http://www.bosstalks.com/ BossTalks.com Tag: startup en Thu, 09 Feb 2012 12:33:14 +0000 http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/88#post-198 Thu, 19 Jun 2008 17:54:10 +0000 white 198@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Hello everyone,</p> <p>My name is <a href="http://live.prokhorenko.us">Olexandr Prokhorenko</a>. As you might already know, I was the one of two guys who started the <a href="http://www.bosstalks.com">BossTalks.com</a> in the beginning of March 2007. </p> <p>Today I'd like to share my next big thing with you. So, please, let me introduce <a href="http://www.atomkeep.com">Atomkeep</a> - the service that solves the problem of information redundancy. </p> <p>So what actually Atomkeep is? We're the first service that created to really share the people profiles. Either you're a social networker, or a job seeker or a professional - all of you are having the same problem of data redundancy. There are too many social networks around, too many job boards, directories and sites that want you to keep your profile there. </p> <p>Being an active member of any community requires you to keep your profile up to date all the time. Nobody likes "dead heads". Once your Internet exposure is starting to grow, you're starting to spend much more time on keeping the things in sync. But we can take save your time. Don't waste your time on routine clicks, but have fun. This is what Atomkeep for. </p> <p>Let me give you another example. Have you ever faced a choice if you should sign to one more (maybe, more interesting or narrow) job site, but was pissed off and decided not to do this when you saw how big is the resume profile in it? I bet you did. But we can help you here as well. This is a typical situation when Atomkeep becomes a priceless service to use (and stays free!).</p> <p>Or might be you are a business owner and have listed your business contacts at the tens (or even hundreds) of different boards and directories, but it's time to move on and your contact are changing? Most of the time changes are good if everyone knows the new contacts. However, can you imagine the crowd of potential clients who got lost and choose your competitor over you just because they got the wrong phone number? Atomkeep is a good service to use now.</p> <p>This is our first day of public release. Our team has been working on it for a while and now we are ready for a launch. So go ahead, take a quick look, register there, it's <strong>absolutely free</strong> and takes only a minute, and give us your feedback. </p> <p>Atomkeep is built for users. Users are the most important elements in the Atomkeep design and we're committed to complete user satisfaction. Let us know, either you like something or not. Any opinion counts and valuable for us. </p> <p>So, thank you and welcome to Atomkeep!</p> <p>Sincerely yours,<br /> <a href="http://live.prokhorenko.us">Olexandr Prokhorenko</a>,<br /> Founder of <a href="http://www.atomkeep.com">Atomkeep</a>. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/65#post-188 Sat, 29 Mar 2008 12:14:06 +0000 susanvarghese2007 188@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>OH...How I wish...Apart from ideas and a ton of talent-<br /> there's also something big that these entrepreneurs have- that most of the world doesn't - including moi! The willingness to take "RISK"- now that's what I call guts! </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/78#post-171 Thu, 19 Jul 2007 13:09:40 +0000 green 171@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Hi there,</p> <p>Very nice <a href="http://www.entrepreneur.com/magazine/entrepreneur/2007/july/180354.html">article</a> recently was posted in <a>Entrepreneur</a>. </p> <blockquote><p><em><br /> The best part about starting small is that there's no limit to how far you can go. These entrepreneurs launched their businesses with less than $1,000, but now they're making millions--and so can you.<br /> </em></p></blockquote> <p>What do you think - should you try to touch the sky with nothing in you pocket, or better you need some real money before even starting your way? </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-165 Wed, 13 Jun 2007 10:55:32 +0000 green 165@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>We talk about the same things, we just call them differently.<br /> Underneath it all the main goal to have the working business. The most proven way is to stick to something which you started with, but not jumping from very different and inadequate to each other areas vice-versa. But I believe that numerous changes withing your direction are just for better. Even if after all the only common thing you will have the global idea like "do money transfers for fee" or "sell stuff online". </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-164 Wed, 13 Jun 2007 03:11:35 +0000 leninkster 164@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>To be accurate, the PayPay business model has never changed. It has always been, and still is "seller pays for the right to acccept payments in a risk-free (or at least risk-reduced) transaction" (Max Levchin 2004).