Rant: Playing Music on a Mobile Speaker Phone

I've been meaning to say something for a while but today on the bus into work was the last straw.

What idiotic engineer or marketeer decided that it would be cool to allow people play music stored on a mobile on it's speaker? The only time that is going to happen is when the person is in a crowded bus/train/building where is going to piss people off.

Now, to those people who do this. STOP. I don't care what music you like but I don't want to have to listen to it. I have my own favourite music and I don't want to have to listen to yours because you are too selfish to not use headphones. You are intruding on my personal space.

Strangely enough it always seems to be teenagers who insist on playing music on the speaker. Some people would say I could simply ask them to turn it down. Yes I could, BUT, they should never have turned it on in the first place. Why can't people think of those around them?

The qantum shift in Climate Change

Tony Blair has said there has been a quantum shift in climate change in the US and there is now a possibility of a deal as long as India, China and other similar emerging economies join in (China and India are 2nd and 4th worst emitters respectively). Yet recent comments by an Indian minister seems to think they should still be allowed to emit at their current levels.

Which kind of leaves us in deadlock. The US is not going to accept caps without the major emerging economies also accepting caps. Neither side seems to be willing to shift. Is there anything that break the deadlock?

There is.

The US, Europe and other interested countries sign a treaty to create caps and a global emissions trading scheme. But included in the treaty is an agreed method to calculate the carbon cost of goods and services. This serves as a standard and is used across the economy. Companies (whether in the signatory countries or not) can receive an audit to show they are below the standard. This allows them to purchase less carbon credits as their goods and services fall below the standard (or even sell carbon credits).

Now to deal to recalcitrant countries. All goods and services receive a carbon cost whether they are produced/provided by the signatory countries or not. Here is the key aspect. The goods and services need only to be consumed in the signatory countries. Companies wanting to sell goods and services within signatory countries would have to purchase carbon credits.

The majority of the exports from the emerging countries go to be consumed in the developed world. Without this methodology, carbon caps will only see the carbon production transfered from the developed world to the developing world. Nothing is gained. By requiring carbon credits at point of consumption forces the producing companies to take the lead in reducing their carbon emmissions as they now have an economic incentive to do so.

A side benefit of this methodology is that it will turn the externality of carbon emission generated in the transport of products (currently not included) into an internality. This will allow the price of the good to better reflect the true cost of production.

Tags: climate change

The news is out- MarketClusters Receives USD3m in expansion funding

MarketClusters (the company I work for) has just raised USD3m in expansion funding. The press release is here. AlarmClock talks about it here. In summary we are continuing our expansion of StrategWire platform. In addition to on-going development of new features we will expanding the platform's coverage to Clean Technology market.

Tags: MarketClusters, StrategyWire, enterprise2.0

Transport in Sydney

I've just returned from Christmas in Australia. Starkest difference between London and Sydney was how hard it is to get around Sydney by public transport. Not having a car in Sydney is a significant obstacle to enjoying Sydney.

This only serves to highlight how (relatively) good London's public transport network is. This is not to say that there isn't room for improvement, there certainly is. But the cost of improving London transport is dwarfed by what Sydney needs, nay must, spend to get a decent public transport network.

Unfortunetly for Sydney, public transport is the single biggest hurdle to further development, increased tourism and maintaining its status as a liveable city (which is already rapid falling).

Yahoo!

Wired has an excellent story about Yahoo and its performance over the last few years. Several bloggers have already commented on the story (Michael Parekh and Brad Feld). My take: I'm not really surprised about anything in the article. Yahoo has been rudderless for at least the last year.

Terry Semel has to go. His performance is simply not good enough.

With recent coup in Fiji, the troubles in the Solomon Islands and riots in Tonga, you have to wonder what is happening. Over the last few years, the south pacific island nations have seemingly lurched from one crisis to another and there does not seem to be an end in sight. The question is, how is this going to be solved?

The answer, I think, is a Pacific Island commonwealth that includes Australia and New Zealand.

Put it in RSS

Something that has been annoying me for a while is the lack of companies and industry bodies that don't put their news and press releases in an RSS feed. Or if they do require you to register. This post goes out to them.

I will say this slowly. Put. Your. Press Releases. Into. A. Feed. And make it public available. The purpose (and please correct me if I am wrong) of a press release is to make an announcement that reaches as many people as possible. The very fact you do not put your press releases in a feed restricts the number of people who can see.

