, you shouldn’t worry, someone will most likely come up with the same/similar idea. Best option may just be to blog about it and have some credit for it later on to build your profile, like many people that do this all the time.

Usually those people that come up with one good idea, come to have more good ideas in the future. So in fact you may hold yourself back from even bigger idea, if you cant act or give up on the previous one.

If in deed you choose to make a GO for the idea, you should first check the patent option.

Is the idea patentable (this is not a legal advise)?

In some countries you can find free or cheap government or city organizations that can help evaluate if the idea could be patentable. If it would, there can also be some grants or similar to cover some of the patenting costs. – Even if there’s not, it can be pretty affordable to apply for national patent.

In any case you should talk to patent attorney/expert to get their feedback (that is typically free). If they think it’s patentable, you can always try to negotiate for revenue share or some other deal. There is also a tool for this in our service.

If the idea included enough innovation to be patented, then you may choose to do so to patent the core parts of the idea (the secret sauce).

Note. There can be BIG difference on innovations that get patent in different countries and by who does the application and who makes decision.

If you have chosen to apply for patent even in only one country, typically you will get 12 months worldwide priority to continue applying in other countries. As long as you do your new/other markets applications on time you will be able to keep your priority and protect the possible patent you may be granted.

If or not the actual patent is granted you don’t need to wit for that, since you do have the priority protection time you can use, if you choose to continue the patent process. So after the first application is in, you are pretty safe from this priority point of view for several months.

If the patent would be granted then eventually you will end with the cost problem of applying to different country and protecting your patent. So after the initial priority time, it starts to become much more costly, unless the patent is denied.

Speed is your protection

When you choose to act on the idea, regardless if you choose to apply for the patent or not, speed is your best protection and asset as a startup. Before you start to talk about your idea to new contacts, you should focus on optimizing your actions on how you will move forward to build your team, momentum and user base.

Few thing are clear, you simply can not move forward or raise capital without sharing the idea, so you need to make sure you are moving as fast as possible with right steps and using right metrics. Even if you have priority to the idea with patent pending, you still need to keep your speed, before the cost of applying and protecting it will start to add up.

And to do this, as one of the answers in that linkedin question pointed out you should build the other material about the plan so that you explain enough about the overall business model and then put teaser information to any public or general information / presentation, that will still build a “good enough, but interesting” overall picture of the solution/business model, while leaving the “secret sauce” part to be shared selectively or by request only.

Other things to think about

You should consider that most likely there is someone already working with the same idea. The earlier you can find out who they are, in what stage they are and with what resources they are working with – the earlier you can choose to either compete or choose a another idea to work on – before you have spent money, time and resources of your own and others, just to learn later that you are already way behind with much less resources. Or both of you could actually see that it may be more beneficial to join forces and make joint and more stronger venture in the very early stage.

Current visibility settings in our service

In Grow VC service at the moment, we have one level of visibility for the information shared in startup, so all information in startup profile is visible to all people that have active funder or expert role and to entrepreneurs that have active startup profile in the service.

So, if there is any core “secret sauce” part to your startup, you can keep that core information to yourself and share it by request. But you still need to make the other part interesting enough or there will be nobody asking for more information and therefore you speed slows down.

In later updates we will add additional level for those “secret sauce parts”, that you can choose to open access to by request.

As for Grow VC – our service is not the first to market, so we are betting on the market timing and better service with some core innovation, where some are out, some will be launched by the end of this month and some later on. – Yet, we also already have some copy cats of our own already and this we consider to be a good sign :)

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
  • Share/Save/Bookmark

How to build your core team for early-stage startup?

January 2nd, 2010 by: Valto Loikkanen

Few days back there was this good question in linkedin Q&A’s:

How to recruit top talents to build a startup with you? How many people will you recruit when you are just starting up?

Below is the reply I posted (with few additional edits). This also cover parts one and two in “The process from idea to competitive startup” -post, I have written earlier. Please note, this process is most relevant for startups with aim and potential for high growth.

Building the succesful startup

How to build your core team

Depending on the type of startup you are building, will lead to questions like; how many people and what skills are needed?, what milestones are you looking to hit, when and how fast?

Those will determine how you should look about building the startup. If you are aiming big, you will need to first look for co-founder or co-founders. There is a great post and podcast about this subject “How to pick a co-founder” at venturehacks. You may also want to see this post “Unlock Your Team’s Potential to Create Evangelists” by The FundingGuru.