</p> <p>Changes came about from the formation of PayPal. PayPal was formed by the merger of two existing businesses with different business models. One, Confinity, of which Max was one of the founders, was honed in on security and cryptography, the second X.COM was primary a financial services company. Both were interested in reconciling payments from Palm Pilots. The merger of the two companies did indeed require a re-think of the business model, and it was decided upon as the which Max quoted in several interviews through 2002 to 2004. To my knowledge this has been and still is the "business-model" upon which PayPal still operates.</p> <p>We mustn't forget that although the business model never changed for PayPal it radically changed the technology model it used to deliver it's strategy, from Palm Pilot centric to all-encompassing web services. </p> <p>I wonder if there is some confusion around the terminology? </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-163 Mon, 11 Jun 2007 19:59:01 +0000 white 163@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Well, I can't agree with you about the PayPal. The Max Levchin's version of what was PayPal is different of what you say. Globally speaking, both of you can be right, however, I still think that PayPal was able to change the business model and utilized this chance. I don't know if you ever read the <a href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/redirect.html?ie=UTF8&#38;location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.com%2FFounders-Work-Stories-Startups-Early%2Fdp%2F1590597141%3Fie%3DUTF8%26s%3Dbooks%26qid%3D1173729152%26sr%3D8-1&#38;tag=prokhorenkous-20&#38;linkCode=ur2&#38;camp=1789&#38;creative=9325">Founders at Work</a> book by Jessica Livingston (one of the partners in Y Combinator), but if you didn't I advice you to give it a quick pick. She interviewed Max and there is an interesting store told by Max in her book. From the other hand, there is always a different point of view, and the <a href="http://valleywag.com/tech/paypal/an-alternate-history-according-to-elon-musk-230076.php">different story of PayPal</a> told by Elon Musk. However, as it looks to me, the both of them tells that PayPal had major changes in the business models before it appeared as we know it. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-162 Mon, 11 Jun 2007 08:33:01 +0000 leninkster 162@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>I've worked with both large enterprises, and with many startups, and my advice stays the same. PaAypal didn't change their business model. Their original business model was to offer a brokerage on the internet to interface with smaller sites that couldn't go, or be bothered to got through the hoops to deal directly with the credit card companies.<br /> This is still essentially their business model. The business has grown, but the model is the same. They have incorporated extra functions and features, but their core business model is still the same.<br /> I'm not sure I understand the argument you are making in your last paragraph. You say "If the business model fails, it does not mean that you shouldn't change it", I am saying, that unless you are a large company and/or have great financial backing, if your business model fails, the business fails. I can give you many more examples of businesses that have found this, than have found otherwise. The point I am trying to make, is to be successfull in a business, you need to put in sufficient due dilligence prior to launching the business to try to ensure that the business model doesn't fail.<br /> Certainly I agree with your statement that If a business model fails you will need to think of another one, but it is very unlikely your existing business, that is using the failing business model will survive that transition. This is why so many of us enterpeneurs end up trying 4-5 times before we finally find a model that works. The secret is for each failure, learn from it, and don't repeat the same mistakes each time. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-161 Fri, 08 Jun 2007 17:32:46 +0000 green 161@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>I didn't work or deal with big enterprises with their business models/goals, but I know something about startups. I should say that startups is the most unpredictable thing, for which I would never say DO they need to change business model, or DO NOT. Just in example - PayPal started with one idea, and by doing the business they changed it to very much different (oh well, they left one thing the same -- to work with money :-). And because of that they got their success. And I can give a lot of such example, but they will prove only one thing. If business model fails, it does not mean that you shouldn't change it. I think you need to, but even if you will not, you still have a chance to succeed. