Communitech is getting $26.4m from the Ontario Government towards the creation of The Communitech Hub: Digital Media & Mobile Accelerator.
“Located in Waterloo Region and serving technology companies provincewide, The Hub will help hardware and software entrepreneurs bring new tools, technologies and applications to market. The Hub will focus on commercialization, business development, access to financing and connecting clients with other digital media hubs across Ontario and Canada.”
It looks like it is a physical space with resources to help entrepreneurs.
“The Hub [is] a new centre that will help emerging digital media companies grow and succeed in the global market. In particular, The Hub will look beyond the entertainment sector to focus on companies creating hardware and software for industries, including advanced manufacturing, healthcare and finance.”
It’s great news for Waterloo Region. Further support of a great organization with Communitech as a leader. Additional attention and awareness to a growing tech sector with companies like OpenText and RIM. And additional real estate development and construction jobs.
What I am curious about is the relationship of the Accelerator Centre to The Hub? And what is the relationship to nGen? to MaRS? to RIC Centre? to OCRI? to Innovation Synergy Centre? Ontario Centres for Excellence? Is there a plan for where each of these pieces fit together? How about where these programs fit relative to local Economic Development Corporations? Is this really about creating an innovation and entrepreneurship based economy? Or is it about investing in third-party, arms length, pseudo-government agencies without looking like big government?
So it’s a mixed bag. This announcement continues to show technology entrepreneurship is a focus of the Ontario Government’s plan to help seed a new economy by bring new companies to market. But there seems to be a focus on real estate as the first step in enablement. Any thoughts?
Great comments/observations David. I can speak specifically to the relationship between the Digital Media Accelerator and the Accelerator Centre. The two will be closely associated, even more so than the current relationship between the Accelerator Centre and Communitech. The Accelerator Centre will provide programing, processes and procedures for all of the start up companies being “incubated” for lack of a better term. We plan to treat the physical incubation space as though it where under one roof. There will of course be differences between the two locations which will complement each other. We should be in a better position to address all of the needs of early stage technology companies. Our goal is to create a seamless organization so as to not confuse those looking for resources.
Tim Ellis
Great comments/observations David. I can speak specifically to the relationship between the Digital Media Accelerator and the Accelerator Centre. The two will be closely associated, even more so than the current relationship between the Accelerator Centre and Communitech. The Accelerator Centre will provide programing, processes and procedures for all of the start up companies being “incubated” for lack of a better term. We plan to treat the physical incubation space as though it where under one roof. There will of course be differences between the two locations which will complement each other. We should be in a better position to address all of the needs of early stage technology companies. Our goal is to create a seamless organization so as to not confuse those looking for resources.
Tim Ellis
It seems to me that Governemnt and entrepeneurship are at odds.
Governments are slow moving, regemented, bureacratic, and process driven – not given to entrepreneurial traits – speed, agility, creativity, dedication, focus etc. Their money is great if spent in the right way – do we need more bricks & mortar to help the tech sector?
Wouldn't the money be better spent on moving these new products into the market to generate long term sustainable technology companies?
It seems to me that Governemnt and entrepeneurship are at odds.
Governments are slow moving, regemented, bureacratic, and process driven – not given to entrepreneurial traits – speed, agility, creativity, dedication, focus etc. Their money is great if spent in the right way – do we need more bricks & mortar to help the tech sector?
Wouldn't the money be better spent on moving these new products into the market to generate long term sustainable technology companies?
It seems to me that Governemnt and entrepeneurship are at odds.
Governments are slow moving, regemented, bureacratic, and process driven – not given to entrepreneurial traits – speed, agility, creativity, dedication, focus etc. Their money is great if spent in the right way – do we need more bricks & mortar to help the tech sector?
Wouldn’t the money be better spent on moving these new products into the market to generate long term sustainable technology companies?
It seems to me that Governemnt and entrepeneurship are at odds.
Governments are slow moving, regemented, bureacratic, and process driven – not given to entrepreneurial traits – speed, agility, creativity, dedication, focus etc. Their money is great if spent in the right way – do we need more bricks & mortar to help the tech sector?
Wouldn’t the money be better spent on moving these new products into the market to generate long term sustainable technology companies?
This is a great announcement! I think the key to showing success in these programs is to have a HIT company come from them. In order to do this we need Investor groups that have a strong incentive to see companies succeed to get involved. Furthermore, with the Investor groups getting involved, the companies will have further guidance and resources to be successful plus the friendly pressure to show commercial traction early on in their lifecycle.
This is a great announcement! I think the key to showing success in these programs is to have a HIT company come from them. In order to do this we need Investor groups that have a strong incentive to see companies succeed to get involved. Furthermore, with the Investor groups getting involved, the companies will have further guidance and resources to be successful plus the friendly pressure to show commercial traction early on in their lifecycle.
