http://www.tech2mkt.com/blog/en-USSquarespace Site Server v5.11.5 (http://www.squarespace.com/)PaulWed, 09 Apr 2008 22:21:50 +0000http://www.tech2mkt.com/blog/is-it-that-bad.html#comments44355:380936:comment/1410555MarkTue, 04 Dec 2007 17:50:24 +0000http://www.tech2mkt.com/blog/thinking-big-in-the-rest-of-the-world.html#comments44355:380936:comment/1153438
In my experience 'Thinking Big' seems to come naturally among the business community in Israel and it shows with their innovation and technology leadership in many. Similar to the U.S. Israel has its share of big thinkers. Here in the U.S. California is without question the state of thinking big when it comes to business. ]]>PaulTue, 29 May 2007 15:42:40 +0000http://www.tech2mkt.com/blog/perpetual-licensing-is-dead-long-live-saas.html#comments44355:380936:comment/840723
Bear in mind they are talking about a "typical" enterprise software VC deal. They are not just talking about starting the business, they are also including the cash required to scale the business to $50-$100 million in revenues.

One of the issues for enterprise software is the cost of sales. Viral sales & marketing is not as applicable to enterprise software as to consumer software because of group decision making. For example, on-demand players such as Arena Solutions and Kinaxis often find themselves in a formal beauty contest against traditional vendors.

I have seen estimates of cost of sales for traditional enterprise software of $70,000-$100,000 per sale. It would be great if anyone has updated figures.

Also, the traditional view is to expand functionality (to grow same customer revenue) while keeping the core technology up to date. That requires more cash, more developers and perhaps a more formal product management process.

The dominant costs will be people related as the company gets bigger.

So I think their point is that you can bootstrap to $6-$10 million in revenue, and have a nice little business. But (in general) you need a lot more capital to grow and scale to the $50-$100 million they are expecting to make the VC model work.

I would love to hear more points of view on this issue. How much capital do you really need for massive scaling in the enterprise software world?
]]>JustinFri, 25 May 2007 16:50:30 +0000http://www.tech2mkt.com/blog/perpetual-licensing-is-dead-long-live-saas.html#comments44355:380936:comment/837481Venture capitalists inherently believe that businesses need huge amounts of capital to grow, because that is what they bring to the table. For a software company it's just not the case anymore unless you're doing something wrong. IMHO.]]>PaulThu, 29 Mar 2007 15:36:02 +0000http://www.tech2mkt.com/blog/why-come-to-silicon-valley.html#comments44355:380936:comment/759939
In cleantech, the cultural and regulatory environment reinforces strong R&D and technical expertise. Indeed my last company was a US-based cleantech company (using Australian technology) that was eventually funded from Europe. It was tough to get US investors interested in cleantech 2-3 years ago.

So perhaps I am also an exception that proves the rule; or else a participant in a new wave from Europe and Asia-Pacific.

Many places have the ingredients: money, talent and ideas. The Valley just seems to be an incredible bio-reactor.]]>Justin FloydThu, 29 Mar 2007 00:16:19 +0000http://www.tech2mkt.com/blog/why-come-to-silicon-valley.html#comments44355:380936:comment/759096
The first has been that Entrepreneurship has been fostered far more successfully in the USA education system [ Ycombination, fantastic idea], however the balance is improving particularly in the UK, there are many more support forums being introduced at University level to spot and nurture talent earlier.

Second has been the lack of protection over patents and IPR, the EMEA legal system must overhaul it's laws to help protect young companies coming to market, and third has been the reliance of European VC's on syndication without the confidence to go in alone.There are some signs that European VC's are gaining in confidence particularly in the SaaS space,and their ideas have evolved considerably over the last three years.

Finally the internet is changing the status quo, it is bigger outside the US than inside of it, and arguably connectivity is more advanced in Europe.In any event and regardless of geography it is faster and easier to get your product to market, compete on a global level, and scale rapidly without huge investment.

So in summary it is changing, there are significant funding opportunities outside of the US having said that [I probably defeat my own argument here] I am from the UK and have moved to San Francisco to develop our business! ]]>Chris SaadTue, 06 Feb 2007 10:30:35 +0000http://www.tech2mkt.com/blog/video-what-is-web-20.html#comments44355:380936:comment/669691Jeremy StieglitzWed, 01 Nov 2006 19:25:09 +0000http://www.tech2mkt.com/blog/unofficial-ca-cleantech-open-awards.html#comments44355:380936:comment/532814
We've been batting our heads against the wall with the VC community to date. Part of the challenge is that there is a lot of wind turbine quakery out there that simply won't work, and most of these are not aerodynamically sound. Aerotecture turbines, while somewhat lower in overall output, are at least honest and forthcoming in their efficiency data.

Another challenge is that most VCs want something deeply proprietary and especially in Silicon Valley, have a comfort level with examining semiconductor/silicon technologies that are somewhat transferrable to white hot solar space.

Lastly, too often people pose solar as "opposed" to wind technologies. As if they are competing. If there is decent wind resource + decent solar resource, the amortization and cost benefits of doing both are hugely complementary, and your return on investment can literally double or triple. That statement alone baffles me why the VCs chase 80 solar ventures and nearly 0 wind efforts.

The frustrating irony in all of this is that when energy delivery starts to really matter, and dollars per watt start to really get added correctly (total installed cost over yearly kW/hr output), then urban solar is going to look like a weak cousin compared to the energy density/footprint available in urban wind.

I'll give kudos to Aerotecture on their elegant overall design, near ergonomic installation/form factor, but for more power, and higher efficiencies with the backing of deep scientific engineering in blade and configuration layout engineered while innovating simplicity throughout, also check out VAWT startup www.wind-sail.com.

thanks,
Jeremy Stieglitz
Founder and VP Marketing, Wind-Sail
]]>Reinhold ZieglerThu, 19 Oct 2006 20:30:06 +0000http://www.tech2mkt.com/blog/unofficial-ca-cleantech-open-awards.html#comments44355:380936:comment/520331
Thank you for wondering who the 3rd runner up was in the renewables section of the California Clean Tech competition. As the presenter for AEROTECTURE, a finalist for a novel urban windturbine, I believe that this competition was not about who had the best and most promising energy technology. It was about who had the most dazzling business plan and power-point presentation. Never mind that the winners didn't even have a production prototype.

So we, the staff of AEROTECTURE want to thank you for your acknowledgement of our first class building integrated wind-turbine, which unlike the winner of the competition can work 24 hours a day, summer or winter.

I would like to know how to contact you and give you our presentation and become your client.

Thank You,
Reinhold Ziegler, (415) 290 4990
R&D Director
Aerotecture International.
]]>