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-160 Fri, 08 Jun 2007 08:07:59 +0000 leninkster 160@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Changing a business model over a long period of time is not necessarily bad. But on a start-up, if you're original business model is failing in the first year or two, it is unlikely changing it completely will save the business. In the case of someone like McDonalds or Dell for instance, not changing their business model has caused them problems. </p> <p>But these are companies that have made a huge success for a long period of time using the same business model, and have missed the fact that the demographics and desires of their customers have changed. McDonalds have pulled back some of the latest failures, they have added to their business model, and modified it, but they haven't changed their underlying business model. </p> <p>And this is what I was trying to explain. If your business model is to sell things on the internet, using low-cost and rapid service, to alter that business model overnight to one of retail sales in a shop with a higher, better more personal service at a proportional higher cost will not necessarily save a failing business. Augmenting an existing model with additional model options, and then gradually phasing out the older model may. In either case this is unlikely to save a failing start-up, and something more fundamental needs to be looked at. changing your business model every year (implied by your "last-years business model statement) is not a good business policy. Changing you business plan is. Designing a strategy for a business is a long term thing, and should be a "living document". Constant tactical changes invariably fail in the long run, and only in very few cases, and normally with a huge amount of financial backing can pay-off long-term. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-159 Thu, 07 Jun 2007 10:35:05 +0000 green 159@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>I know that quite few successful companies actually DID change their business model, and not once, but 4-5 times... World is global and agile nowadays. If you'll stick badly to <em>old and proven to work (last year) business model</em> you can end up nowhere. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/75#post-158 Thu, 07 Jun 2007 02:40:07 +0000 leninkster 158@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>So you've thought of a product or service that you can sell. You've done your market research and have decided that a business is feasible. You've looked into the costs of building your sales channel, the costs of administration, the costs of insuring yourself, your company, and your employees. You've looked 5 years down the road to see (realistically) where you could be, and you've extrapolated all those costs and profits, sales and losses into some form of business plan.</p> <p>What! You mean you haven't? OK, then you need to. One at a time, and carefully, with an objective head, not the passionate one that thinks you product or service is going to be wanted by everyone. </p> <p>Wow! You have! Well done. Now what? Take it easy! go slowly and follow your plan. Don't deviate from it. At the end of the first year, if you are still in business, analyse your plan again. Go over everything. Be realistic. Build into that plan some business strategies. Watch your overheads. make it a date, do this every year, and more often if your business grows rapidly.</p> <p>Don't make big changes to your business model, add to it, yes, but don't change it. </p> <p>Stay lean, and I don't mean fire everyone, make sure you are getting the best out of every single overhead and investment you make.</p> <p>If you get in above your head, ask for help, and where you can, get it free. Get a second, third, fourth... opinion. Don't aim for failure, but don't be afraid to fail. It's not the failure that defines you, it's what you do afterwards.</p> <p>If you are lucky you'll get rich/famous/happy whatever you want. If you are not, you'll get experience. In either case, it won't come easy, and it won't come quickly.</p> <p>Good luck and happy hunting! </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/74#post-157 Wed, 30 May 2007 08:19:46 +0000 white 157@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>This event was held at 5/29/2007 at the California State University in the Long Beach.</p> <p><a href="http://www.techcoastangels.com/Cal/PublicEvents.aspx?EventID=2541" rel="nofollow">http://www.techcoastangels.com/Cal/PublicEvents.aspx?EventID=2541</a></p> <p>It was leaded by John Morris who is past President and on the Board of Governors of the Tech Coast Angels (TCA) and Managing Director of GKM Ventures.