Nor do I wont to register and receive emails. I just want an RSS feed with your press releases. There is absolutely no benefit for me to register for your press releases. Registering is only useful when the user gets a service out of it. Press releases are not a service.

It is even more nonsensical for industry bodies not to put press releases in a RSS feed. The whole point on an industry body is to act as advocate and communicate with society. Making it difficult for me to get hold of press releases is not the way to do it. I do not want to have to visit your site to check. I do not want to have to work at it. Nor do I want to register to get an email. I get enough already.

I'll say it again. Put your press releases in a RSS feed.

Tags: RSS, Marketing, PR

Paying people for UGC

In a recent post Umair wrote a reply to a question that had come up in a recent Beers & Innovations night. Summary is when will people be paid for "user generated content." I made a point in the comments about how different people get value from services in different ways i.e. monetary payment is not the only form of received value. This is all well and good but many people will still want to be paid.

The biggest hurdle is that transferring small sums of money is prohibitively expensive for the size of the funds transferred. Widespread payment for UGC will not occur until someone cracks problem of providing transfer of funds between parties with a cost approaching zero.

There are several possible methods for doing it. The first would be for a company such as Google to create a financial transfer company and absorb transfer fees the banks impose as a cost of doing business. This is a big and costly option that runs up against (massive) regulatory problems.

The second would be to create a frequent flyer style points system that people can accumulate and then use to for discounts at stores or to purchase gift certificates. This option is probably one that would work well. The "frequent generator" (FG) points would be tied to an identity. For example, I could state (just as Amex holds my "loyalty points") that all my FG points would be held by Google whom attaches my FG points to my Google identity. I can then go to various stores and reclaim the points for discounts, gift certificates etc.

The third option is to essentially create an "internal market" where parties with an identity can transfer, at zero cost, funds. For this to work a provider, lets say Google, would create relationships with the various users of UGC. These users would deposit an opening balance to Google (Google holds this in escrow). When a user uploads some UGC to the site, which then makes some money, the service "transfers" money to the user by saying to Google "user x receives y amount". Google records against the users identity that they have received x without directly transferring the money. The costs are only paid if the user moves money to their real world bank account. Paypal on steroids if you like.

My guess is that a frequent-flyer like system is probably the best option. There is less regulatory overhead, capital and technical requirements. The other major attraction of FG points is that everyone understands frequent flyer systems and the redemption of points. GAYME companies are the obvious candidates to create these systems (they have identities and relations with the users and UGC companies) and I can see this being the next battleground for the hearts and minds of internet users.

Tags: UGC, Web Services

UK Age Discrimation Laws - The death knell of target job boards?

As of 1 Oct 2006 the UK's age discrimination law (Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006) came into effect. I am now reading through a "guide" on these laws and, I am, to say the least astounded. The UK government has taken a massive sledge hammer to crack a small nut and then missed.

What strikes me as most interesting is the possibility that target job boards could possible be ruled illegal under the new laws. From the guide is the following quote:

"If you limit your recruitment to university ‘milk rounds’ only, you may
find that this is indirect age discrimination as this practice would
severely restrict the chances of someone over say, 25 applying for
your vacancies."

or

"Example: An advertisement placed only in a magazine aimed at
young people may indirectly discriminate against older people
because they are less likely to subscribe to the magazine and
therefore less likely to find out about the vacancy and apply."

Now the obvious first shot will be on services such as Milkround. However, I can see the same logic being extended to any target job board. For example the TechCrunch, Joel on Software and 37Signals job boards are seen by an audience that is by and large of a particular age group. This could be be seen as indirect discrimination.

Perhaps the biggest question is the liability of non-UK companies for job advertisements placed on the Internet? The obvious answer is don't be silly, but if a non-UK advertises a job that can be done by telecommuting, lawyers could argue that the advertisements do fall under the UK laws.

The law of unintended consequences raises its head again.

Also puts a damper on the outcome of News International's purchase of Milkround.

Tags: Web Services

A brilliant but simple idea - SlideShare

The best ideas always are aren't they?

Today, Uzanto launched a second service called SlideShare. Essentially, it allows the user to take a already generated powerpoint or openoffice slide pack (doesn't seem to support Keynote yet although a help note says to export to PPT). The user can then share these slide packs with other users and embed them on other sites.



The embed is a flash movie making usable on a majority of social networking sites and viewable in most if not all browsers. The service seems to use Amazon's S3 service.