After you have your co-founder and your product/service is in right stage, you can opt for what Wallace was suggesting “Get a nice chunk of VC and simply hire them and pay them what they are worth.” (if that is realistic option), or you can continue building the startup with your equity (shares).

So after co-founder(s), you can start to look for outside experts / service providers, that can join your startup with “sweat equity” type of deal and/or for core team employees, where you can opt to give shares + minimum salary even for top talents. More about this subject, see this video by my co-founder Jouko, about “Startups and Advisers“.

When you have these two routes (VC + hired employees or sweat equity + minimum pay), you need to choose the route that is achievable and makes the most sense for what you are doing. You should be calculating what will give you most value in the long run, IE. shares that you end up having & their value and the value of your team (resources, skills, commitment).

No VC (at least not a good one) will invest unless you can prove enough traction for the idea and product/service. And not unless you have at least one committed co-founder.

Being able to attract a good co-founder to join, + other core people on shares (+ optional minimum pay), is one very strong signal of traction on the idea and you also get committed resources.

If you are unable to attract top talent people with your shares, don’t expect VC’s to pay for those shares either, it’s a much harder sell.

In the very early stages, you will want to have very entrepreneurial and passionate people to join your startup (regardless of the position), those that agree and can absorb some limited financial risk (uncertain or very limited pay), without abandoning the startup before the agreed time/milestone is reached.

When you opt for “normal employee” type of deal, you better have enough money to pay them for the duration agreed. Because those type of top talent, will have plenty of options to choose from. And typically their personal life can not or they don’t want to be flexible on the compensation (no flexibility on personal finance, big spenders, spouse don’t agree etc.) – therefore, this option really is available only after you have raised enough cash or your are generating enough cash-flow.

In the answers there was also another good and thoughtful one given by Joe Abraham, where he starts with this advise:

Figure out what it is going to take to get your venture to a point where you have proof of concept and market traction. That is truly the only point when your business is considered “viable” and “investable”.

and then continues

Based on this established point (call it milestone #1), figure out WHO needs to be on the team to get you to milestone 1. Don’t try to recruit “top talent” at the management level yet. Focus your energy on the people who will actually build/sell your product.

Jump to original question to read his full answer.

Now that you are ready to start taking your idea or startup forward and build your core team, you may want to take advantage of our platform, where we provide you with the right tools to build your startup from idea to VC funding level. Including “service investment” -tool, to create, promote and negotiate your core team & advisor deals.

Note, all accounts and roles for 2010 are FREE for registrations done before 31st of January.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Wishing you all Happy Holidays!

December 22nd, 2009 by: Valto Loikkanen

Happy Holidays!

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Silicon Valley Venture Capitalist joins to Grow VC Advisory Board

December 16th, 2009 by: Jouko Ahvenainen
It is my great pleasure to announce that Voytek Siewierski has joined to Grow VC Global Advisory board. Voytek is an Investment Partner at Mitsui & Co.Venture Partners, Inc., Silicon Valley Office. He is currently managing 12 portfolio companies for MCVP and has closed six deals during his 3 years tenure at MCVP. Before joining MCVP team Voytek was an Executive Director at NTT DoCoMo including 6 years in Japan and 3 years in the UK. After participating in the carrier’s IPO at Tokyo Stock Exchange he coordinated DoCoMo’s international technology partnerships including the partnership with Sun Microsystems that brought Java to mobile phones. Developed a number of successful value added mobile services with partners such as Walt Disney Corporation, Warner Brothers, CNN and others.
Voytek executed a number of international equity investments in cellular carriers in Europe and Asia and initiated a number of technology licensing projects between DoCoMo and mobile operators such as KPN Mobile in Holland, Telefonica in Spain, Boygues Telecom in France and KG Telecom in Taiwan. Between 2004 and 2006 he was in charge of all new business in Europe. His previous experience includes consulting and technology research in the United States and Europe. A visiting lecturer at the University of Oxford and judge in several technology awards programs, including Tech Pioneers of the World Economic Forum in Davos and Mobile Innovation Awards of the GSM Association. Holds M.A.L.D from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy (Tufts University/Harvard). Graduate courses in IT and International Marketing at the Harvard Business School.
Voytek is a great addition to our advisory board, bringing an excellent reputation in the investment and business markets in Silicon Valley and Asia. He will give perspective and expertise from Silicon Valley, traditional VC investments, and very interesting Asian markets. Voytek is a person who is always open for new ideas and pragmatic to make successful business.
Voytek comments his new role: “New models are needed for seed investments and startup funding; especially solutions that make the whole startup ecosystem more global, effective and transparent. Grow VC is the most promising and innovate new model for early phase startup funding. Grow VC also helps traditional VC’s find better companies when they have got seed funding from the Grow VC community. Grow VC is an essential new element for the VC and Silicon Valley ecosystem.”

