Author: David Crow

  • Y Combinator Accepting Winter 2009 Applications

    Y Combinator is now accepting applications for the winter 2009 funding cycle happening in Mountain View, CA. It’s possible for Canadians to get accepted to the Y Combinator program. All of Canada is following the exploits of Michael Parkatti and Mike Marrone during the summer cycle in Boston. We’ve covered the story, with Austin Hill interviewing both Michael and Mike. It’s important for Canadian entrepreneurs to apply. The Y Combinator program is about the experience and connections that you can build during the three month program.

    The Winter 2009 Y Combinator is offering $5000 + $5000n where n = the number of founders in exchange for between 2-10% of the company. Assuming 2 founders and Y Combinator owning 6% of company, this works out to a pre-money valuation of $250,000 and a post-money valuation of $265,000. It’s a great way to seed a company.

    Jevon talks about startups being about execution, the Y Combinator program is all about execution.

    7. Once your company exists, we’ll write a check to it for the rest of the money. You can spend the money however you want.

    8. Y Combinator is not an incubator. We have space you can use if you need to, but we expect you to work out of wherever you find to live. It is no coincidence that so many successful startups have started this way; it’s the ideal setup for the initial phase.

    9. Throughout the 3 months we have regular office hours for startups who want to talk about what they’re building, or get advice in dealing with investors. We also have occasional open houses at YC on Thursday afternoons.

    10. From January through March we’ll have dinners every Tuesday for all the founders. At each dinner we’ll invite an expert in some aspect of startups to speak.

    It is a program that is designed to help you take an idea, and learn to execute with very little capital resources. The benefits of mentorship, guidance and a growing network of alumni and entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley and around the world. You get enough cash to pay for your living expenses for 3-4 months. You get a cohort of entrepreneurs you can have a shared experience with. You have scheduled diners with the Y Combinator team and an expert about some aspect of startups. You get 2 investor days where follow on investors are brought in and use the Y Combinator to do deal flow. It’s a great opportunity.

    The original motivation for Y Combinator was benevolent, but this is not a charity. If our investments pay off, we can invest in more startups, and if they don’t, we can’t keep doing this indefinitely. So we’re looking for startups we think will succeed.

    If you’re a small team of Canadian entrepreneurs looking for a chance. You should fill out an application the deadline to apply is October 17, 2007.

  • Ten Web Startups to Watch

    Technology Review has published a list of Ten Web Startups to Watch.

    1. Pinger
    2. Pownce
    3. Qik
    4. Dash Navigation
    5. Ushahidi.com
    6. QTech
    7. 33Across
    8. Peer39
    9. Mashery
    10. Anagran

    Interesting list of companies. There is a mix from social networking platforms to packet filtering. It started me wondering who were the top ten web startups in Canada. Who were the companies that were building businesses around market opportunities and technologies that should succeed. And in true Nigel Tufnel logic my top ten list goes to eleven. None of these companies are listed on the Fast 50, yet. And the list doesn?t include non-Web companies like Rapid Mind or xkoto. But they are an outstanding group of Canadian ventures.

    1. Idée Inc.
    2. Crowd Science
    3. Octopz
    4. FreshBooks
    5. ConceptShare
    6. Viigo
    7. NowPublic
    8. Acquisio
    9. Agoracom
    10. radian6
    11. LearnHub 
  • 17 Mistakes Start-ups Make

    John Osher discussed What Not To Do: 17 most common mistakes start-ups make and how to avoid them in Entrepreneur Magazine. Each of the mistakes are a topic on their own, for example, I?ve trying to provide examples of high level market and financial analysis. Mistakes 1-8 focus on the market and financial requirements of a startup. Mistakes 9-10 focus on hiring and corporate management. Mistake 11 is about product design and technology. Mistakes 12-17 are about focus and vision. It is a very interesting read for building an appropriate mind-set for entrepreneurs.