Just as YouTube has many similar competitors, I expect other presentation services to popup with a similar system. It will be interesting to see who wins. I expect SlideShare has a good start with a working service that is easily used that is compatible with a social networks and a majority of the web.

Tags: SlideShare, Web Services, Social Networks

Defence in Depth in the world of Single Sign-on

Recent expansion of our network has led me to revist the concept of Defence in Depth and its relation to security. I am a big beliver in Defence in Depth. To the point all the computers at work run with software firewalls in addition to the hardware firewall. But that is not what the point of this post.

Rather, it is the concept of Defence in Depth in web services. The question arises of how many web service companies use Defence in Depth. Given the recent security failures my guess is not many at all. Cruel experience will change that I am sure. But this does lead to the problem of the social engineering attack.

I am wary of single sign-on as it seeminly destroys the usefulness of Defence in Depth. One sign-on and the cracker will then have access to all of a targets services. As web services usually have weaker protection from attacks that come from inside the service it opens up a whole world of hurt. I wonder if Defence in Depth is considered by Identity 2.0 crowd.

An interesting problem.


Tags: Identity2.0, Web Services

Social Networks and Attention

I was at dinner with Howard Rheingold organised at the very last moment by Ian Forrester. It was a very good evening thoroughly enjoyed. But this post isn't about the actual dinner but a comment made by one of the attendees.

Discussion had turned to "The Daily Show" and "Colbert Report." Then the comment was made "I watch 'The Daily Show' but not the 'Colbert Report' as I am sure with my social network that if there is something really funny on the 'Colbert Report', I will find out about it" or words to that effect.

The comment shows an interesting trend in managing attention. People are using their social networks to expand the amount of attention they have. By relying on different parts of your social network to pay attention for interesting items effectively expands the amount of attention a user has.

What is the impact of this? I'm not sure as I haven't had the chance to fully think the implications through. Top of the head is that it will complicate the monetisation of attention. It also indicates that making very general social networks profitable will not be easy. The better route is adding social networking features around a series of more focused websites. Shades of the old Geocites and AngelFire?

The other side of the coin is that this is an interesting adaptation by an individual to managing information overload.

Tags:Attention, Social Networks, Geek Dinners

Where have I been?

It has been a long time since I last posted. Several months in fact. Where have I been? Working. Of course this begs the question of what I have I been working that has stopped me blogging.

StrategyWire is what has stopped me blogging. I have been working hard getting the system up to scratch for the initial release, which has now come and gone. We (MarketClusters) are lucky to be in a position that we had paying clients with the initial release. Of course this creates the (good) problem of having to push further and faster with our development of the platform.

What is StrategyWire? Good question. StrategyWire is an online intelligence platform that organised news, blog posts, statistics etc. using a graphical map to allow users to easily understand their market. In many ways this will be the most interesting period because we will be building on a strong foundation adding in the whizz bang features. Of course we are looking to hire more developers (and analysts).

StrategyWire is part of the growing number of Enterprise 2.0 applications that are starting to appear.

Tags:Enterprise2.0, StrategyWire

Australian Last Mile Broadband as a Utility

Debate has been raging (as much as debates rage in Australia) about who is going to pay for the next generation of broadband network and how they are going to pay for it.  Telstra (the incumbent) has given the ultimatum that it will not build out a FTTN network without regulatory relief (translated: we want to charge monopolistic prices to competitors to access the network).  Their reasoning is the requirement to achieving a realistic return on investment.

Last week Telstra's main competitors tossed a curve ball by offering to jointly fund the build out of a FTTN network for Australia in exchange for access.  Which of course nails Telstra's ROI argument.

What I find most interesting in this debate (many do expect that the offer as proposed will get off the ground) is the airing of different methods to developing out next generation broadband networks.  The common element is the recognition that the base network is a utility.  The proposal for joint funding recognises this.

While it is debateable that joint funding will work (it may) it opens up the debate to other methods of funding.   One that needs consideration is the to place the last mile network (exchange to doorstep) into a tradeable asset trust.  The trust would own the network and service providers would purchase access from the trust.  The advantage of the trust is that it separates network provision from the service provision (a utility) and provides a level playing field for service providers.  The network asset trust would also provide a long term investment vehicle for pension and super funds.

Last mile access is a utility and the joint funding proposal is a clear indication of this fact.  Last mile access as a utility casts the net neutrality debate a completely different light and negates many of the arguments put forward by the US bells.      