It is my great pleasure to announce that Voytek Siewierski has joined to Grow VC Global Advisory board. Voytek is an Investment Partner at Mitsui & Co.Venture Partners, Inc., Silicon Valley Office. He is currently managing 12 portfolio companies for MCVP and has closed six deals during his 3 years tenure at MCVP. Before joining MCVP team Voytek was an Executive Director at NTT DoCoMo including 6 years in Japan and 3 years in the UK. After participating in the carrier’s IPO at Tokyo Stock Exchange he coordinated DoCoMo’s international technology partnerships including the partnership with Sun Microsystems that brought Java to mobile phones. Developed a number of successful value added mobile services with partners such as Walt Disney Corporation, Warner Brothers, CNN and others.

Voytek-xsVoytek executed a number of international equity investments in cellular carriers in Europe and Asia and initiated a number of technology licensing projects between DoCoMo and mobile operators such as KPN Mobile in Holland, Telefonica in Spain, Boygues Telecom in France and KG Telecom in Taiwan. Between 2004 and 2006 he was in charge of all new business in Europe. His previous experience includes consulting and technology research in the United States and Europe. A visiting lecturer at the University of Oxford and judge in several technology awards programs, including Tech Pioneers of the World Economic Forum in Davos and Mobile Innovation Awards of the GSM Association. Holds M.A.L.D from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy (Tufts University/Harvard). Graduate courses in IT and International Marketing at the Harvard Business School.

Voytek is a great addition to our advisory board, bringing an excellent reputation in the investment and business markets in Silicon Valley and Asia. He will give perspective and expertise from Silicon Valley, traditional VC investments, and very interesting Asian markets. Voytek is a person who is always open for new ideas and pragmatic to make successful business.

Voytek comments his new role: “New models are needed for seed investments and startup funding; especially solutions that make the whole startup ecosystem more global, effective and transparent. Grow VC is the most promising and innovate new model for early phase startup funding. Grow VC also helps traditional VC’s find better companies when they have got seed funding from the Grow VC community. Grow VC is an essential new element for the VC and Silicon Valley ecosystem.”

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Limited Partners’ interest to invest in VC funds has collapsed

December 7th, 2009 by: Jouko Ahvenainen

Go4Venture published their monthly report in this week. They report: “October 2009 showed a healthy amount of activity on the funding front, suggesting that the market is still alive and kicking, albeit from a lower level. One cannot deny that the environment is different than in

ROI

previous years: more international, more selective and of course more capital efficient. According to our index, overall investment levels continue to be approximately -30% lower than last year, pretty much what we’ve been reporting for the past six months.”

But they continue: “The continued activity of the venture market is unfortunately in sharp contrast with Limited Partners’ interest in European venture capital as an asset class. The only closing announced in October was for Vendis Capital, a retail and consumer specialist fund seeded by the family office of the Colryut family. Belgium-based Capricorn announced the launch of its “human health technology” fund (including medtech), although it will be some time before its first closing. Otherwise, it was pretty much doom and gloom in the news with both the US and Europe reporting the worst funding environment for VC funds since 2003 and 2000 respectively (and since 1994 in the US if one just looks at the third quarter).”

We can assume that a part of this dip is temporary and Limited Partners will return to make VC fund investments in the next year. But we have reasons to believe that Limited Partners are decreasing traditional VC fund investments also in long-run. Many LP’s have not been happy for VC funds’ ROI. They also criticized high management fees and especially tier #2 VC’s competence to find and manage future growth companies. This is one of reasons, why we at Grow VC, see the need of new funding models for startups. We must get the market more transparent and effective, and more global. Our new model (launch in January) is especially to fulfil these needs.

  • Share/Save/Bookmark