    1. Failing to spend enough time researching the business idea to see if it’s viable. "This is really the most important mistake of all. They say 9 [out] of 10 entrepreneurs fail because they’re undercapitalized or have the wrong people. I say 9 [out] of 10 people fail because their original concept is not viable. They want to be in business so much that they often don’t do the work they need to do ahead of time, so everything they do is doomed. They can be very talented, do everything else right, and fail because they have ideas that are flawed."
    2. Miscalculating market size, timing, ease of entry and potential market share. "Most new entrepreneurs get very excited over an idea and don’t look for the truth about how many people will want to buy it. They put together financial projections as part of a presentation to pump up their investors. They say, ‘The market size is 50 million people that could use this product, and if I could only sell to 2 percent of them, I’d be selling a million pieces.’ But 2 percent of a market is a lot. Most products sell way less than 1 percent."
    3. Underestimating financial requirements and timing. "They set their financial requirements based on Mistake 1, and they go ahead and make a commitment to this much office space and this many computers, and hire a vice president of sales, and so on. Before they know it, based on sales projections that were wrong to start with, they have created costs that require those projections to be met. So they run out of money."
    4. Overprojecting sales volume and timing. "They have already miscalculated the size of the market. Now they overproject their portion of it. They often say ‘There are 200 million homes, and I need to sell [to] x number of them.’ When you break it down, though, a much smaller number of those are really sales prospects. That makes it impossible to make their sales projections."
    5. Making cost projections that are too low. "Their cost projections are always too low. Part of the reason is that they project much higher sales. There are also unknown reasons that always come out that usually make costs higher than planned. So on top of everything, their margins are now lower."
    6. Hiring too many people and spending too much on offices and facilities. "Now you have lower sales, higher costs and too much overhead. These are the things that you see every day in companies that fail. And they all grow out of that first mistake: failing to research the size and viability of the opportunity."
    7. Lacking a contingency plan for a shortfall in expectations. "Even if you’re realistic in your estimates to start, there are things that happen when you start a new business. Your sales ideas may be no good; bank rates may go up; there may be a shipping strike. These aren’t the result of poor planning, but they happen. More often than not, entrepreneurs just feel that something will come along when they need it. They don’t have contingency plans for it not working out at the size and time they want."
    8. Bringing in unnecessary partners. "There are certain partners you need. For instance, you often need money, so you’re going to need money partners. But too many times, the guy with the idea takes on all his friends as partners. Many people don’t provide strategic advantages and don’t warrant ownership. But they’re all going to get 25 percent of the company. It’s totally unnecessary, and it’s a mistake. Before people are made partners, they have to earn it."
    9. Hiring for convenience rather than skill requirements. "In my first business or two, I hired relatives. It was easy to do, but in many cases, they were the wrong people [for the job]. And it’s hard to fire people, especially if they’re relatives or friends. More time needs to be spent handpicking people based on skill requirements. You really need super-skilled people who can wear more than one hat. It just bogs you down when you hire people who can’t do the job."
    10. Neglecting to manage the entire company as a whole. "You see this happen all the time. They’ll spend half their time doing something that represents 5 percent of their business. You have to have a view of your whole company. But too often, the person running it loses that view. They get involved in a part, and they don’t manage the whole. Whether I do this product or that product, whether I hire somebody, [I consider] how they [will] fit long term and short term in the big picture. Constantly try to see your big picture."
    11. Accepting that it’s "not possible" too easily rather than finding a way. "I had an engineer who was a very good engineer, but with every toy we developed, he would say, ‘You can’t do it that way.’ I had to be careful not to accept this too easily. I had to look further. If you’re an entrepreneur, you’re going to break new ground. A lot of people are going to say it’s not possible. You can’t accept that too easily. A good entrepreneur is going to find a way."
    12. Focusing too much on sales volume and company size rather than profit. "Too much of your management is often based on volume and size. So many entrepreneurs want to say ‘I have a company that’s this big, with this many people, this many square feet of space, and this much sales.’ It’s too much [emphasis] on how fast and big you can build a business rather than how much profit it can make. Bankers and investors don’t like this. Entrepreneurs are so into creating and building, but they also have to learn to become good [businesspeople]."
    13. Seeking confirmation of your actions rather than seeking the truth. "This often happens: You want to do something, so you talk about it with people who work for you. You talk to [your] family and friends. But you’re only looking for confirmation; you’re not looking for the truth. You’re looking for somebody to tell you you’re right. But the truth always comes out. So we [test] our products, and we listen to what [the testers] say. We give much more value to the truth than to people saying what we’re doing is great."
    14. Lacking simplicity in your vision. "Many entrepreneurs go in too many directions at once and do not execute anything well. Rather than focusing on doing everything right to sell to their biggest markets, they divide the attention of their people and their time, trying to do too many things at [one time]. Then their main product isn’t done properly because they’re doing so many different things. They have an idea and say they’re going to sell it to Wal-Mart. Then they say they’re going to sell to [the] Home Shopping Network. And then the gift market looks good. And so on."
    15. Lacking clarity of your long-term aim and business purpose. "You should have an idea of what your long-term aim is. It doesn’t mean that won’t change, but when you aim an arrow, you have to be aiming at a target. This [concept will] often come up when people a
      sk ‘How do I pick a product?’ The answer depends on what you’re trying to do. If you’re trying to [create] a billion-dollar company with this product, it may not have a chance. But if you’re trying to make a $5 million company, it can work. Or if you’re trying to create a company [in which] family members can be employed, it can work. Clarity of your business purpose is very important [but] is often not really part of the thought process."
    16. Lacking focus and identity. "This was written from the viewpoint of building the company as a valuable entity. The company itself is also a product. Too many companies try to go after too many targets at once and end up with a potpourri rather than a focused business entity with an identity. When you try to make a business, it’s very important to maintain a focus and an identity. Don’t let it become a potpourri, or it loses its power. For instance, you say, ‘We’re already selling to Kmart, so we might as well make a toy because Kmart buys toys.’ If you do that, the company becomes weaker. A company needs to be focused on what it is. Then its power builds from that."
    17. Lacking an exit strategy. "Have an exit plan, and create your business to satisfy that plan. For instance, I am thinking I might run my new business for two years and then get out of it. I think it’s an opportunity to make a tremendous amount of money for two years, but I’m not sure [whether] it’s proprietary enough to stop the competition from getting in. So I’m in with an exit strategy of doing it for two years and then winding down. I won’t commit to long-term leases, and after the first year, we’ll start watching the marketplace very closely and start watching inventories.
  • NYC Seed versus IAF