Technorati Tags: Telstra, Broadband, Optus, Utility, Net Neutrality, FTTN

Technorati Tags: Telstra, Broadband, Optus, Utility, Net Neutrality, FTTN

Microsoft's Choice

Google and Apple have shifted the competitive landscape leaving Microsoft fighting a defensive battle on a battlefield not of its choosing.  Microsoft faces the dilemena of continuing to compete on their competitors terms or disrupt the competitive landscape.

The first choice will lead to the slow but inexorable decline in revenue and profitability of Microsoft.  The second choice is very risky because the outcome is unknown and will involve the internal disruption of Microsoft.   Two stark choices but only one can halt the decline of Microsoft.

So what can Microsoft do if it chooses to go with the second option?  Microsoft needs to swap the Win32 kernal for the Linux or BSD and focus on the UI and productivity aspects of the OS.  Similar to Apple's strategy with OS X.

By using a Linux or BSD kernal Microsoft benefits in several ways.  Fundamental architectural decisions made a  long time ago are placing constraints on how secure the WinOS can be made.   Security is becoming increasingly important and is now effecting choices on OS.  A Linux/BSD kernal provides the fundamental security necessary to build a safe OS.  Using a Linux/BSD kernal will allow Microsoft to concentrate on the UI and productivity aspects of the OS which fits very neatly into the creation of a seamless computing experience that Microsoft is pursuing.  It reduces OS maintence and development costs.  Microsoft essentially outsources the bug fixing and OS maintence to the Linux or BSD community.   Microsoft would still need to participate but would not need to devote so much resources on housekeeping but can focus on innovation.

Using a Linux or BSD kernal will allow Microsoft to increase margin on the OS product while reducing the cost to the consumer.  A benefit that Microsoft's hardware partners will appreciate.

Those are the direct internal effects of this move.  But there will also be disruptive market effects of a kernal switch, which can be argued to be far more important to Microsoft.

• The sea anchor of being an OS company that is stopping Microsoft competing effectively in the new market. 
  
• It will in on fell swoop take the wind out of most of the anti-trust suits that Microsoft currently faces.
• The OS versus OS argument looses bight as it becomes an argument about Unix flavours.
• Security and productivity reasons for swapping OSes (ie from Win to OSX or Linux) will be mutted if not completely sunk.

But most importantly, the strategy of switching kernal will allow Microsoft to blur the boundaries between the centre and edge of the network.  Which directly effects the competiviness and value of competitors like Apple and Google.

The question remains of what kernal would Microsoft use.  Technically there isn't much difference between Linux or BSD kernals.  I expect that Microsoft will go with the Linux kernal for the following reasons:

1. Linux already has a greater amount of public mindshare and it would allow Microsoft to reclaim those organisations that have already move to Linux Desktops,
2. Linux developer community is larger (and more vocal) than the BSD community, and
3. Steve Jobs choose BSD.

Microsoft using the Linux kernal has significant benefits for the company ranging from costs to more focused development.  Perhaps more importantly it will represent a major disruption of the status quo.  Innovative disruption not only comes from new technology but also from adopting new strategies.


Technorati Tags: Microsoft, Disruption, Strategy, Linux, BSD, Apple, Google, OS

The Undiscovered Pearl of the Blacksea

I need a break and as I like visiting new places I decided to go to Odessa in Ukraine. I am glad I did. This post is to give you the reader the merest taste of Odessa. Odessa is not a particularly stunning city in the way that Paris or Sydney are. But Odessa has its own charm. As a friend put it: "Odessa is just a large village." Some of the buildings are crumbling others are new. The buildings in the centre of the city are a wonderful meadly of everything great in Italian architecture. Another way to think of it is that the buildings are Italian Architect's ideal of Italian architecture.



Another distinct feature of the city is the huge number of sculptures and statues dotted around the city. Many are beautiful and well worth a look.



While I was there during the winter, it struck me wandering around Odessa that it would be a lovely city to visit during the summer. Particularly with the beaches a 5 minutes walk from the centre of the city (where the decent hotels are :) ). A traveller can spend the day lazing around on the beaches and then hit the many good pubs or clubs at night. After dinner at one of the resturants that serve great food. Of course there are a number of museums to satisfy intellectual guilt before heading back to the beach and niteclubs.