</p> <p>Here are some notes on the events.</p> <p>It was an introductory meeting, it wasn't supposed to be very specific, it was detailed enough so everyone could get an answer for his questions. It was a pretty interesting networking for the first hour. And the very hot and spicy dinner -- it was nice, but only for those who can eat fire. </p> <p>This is the first and experimental event on the Long Beach. Few words about the TiE (the organization which runs the event). TiE provides a range of opportunities for entrepreneurs and a mentorship programs. They have a regular seminary, TiEcon, and it is going to take place in the middle of September this year. Currently, TiE is developing close relationship with TCA.</p> <p>When the time for Tech Coast Angels (TCA) presentation came, they started with the <strong>Key Trends</strong>:</p> <ul> <li>VC Funds getting bigger, investment size increasing</li> <li>Technology helping lower startups costs</li> <li>Organized angel investing has become a national theme</li> <li>VCs have grown t respect Angels, slowly</li> <li>Angel bandwidth for coaching and mentoring is major value add for seed stage entrepreneurs</li> <li>2006 nationwide Angel investments in 2006 topped $25.6 billion, matching VC investments in all rounds</li> <li>VCs affiliate program is very important</li> </ul> <p>&nbsp;<br /> <strong>Few words about the TCA</strong>:</p> <ul> <li>TCA celebrates the 10th year </li> <li>TCA is largest Angel organization in US</li> <li>TCA has completed 41 deals in 2006, among them 20 new deals, 21 follow-ons</li> <li>$11.4 millions from TCA, $96.4 millions from VCs</li> <li>TCA organizes four groups (networks)</li> <li>2005 was a break out time for TCA deals</li> </ul> <p>&nbsp;<br /> The typical TCA <strong>Deal Flow Funnel</strong>:</p> <ol> <li>Pre-screen</li> <li>Network Screening Presentations -- 40% of opportunities</li> <li>Due Diligence, Valuation and Terms -- 10%</li> <li>Network Dinner Presentations -- 4%</li> <li>Fund -- 2%</li> </ol> <p>&nbsp;<br /> Typical TCA <strong>Investment Criteria</strong>:</p> <ul> <li>Technology is a core</li> <li>Located in Southern California (within driving range)</li> <li>Addressing a compelling business need</li> <li>Protect-able IP or barrier to competition</li> <li>Validation from existing or potential customers or users</li> <li>Market size enabling more 10x return within 5 years</li> <li>Coachable and talented management team</li> <li>Ability to attract future funding</li> <li>More than just technology</li> </ul> <p>&nbsp;<br /> Thesis from the event:</p> <ul> <li>There are several Angels groups in the Southern California. They are often interconnected. In example, one of the speakers, Mr. Al Schnaeider -- one of the founders of LA Angels and Pasadena Angels networks, was one of the founder of Pasadena's one.</li> <li>Angels don't like to do follow-ons, but TCA hit a lot of them last year. </li> <li>Angels have a lot of VCs affiliates and sponsors -- can help you to get to the right firm and organization. </li> <li>The recent TCA investments was made to Make It Work, Mindbody, Coda, etc.</li> <li>VCs don't have as much time for you as Angels do.</li> <li>Angel expect to do a lot of mentoring, because can really help, but not only write a check.</li> <li>VCs can write a bigger checks and it's harder to reach them.</li> <li>Most early stage companies fail because they make a failure mistake and they are very limited in possibilities.</li> <li>TCA view of the entertainment industry -- they neither stay or go with entertainment industry. They work closely with the merger of Internet and real life social networking and entertainment media. But they are not always about technology component. Content development is very important. Entertainment is a tough industry and built on a risk pyramid and very challenging.</li> <li>Nowadays it's not about a building your website, but it's about marketing it.</li> <li>Angels try to act similar to VCs (in matter of investment rounds, etc).</li> <li>It's awfully easy to take money from Friends &#38; Family, but it's important to put it in writing properly. Every transaction should be properly documented.</li> <li>Angels expect at least 12-15 months period of time for each funding round.</li> <li>Valuation is not an academic science. Valuation depends on development stage, nature of market, risk, time range of the projects, reasonable projection, etc. In common, the valuation is a very complex question.</li> <li>Angels don't want to mess with out-of-country and different-culture problems, but sometimes they do.</li> <li>Business investor slides are for Angels, business plan for entrepreneur. Investor slides is the methodology nowadays, it's 15-20 slides and that's all. Written document (business plan) is not that important. Business plans are yesterday. Key elements of business plan should be included into investor slides. Substance is more important than a form. Quality of the answers is more critical than a business plan. Put up a chart in presentation and provide a reason why and how to get enough ROI for Angels. They take a high risk and want to get high ROI. You should be realistic in your calculations hitting the high revenues.