    Wow, NYC Seed is an interesting fund focused on seed-stage technology companies in NYC. It sounds familiar to the IAF program by the Ontario Centres for Excellence.

    The NYC Seed fund is a joint venture between ITAC, New York City Investment Fund, The New York State Foundation for Science, Technology and Innovation, New York City Economic Development Corporation, and PolyTechnic University. In addition to investing up to $200,000 per startup, the fund aims to give entrepreneurs support via a network of "notable entrepreneurs, technologists and venture capitalists," and plans to help the companies it funds seek series A round funding when they reach that stage?

    The fund currently has $2 million under management.

    The Investment Accelerator Fund (IAF) is similiar, it allows up to $500,000 in the form of convertible debt for early-stage companies.

    Fund Requires
    NYC Seed
    • A team (2+ people) with a compelling idea that makes sense today.
    • Your team should be technically savvy, with members possessing a proven record of completing complex technology projects.
    • We will ask to review a prototype of your product.
    • Company must be based in NYC.
    IAF
    • Technologies or intellectual property (IP) the company intends to commercialize must have
      unique and protectable aspects that establish a sustainable competitive advantage
    • Full and unencumbered legal right to the commercial use of the company?s technology or IP
    • The products and services the company intends to bring to market must meet a defined
      market need and have a significant and sustainable advantage over competitors
    • The addressable market should be at least $20 million and clearly defined
    • The management team must have the skills and domain expertise to be successful,
      or be willing to replace or augment the team as necessary
    • A clear path to commercialization and a plausible plan to support it
    • The company must be incorporated, or be incorporated by the time of IAF investment
    • Total revenues should be less than $500k from the time of incorporation
    • Intend for at least 50% of salaried employees to be based in Ontario

    There?s not a huge difference in the funding, or the requirements. But the NYC Seed option just feels cleaner. The IAF eligibility requirements are verbose and at times a little obvious. The big difference might be in the size of the fund, NYC Seed is just $2M where IAF is a $29M fund. And the differences in focus, NYC Seed is focused strongly on ?software and web-oriented technologies?, the IAF fund is part of the Centre of Excellence for Communications and Information Technology covering diverse areas as wireless and wireline communications, the Internet, human-computer interaction, health and medicine, software design, network planning, education, security, among others.

    NYC Seed aims to provide ?entrepreneurs support via a network of "notable entrepreneurs, technologists and venture capitalists?. Very similar to the Business Mentorship and Entrepreneurship Program provided by MaRS.

    There?s a different feel in the web copy used to describe each program. The IAF program just feels more cumbersome. However, it offers many of the same advantages for Ontario companies.We need to do some work to help local entrepreneurs understand the availability, benefits and people at OCE to connect with John MacRitchie, Bryan Kanarens and Charles Plant.

    I think all entrepreneurs looking to raise funding should be able to answer the questions on the NYC Seed application form. My offer, any Ontario-based entrepreneur that wants a connection to OCE, just send me an email with the information from the NYC Seed application (see below) and I will forward it to John MacRitchie.

    1. What?s the idea?
    2. Why now?
    3. Who are your competitors?
    4. How will you make money?
    5. How will you use the funding?
    6. Please describe your product development roadmap. How long will it take to complete your first version?
    7. Please provide bios for each founder.
    8. Please provide 3 references for each founder.
  • TSX Venture Exchange Entrepreneurial Bootcamp

     tsx-bootcampModerated by Sean Wise, Wise Mentor Capital

    Decide if Public Venture Capital (PVC) is right for you. TSX Venture Exchange’s Entrepreneurial Bootcamp is tailored for CEOs and CFOs of aggressive growth companies considering raising capital from the PVC marketplace over the next few years. This workshop will explore the use of PVC as a growth tool for emerging companies.