But and there is always a but, travel to Odessa is not for the package holiday maker. Odessa (at tis time) lacks the developed tourism infrastructure that Malaga or Ibiza have. Odessa is really for the independent traveller at this time or those looking for a holiday that is slightly different but still has niteclubs and beaches.

If you do make it to Odessa, drop in to Mick O'Neils Irish Pub. A good pub, a great atmosphere, good food and drink. O'Neils also doubles as the local for the expatriate community of Odessa (all six of them :). Speaking of which I would like to thank Steven, Debbie, Mark and Alan for their selfless inclusion of a traveller into their circle if only for a short period. Special thanks to Mark for taking the time to show me some of Odessa.

I enjoyed my trip to Odessa. I hope I can find the time to return in summer. I do recommend a visit with the proviso that is still rough and not for your average package tourist. But if you want a holiday that is different, not overly touristic then a trip to Odessa could be what you are looking for.

Doing a Hugh in Italian

A recent The Economist (Feb 25 - Mar 3) had an article in it about the challenges facing the Italian textile and footware industry. The Economist offers up the standed freee market cures such as consolidation and investment in capital equipment. One solution that The Economist does not mention is the creation of a global microbrand or to put it another way: the Italian textile and footware industry needs to do a Hugh (you could say doing an English Cut but doing a Hugh sounds better.)

The Italian textile and footware industry simply can't compete in mass market production. If it is not China it will be Vietnam or Burma or Cambodia or Africa. There will always be someone with cheaper labour. Trying to compete directly with the cheap labour is not going to work. Instead the Italian textile industry needs to build on their unique characteristics. The Italian textile and footware industry has a history and a reputation that the cheap labour countries cannot replicate. Taking advantage of their history and reputation is how the Italian companies are going to be able to compete.

Italian textile and footware companies need to create global microbrands that use the reputation and history as a foundation. The global microbrands are important as they create the demand for the time of the craftsman. Time is the only scarcity. But scarcity has no intrinsict value. Value only comes from the interaction of demand and scarcity. Here lies the success of English Cut (doing a Hugh). Through creating a global microbrand English Cut created demand for the time of the craftsman.

There is no reason why Italian textile and footware companies cannot create their own global microbrands to sell the time of italian mastercraftsman. They need to do a Hugh.

Links:
Hugh Macleod's The Hughtrain Manifesto

Technorati Tags: Hugh Macleod, Global Microbrand

Discovery of A-List Posts: Or Why A-lister vs Z-lister debate is a red herring

The conversation that started about gatekeepers has moved on to about A-listers vs Z-listers. Or how Z-listers can become A-listers. You can see the part of the conversation here on tech.memeorandum.

If you are trying to be an A-lister you aren't. Now matter how hard you try it just ain't going to work.

Besides the point isn't to be an A-lister but to write A-list posts. To do this you need an interesting topic, something worth saying (I agree posts get tired very, very quickly) and a readable style of writing. Note carefully that last point. Readable style of writing. I have lost count of the number of times I stopped reading a post after the first paragraph because of really bad writing (I'm looking at you Umair Haque of Bubblegeneration). I enjoy reading Gapingvoid because of Hugh MacLeod's writing style (not to mention the cartoons). It is really simple concept. I With the amount I read every day I don't have time to waste deciphering incomprehensible writing.

Back to the A-lister vs Z-lister debate. The real issue is allowing A-list blog posts rise to the surface from whatever blog they are posted on. Robert Scoble and Om Malik don't write A-list posts all the time. The blogsphere will improve if we make the shift away from thinking in terms of blogs to thinking in terms of posts.

More is needed to help good posts to rise to the surface. Technorati has just implemented their "Authority" slider. However, this still looks at the whole blog and not the individual posts. This is a step in the right direction but the slider could do with refinement to look at per post authority. The other major problem with Technorati's "Authority" measure is that it counts links. This fails to account for the "virtual bloggers" who simply read the post and may leave a comment but do not have their own blog.

There is never going to be a magic bullet for finding good posts. What is needed is a series of measures to rate and compare posts. Some of these measures will be social/community based. Others will be algorithmic like Google News. The more methods for quantifying quality the greater the likelihood of a good post finding its way to the surface where ever its location.

To kick start the debate I propose that two widgets be included in blogs. These widgets would allow readers to rate a particular post. One widget would allow the reader to rate the quality of writing and the other widget would let the reader rate the content i.e. is it interesting, funny, flamebait etc. Think of it as the Slashdot moderation system write large across the blogsphere. The same system can be used for comments as well.