</li> <li>The ideal situation if the Angels loose money, the founder should feel badly, too.</li> <li>Angels expect to see confidence in your business.</li> <li>The pre-screening could be a session, when you are not ready with the slides, but know the core thing, so Angels can advice you what are you missing, because they suppose to do mentoring.</li> <li>TCA have a very deep relations with UCLA, Caltech, etc and they provide mentoring and coaching over there.</li> <li>Management vs governance. Angels want to help on opening the path to customers and clients. They offer help to management, but try not to force it.</li> <li>You've got to have some customers who are interested. Needs to be a high enough pain for the problem which you're solving and a potential customer needs to want to work with the startup. Only 2% of business are willing to work with the startups.</li> </ul> <p>&nbsp;<br /> In total, it was a pretty interesting event, which helps to build a great networking. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/69#post-150 Mon, 16 Apr 2007 21:23:18 +0000 green 150@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Google wasn't supporting <a href="http://www.dodgeball.com/">dodgeball.com</a> the way expected by creators. That's why they just <a href="http://www.teendrama.com/dens/index.php?task=more&#38;e=460">quit</a>. Did Google get too big to be able to pitch something new? </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/65#post-146 Sat, 07 Apr 2007 16:37:57 +0000 green 146@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Many entrepreneurs working in a Web nowadays are thinking about investing their own money into their projects - and that is enough smart. Frankly speaking, it really can improve business ideas and models of many of startups -- because spending <em>your own money</em> isn't the same like <em>raise money and shut down</em>. It is different. I enjoyed this article in NY Times - <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/09/technology/09venture.html?ei=5088&#38;en=550d24cae21caac0&#38;ex=1320728400&#38;adxnnl=0&#38;partner=rssnyt&#38;emc=rss&#38;adxnnlx=1163096427-kAU/QQ1e9QOqBmLukuGR7g&#38;pagewanted=print">For Start-Ups, Web Success on the Cheap</a> telling us about <a href="http://www.meebo.com/">Meebo</a> startup. It is a good, no - terrific example of explained above:</p> <blockquote><p><em><br /> When Seth J. Sternberg and two colleagues started Meebo, a Web-based instant-messaging service, they didn’t go looking for venture capitalists. Using their credit cards, they financed the company themselves to the tune of $2,000 apiece. It was enough to cover their biggest expense — leasing a few computer servers at $120 a month each.<br /> </em></p> </blockquote> <p>This is a terrible risky step, but this way those guys putted themselves into condition where they needed a success. They didn't try to find "bridge back", they just stepped strictly ahead. Like other companies (i.e. <a href="http://www.37signals.com/">37signals</a>) they created working and good product, with all their responsibility and just followed the way up. Two thumbs up! Even me, who is not an ICQ/GTalk/IM-lover at all -- I did try their service. </p> <p>Dreaming about your startup? Create something, then launch, and prove it can work by yourself completely into it. Angels and VCs will be knocking <em>your</em> door, then, and not vice-versa. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/64#post-145 Sat, 07 Apr 2007 16:17:21 +0000 green 145@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p><a href="http://bambi.blogs.com/bambi_francisco/">Bambi Francisco</a> together with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Thiel">Peter Thiel</a> launched new and innovative (and very unusual) resource to connect entrepreneurs and VCs - <a href="http://www.vator.tv/">Vator.TV</a>. This is what they are saying about it:</p> <blockquote><p><em><br /> Vator.TV is a place where entrepreneurs can share their ideas with the rest of the world through video. We provide a platform for innovators in all fields of industry and from around the world to be showcased, benefiting from the opportunity to reach others that might contribute to their success.<br /> ...<br /> The video pitch is also a more powerful means for entrepreneurs to demonstrate their business which can often be based on abstract concepts.