    Topics include:

    • How to decide if going public is right for your company
    • The Capital Pool Company® (CPC) Program
    • Picking the best and most cost-effective advisors
    • How to pitch for public capital
    • Why PVC may work when private VCs are not interested or an attractive option

    Register, Cost: $65.00

    What: TSX Venture Exchange Entrepreneurial Bootcamp
    Cost: $65.00 Moderated by Sean Wise, Wise Mentor Capital For more information please contact: Debbie Bamforth, TSX Venture Exchange, at (416) 947-4411 or [email protected]
    When: Wednesday, May 28, 2008 1:00 PM to 5:30 PM
    Where: MaRS Centre

    101 College Street, Auditorium B
    Toronto, ON   Canada
  • 2008 ACE Exposition

    acecanadaAdvancing Canadian Entrepreneurship (ACE) held their showcase of entrepreneurs at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre.  ACE is a charitable organization that delivers programming to higher education students to inspire them to make meaningful contribution to words their community by building real world businesses and entrepreneurial ventures.

    ACE submissions are from major Canadian schools including BCIT, University of Calgary, Ryerson University, University of Toronto, University of Waterloo amongst others. The Student Entrepreneur Competition requires that students be a founder (or 50% owner of a business) and are selected based on financials and subjective judging criteria. The goal is to submit an operating venture that is ready for growth.

    ACE announces 2008 National Student Entrepreneur Competition Champion – Joseph Moncada, Sweet Tooth Candy Emporium

    Since 2006 Joseph, a Business student, has owned and operated Sweet Tooth Candy Emporium, a network of stores and kiosks offering rare, unique, retro, and imported sweets from around the world. What started as a summer project through the Ontario Government “Summer Company” program has grown exponentially into a successful franchise.

    Now in operation for only two years, Sweet Tooth Candy Emporium employs over 25 people and has grown into three stores based in prominent locations around the Greater Toronto Area and Wasaga Beach.

    The focus of the ACE programs is on economic impact on local communities. The submissions are diverse ranging from software to franchises. The 2008 regional winners included software companies, an online retailer, a French language publishing company and a walking stick manufacturer.

    • Ryne Flood, 6am SoftwareOnline Parent-Teacher Interview Scheduler
    • Grahm Watts, Nature Trails – A company that manufactures walking sticks, twig pencils, bird hourses, etc.
    • Brad LeBlanc, Engaging Entertainment – Event mangement, event production and strategic marketing
    • André Wilson, Editions Court-Circuit – A French language publishing company
    • Jill Lennox, Stuffitbag – Custom designed laptop bags with online retailing
    • Brett Patrontasch, Scholars At Your Service Inc. – a student organization offering residential and commercial painting, window washing, and on site automotive detailing to their customers

    While most of these ventures probably aren’t venture fundable, the opportunity for students to see entrepreneurship as a career path is needed in Canadian post secondary educational institutions. ACE offers a great structured set of programs for students to get involved and inspired by entrepreneurs in their communities.

  • Founders & Funders Toronto – June 4, 2008

    Jevon MacDonald and I are please to announce the second Toronto Founders & Funders dinner on June 4, 2008.

    90546828

    What: Founders & Funders Toronto
    Founders & Funders is a private, invite only social event. Founders and Funders is dedicated: to helping Canadian entrepreneurs to meet each other; meet potential funders: angel, VC or other money sources; to have fun; and see how we can help each other create the NEXT BIG successful company.
    When: Wednesday, June 4, 2008 5:30 PM to 10:00 PM

    The inaugural Toronto event sold out. And we’re expecting this event to reach capacity very quickly.

    We are limited to 100 seats. The fee for the dinner is $100 which will include drinks and dinner.  This is a private networking event and we are selecting the audience to ensure a quality group of attendees. And to provide the best chance to network together.

    How do I get an Invite?

    If you would like to attend the dinner, please fill out the following form and let us know who you are.

    We will be contacting those invited with details on the registration and attendance details for the dinner in the coming weeks.

    Special Guest  – Dan’l LewinDan'l Lewin

    We’re incredibly lucky to have Dan’l Lewin scheduled to be in attendance (Dan’l is the Corporate Vice-President, Strategic and Emerging Business Development for Microsoft). Check out GigaOM’s interview with Dan’l where he talks candidly about his role in Microsoft and how Microsoft works with other emerging technology companies.