The Ontario Centres of Excellence has a cross-appointed business development manager with Communitech, specifically to cover the new Hub. Glenn Smith provides us with a direct link to the program. Most importantly, he provides an entry point to the OCE programs for companies and projects that will be incubated in the Hub.
OCE is also a partner in ACE – Accelerator for Commercialization Excellence – along with the Accelerator Centre and the UW IP Managament Group. ACE is intended to provide a single point of contact to commercialization support for UW researchers interested developing their technology into business or licensing opportunities.
Our interest is in supporting projects that move technologies to where they can make a commercial impact on a company. That can take a diverse set of supports and resources covering both business and technology. Wherever we can we work with the local resources that can provide these supports, supplementing what we can bring to the effort.
John MacRitchie / OCE
The Ontario Centres of Excellence has a cross-appointed business development manager with Communitech, specifically to cover the new Hub. Glenn Smith provides us with a direct link to the program. Most importantly, he provides an entry point to the OCE programs for companies and projects that will be incubated in the Hub.
OCE is also a partner in ACE – Accelerator for Commercialization Excellence – along with the Accelerator Centre and the UW IP Managament Group. ACE is intended to provide a single point of contact to commercialization support for UW researchers interested developing their technology into business or licensing opportunities.
Our interest is in supporting projects that move technologies to where they can make a commercial impact on a company. That can take a diverse set of supports and resources covering both business and technology. Wherever we can we work with the local resources that can provide these supports, supplementing what we can bring to the effort.
John MacRitchie / OCE
Typical of politics — announcing a new initiative is much more interesting than supporting existing ones; that's why every announcement kicks off something that sounds new, even if it happens to be well-supported by initiatives that came before.
Typical of politics — announcing a new initiative is much more interesting than supporting existing ones; that’s why every announcement kicks off something that sounds new, even if it happens to be well-supported by initiatives that came before.
Incubated vs accelerated. The semantics are the same. Real estate with benefits. I'd love to see a real investment not in the programs but in real infrastructure to enable a next generation of companies. Broadband beyond 100Mb to the home. 4G wireless testbed.
How about stronger lobbying not for money to build real estate but to change things like Section 116? http://www.vcrants.com/2009/04/reforming-sectio…
Again I'm not sure why the separation? If the goal is a seamless organization then why not have one organization?
Agreed,
This is a great thing for Waterloo Region, which by all purposes has demonstrated the best potential for creating and sustaining emerging technology companies. It would be fantastic to see additional funders (VCs and others) with permanent homes in Waterloo. (I know as Waterloo alums we all have a strong affinity for students/coops and hiring talent out of UW). (PS Andrew, Tim, Jacqui, Peter and team are fantastic — It's the opportunity to enable more of the UW talent by being there).
Incubated vs accelerated. The semantics are the same. Real estate with benefits. I’d love to see a real investment not in the programs but in real infrastructure to enable a next generation of companies. Broadband beyond 100Mb to the home. 4G wireless testbed. nnHow about stronger lobbying not for money to build real estate but to change things like Section 116? http://www.vcrants.com/2009/04/reforming-section-116-key-to-opening-canadian-borders-to-foreign-venture-capital/
Incubated vs accelerated. The semantics are the same. Real estate with benefits. I’d love to see a real investment not in the programs but in real infrastructure to enable a next generation of companies. Broadband beyond 100Mb to the home. 4G wireless testbed.
How about stronger lobbying not for money to build real estate but to change things like Section 116? http://www.vcrants.com/2009/04/reforming-section-116-key-to-opening-canadian-borders-to-foreign-venture-capital/
Again I’m not sure why the separation? If the goal is a seamless organization then why not have one organization?
Again I’m not sure why the separation? If the goal is a seamless organization then why not have one organization?
Agreed, nnThis is a great thing for Waterloo Region, which by all purposes has demonstrated the best potential for creating and sustaining emerging technology companies. It would be fantastic to see additional funders (VCs and others) with permanent homes in Waterloo. (I know as Waterloo alums we all have a strong affinity for students/coops and hiring talent out of UW). (PS Andrew, Tim, Jacqui, Peter and team are fantastic — It’s the opportunity to enable more of the UW talent by being there).
Agreed,
This is a great thing for Waterloo Region, which by all purposes has demonstrated the best potential for creating and sustaining emerging technology companies. It would be fantastic to see additional funders (VCs and others) with permanent homes in Waterloo. (I know as Waterloo alums we all have a strong affinity for students/coops and hiring talent out of UW). (PS Andrew, Tim, Jacqui, Peter and team are fantastic — It’s the opportunity to enable more of the UW talent by being there).