<br /> </em></p></blockquote> <p>Very unusual! But may be because of that it would work? First people already <a href="http://bambi.blogs.com/bambi_francisco/2007/01/vator_reports_t.html">stepped in</a> into this new thing. However, there are not too many of participants yet, even if Vator.TV already have had pretty nice publicity exposure with different resources like <a href="http://alwayson.goingon.com/permalink/post/9043">AlwaysOn</a>, <a href="http://www.profy.com/2007/04/07/women-in-20-ethics/">Profy</a>, <a href="http://www.thealarmclock.com/mt/archives/2007/04/bamb_francisco.html">Alarm:clock</a> , <a href="http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/why-started-vatortv-why-im/story.aspx?guid=%7BCC31F569%2D9BAA%2D4CD5%2D903C%2D17279B37E946%7D">MarketWatch</a> and of course in different blogs (<a href="http://nojobplease.blogspot.com/2007/04/elevator-pitch.html">1</a>, <a href="http://sunbeltblog.blogspot.com/2007/04/ok-bambi-gone-but-can-someone-help.html">2</a> and others). </p> <p>On the sad note, it does not sound just <em>huge</em> like it was with YouTube -- but the reason for that is that it's very-very narrow targeted. Hopefully it will work out fine for entrepreneurs, otherwise it'll be just a useless technology for cave people ;-) </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/61#post-140 Thu, 29 Mar 2007 21:39:36 +0000 green 140@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Nice article recently was published on Business 2.0 called "<a href="http://money.cnn.com/2007/03/02/magazines/business2/stocks_techs.biz2/index.htm?postversion=2007030706">As Wall Street quakes, Silicon Valley yawns</a>". Beyond this dramatic title, it speaks about (quote): </p> <blockquote><p> "<em>...<br /> A funny thing is happening in Silicon Valley.<br /> ...<br /> Silicon Valley is far different place than it was seven years ago when the dotcom bubble burst. You see, unlike the rip-roaring days of 2000 when countless twentysomething-ers and wannabe day traders bet heavily on rising stocks, Silicon Valley no longer needs Wall Street.<br /> ...<br /> What it needs are the four cash-rich superpowers (Google, eBay, Yahoo, Amazon), a handful of lesser powers with profitable niches (like Salesforce.com), and the vast co-dependent kingdoms that each has opened up for aspiring entrepreneurs.<br /> ...<br /> </em>" </p></blockquote> <p>Is it really true? I am afraid that I have to agree at this moment. I believe "potential IPO" still was forcing founders/CEOs to build <strong>better business</strong> and <strong>better company</strong> by all means. With those "to be acquired" dreams and goals those intentions getting lost. Of course, it may be better - entrepreneurs are entrepreneurs. They run one company, and then another, and loop back. But how long could it stay like that? Who will be building <em>new</em> Google or eBay, or (you name it)?<br /> Startups are fun, but it's still necessary to know that business needs to be run, not just sucessfully launched.</p> <p>Anyway. I cannot blame people with goals to sell company when it will be possible. Don't know what I'll do in the face of opportunity to sell my businesses. But, I think it's still a thing to think about. </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/60#post-139 Thu, 29 Mar 2007 18:47:20 +0000 white 139@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Paul Buchheit (the creator of Gmail and one of the speakers at Startup School 2007 <a href="http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/52" rel="nofollow">http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/52</a>) posted a very clear post about shares in startup and changes, which happen to them during the fundraising stages. A very nice post, highly recommended to read for everyone.</p> <p><a href="http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2007/03/equity-math-for-startups.html" rel="nofollow">http://paulbuchheit.blogspot.com/2007/03/equity-math-for-startups.html</a></p> <p>You may find Explanation of Certain Terms Used In Venture Financing Terms Survey useful while reading the post (see <a href="http://www.fenwick.com/VC_Terms.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.fenwick.com/VC_Terms.htm</a>).</p> <p>Although, I got a question right away. What happens if the option pool is completely exhausted, but the company still need to hire new people, and the old employees have quit, but took shares? </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/59#post-138 Thu, 29 Mar 2007 18:37:48 +0000 white 138@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>Welcome Colorado based seed investors for startups. </p> <p><a href="http://www.techstars.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.techstars.org</a></p> <p>They successfuly cloned Y Combinator's business model and ask for less money (5% vs 2-10%).</p> <p><a href="http://www.ycombinator.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.ycombinator.com</a></p> <p>The same investement calculation, $5,000 per founder, however, the Y Combinator gives $5,000 + $5,000 per founder.