The rating widgets fall into the community/social category of rating measures. What is now needed is a algorithmic measures. Bayesian filters fit nicely. Bayesian filters can be used to find good posts across the blogsphere in much the same manner as they detect and junk spam. The filter would compare each individual post against what it has learned are good posts. The filter can be continuously trained by simple yes/no button for readers and by tying the rating widgets.

Over time further measures can be added including rating the readability of the English and creating topic specific Bayesian filters (what is considered a good post of skateboarding may be quite different from what is considered a good post on 19th century Russian Literature).

No system will ever be perfect and the system will need to be continuously refined. A combination of social and algorithmic methods will be needed to discovery good posts. Neither social or algorithmic alone can do it. And if you are a Z-lister wanting to be an A-lister, writing consistently good posts is the fastest way to becoming an A-lister. Whinging about being a Z-lister is not.

Technorati Tags: blogs, attention, blogging, brreeeport, a-lister, z-lister

Rocketboom and Attention

This week news broke of Rocketboom auctioning ad space. Jeff Jarvis has a post quoting Henry Copeland's view of the Rocketboom auction. It is easy to exaggerate the importance of this auction but I see this as being an interesting harbinger of things to come. It also speaks to a weakness of Google.

What is developing is a transparent market for the sale and purchase of attention; an Attention Market. Just like Fred Wilson wanted. The market poses a serious issue for Google maintaining the growth in revenue. It dent's Google's strategy of becoming an attention arbitrator. Google's current strategy seems to broaden the size of their attention pool through foray's into main stream media. I see this providing a short term to medium growth in revenue but this will rapidly become difficult to maintain as the Attention Market's momentum grows.

Google is not the only company threatened by the Attention Market. All of the Internet Ad Networks and traditional advertising arbitrators will be challenged and changed by the Attention Market. While the Attention Market threatens the established order it brings new opportunities for investment and companies.

Technorati Tags: attention, rocketboom, attention market, google

Disrupting the VC Industry Redux: Disrupting Equity Financing

In the ensuring discussion fuelled by Rick Segal's original post on disrupting the VC industry many important points where raised by both sides. In particular Jeff Nolan of Venture Chronicles gives cogent arguments about the value of VCs in building and developing companies. Not the least of which is overcoming the traditional web services "hole" during scaling. Something I have commented on before.

The simple fact is that VCs are not going away. No matter how hard some people might wish. VCs bring value to the table. However, the value that VCs bring does not fit every situation. VCs are currently used as a one-size-fits-all solution to problems. This is where the VC or, more accurately, the equity financing industry will be disrupted. Disruption will come from solutions that address particular problems or situations within the equity financing industry.

In my previous post on this subject I proposed a VC marketplace as one solution. I foresee this market covering the early stages of new company/idea development. From conception to a product with a few customers and some revenue. Put in web service terms, this would be from conception to the beta with a few customers and some revenue coming in. It is from this point that VCs add value. The marketplace, while it could still be used, is not necessarily the best solution for further equity financing. VCs can help smooth the ride as the company goes through major growth spurt. The aim of VCs should be to help the companies leap the "hole".

The VC markeplace doesn't replace VCs. The VC marketplace compliments VCs. The marketplace provides equity financing to companies to get them to the point of being ready for VC funding if they so desire.

Does the investment company proposed by Dave Winer and seconded by Doc Searls have a place. Many bloggers don't think so. They point to the previous failure of publicly traded VC funds. As proposed, I agree. It really isn't a particularly good idea nor is it disruptive (no matter how you cut it) as stated. For its proposed vision it well..sucks. However, the company does have a place within the equity financing industry. Just not the one dreamt of by Dave et al.

The fund could be useful for providing cash injections into companies that either don't want to undertake a round of VC funding (remembering Guy Kawasaki's refrain "To much money is just as bad as to little") or don't wont to involve VCs in the company for some reason (they see the VCs as the devil in disguise). The fund is another way of raising equity financing when VCs or the marketplace aren't a suitable solution.

The fund would only address companyies with cashflow that have an equity requirement that is too small to be worthwhile for VC funding (which seems to be as high as US$10m at the moment and likely to go higher). The fund would focus on purchsing preferred stock as opposed to common stock. Which translates (very roughly) as purchasing a slice of future profits as opposed to a slice of the company


Technorati Tags: VC, disruption, vc disruption, markets