</p> <p>Sounds like it's a crime not to start a startup now. :) </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/58#post-137 Thu, 29 Mar 2007 15:16:28 +0000 white 137@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p><strong>How to find a co-founder or a partner?</strong></p> <p>It's a common fact that every startup company needs at <strong>least one founder</strong> to happen. However, it's also known that startups with the only one founder are doomed to fail. </p> <p><strong>The first reason is simple</strong>: if you can't convience at least one more person to do business with you, how would you convience million of your potential customers? You would not be able to get investment for your business and you would not raise any funds until it's only about you.</p> <p><strong>There is other reason also</strong>. Unless you have a lot of capital to hire help early on, you’ll probably want to find someone to work together you from the very beginning. Otherwise, you'll get screwed up and messed to too many things put on your shoulders.</p> <p><strong>The typical startup company has from 2 to 3 co-founders on board.</strong></p> <p><strong>Finding a co-founder for a startup can be a tricky deal</strong>. Your co-founder will need to share your vision, your feelings, your passion and your excitement about your idea. If it's not so, you are doomed again. Your co-founder needs to have enough skills which will work the best for your idea. Your co-founder has to fit the same communication level with you. You will get a plenty of disagreements in the early days and you can not allow yourself to be engaged into any kinds of personal conflicts.</p> <p>Deciding who will be your co-founder will be one of the most important decisions you will make for letting your idea come true. Well, this is not kind of a thing that you can not change later, but trust me, you don't want to mess up with splitting your company afterall. I've been there and I don't want to come back for any reason now.</p> <p>So, again, finding a co-founder for a startup can be a tricky deal. Besides, <strong>it is a tought task</strong>, especially if your network and social circle is limited, your work agreement has a clause about not hiring away any co-workers, you are too young or too old to be considered a perspective partner.</p> <p>Paul Graham on his presentation on the Startup School 2007 event (the notes are available at <a href="http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/52" rel="nofollow">http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/52</a>) spoke about the co-founder issue. Let me quote him:</p> <blockquote><p> Not having a cofounder is a real problem. A startup is too much for one person to bear. And though we differ from other investors on a lot of questions, we all agree on this. All investors, without exception, are more likely to fund you with a cofounder than without.</p> <p><strong>We've funded two single founders, but in both cases we suggested their first priority should be to find a cofounder</strong>. Both did. But we'd have preferred them to have cofounders before they applied. It's not super hard to get a cofounder for a project that's just been funded, and we'd rather have cofounders committed enough to sign up for something super hard.</p> <p>If you don't have a cofounder, what should you do? <strong>Get one</strong>. It's more important than anything else. If there's no one where you live who wants to start a startup with you, move where there are people who do. If no one wants to work with you on your current idea, switch to an idea people want to work on.</p> </blockquote> <p>In the matter of the fact which is described above, we decided to make an extra step in solving the problem of finding a co-founder. We are creating a separate forum, the <strong>Founders Nest</strong> on BossTalks.com. This is a specially designed place to look for co-founders. You are never too young or too old for Founders Nest. You are never under- or overqualified for it. It does not matter whom are you looking for, either for co-founder with developer skills or for a co-founder with business skills (well, the developers are more valuable at the very beginning). </p> <p><strong>How to find a partner or a co-founder?</strong></p> <ol> <li>Post here.</li> <li>Watch the topic.</li> <li>You can even subscribe via RSS.</li> <li>Get replies.</li> <li>Start a startup.</li> </ol> <p>&nbsp;<br /> Let Founders Nest extend your social network and become your community. The early days of every startup are very tough and sometimes you do not know whom to share your ideas with. Founders Nest is the right place. And it's free. Free to register, free to post, free to start. You are welcome! </p> (read more) http://www.bosstalks.com/topic/57#post-136 Wed, 28 Mar 2007 19:16:34 +0000 white 136@http://www.bosstalks.com/ <p>I've heard guys still doing development in PHP, Perl and even Lisp, however, I really have no clue how could the Web development be made on Lisp. </p> (read more)