    Dan’l Lewin is corporate vice president of Strategic and Emerging Business Development, responsible for managing worldwide strategic business relationships with venture capitalists and emerging venture-capital-backed businesses, as well as managing the business relationship with leading global industry partners such as SUN, Adobe, Intuit and BEA to ensure their applications interoperate with and run well on the Microsoft platform – for the benefit of the companies’ common customers. Lewin is based at Microsoft’s Mountain View, Calif. campus.

    A 25-year Silicon Valley veteran, Lewin was most recently CEO of Aurigin Systems Inc., an enterprise software company focused on intellectual property asset management. He also spent 18 years as an executive, leading sales and marketing divisions for companies including Apple Computer Corp., NeXT Inc. and GO Corporation. In addition, Lewin has served as a consultant for emerging companies, venture capital firms and corporate joint ventures.

    Lewin holds an A.B. in politics from Princeton University.

    Sponsors

    We’re working with a number of great organizations to sponsor the event.

    If you would like to sponsor this event or other Founders & Funders events across Canada please feel free to contact David Crow or Jevon MacDonald.

  • Radiant Core acquired by Zerofootprint

    Radiant CoreRadiant Core has been acquired by Zerofootprint Software. Radiant Core was a Toronto-based web design and development shop led by Jay Goldman and Mike GlennZerofootprint is a Toronto-based company that “provides information, products and services for the global network of consumers and businesses who wish to reduce their environmental impact”. Radiant Core is best known for the visual design of Firefox 2, and has been recognized by Taschen as a leading web design agency. Jay and I have presented together at Web2Expo, FSOSS and Ignite. We’re also co-conspirators in this whole DemoCamp thing.

    zerofootprintsoftwareZerofootprint has been a client of Radiant Core. Radiant Core designed, built and launched the Zerofootprint Calculator Facebook application (add the application). Zerofootprint has a laudable goal to empower people and change their collective footprint.

    Our goal is to mobilize and empower large groups of individuals and organizations worldwide, to reduce their collective carbon and ecological footprint. We do this by harnessing the power of social networking, the Internet and software.

    Why acquire a consulting firm? It’s a great acquisition method, Ron and the Zerofootprint team really managed their risk by engaging Radiant Core to evaluate capabilities, working styles, and the quality of team deliverables. In Radiant Core they get a world-class design firm with strong experience designing and building accessible web and social media applications. Radiant Core also has deep roots in participating and building vibrant, open creative communities. Jay and Mike have been involved with TorCamp, DemoCamp, TransitCamp, FacebookCamp/Facebook Developer Garage and other activities here in Toronto. The Zerofootprint team had the opportunity to evaluate the Radiant Core team and their ability to deliver on the design and development of the Zerofootprint Calculator Facebook application.  Zerofootprint and Radiant Core have worked together and can begin to have informed conversations about cultural compatibility and employee integration based on real experiences.

    No financial details have been released.

    What does this mean for Toronto?

    • One less world-class web design shop.
    • One more awesome software startup, now with world-class web development team!

    It means that Zerofootprint just acquired one of the best web development shops in Canada to be their product team. Running a consulting business is a tough slog. It’s a linear growth business, i.e., you grow revenues by increasing the number of billable hours, increasing the billable rate, or increasing the number of people. It hopefully gives Jay and Mike an exit. It gives Zerofootprint a huge accelerator to continue to build products and services that will help to change the world.

    Interested in what it really means, try calculating your footprint at http://toronto.zerofootprint.net/ and see how Zerofootprint is working with the City of Toronto to create a greener city.

  • Is Dragon's Den bad for innovation?

    Originally posted on davidcrow.ca.

    I was talking to Greg Wilson about the Dragon’s Den on CBC. I think that this show has really done a disservice to entrepreneurs and innovators. It might make interesting television for a government network but I think it is doing more harm than good for early-stage entrepreneurs (particularly technology entrepreneurs).

    1. Making venture capital process appear too simplistic
    2. Putting people on stage that aren’t venture fundable
    3. Creating misconceptions for future entrepreneurs

    Simplistic Process

    The Dragon’s Den basically showed a 5 minute pitch followed by 5 minutes of discussion where the “Dragons” decide the valuation and their investment in a company. There is a significant amount of legal paper work and due dilligence that happens even before most contestants were allowed on the stage. Turning to successful, informed venture capitalists like Rick Segal or Don Dodge for information about the funding process is much better for most (serious, venture-fundable) entrepreneurs. However, this is not good television, and including the details would keep the CBC’s ratings right where they are (there are exceptions, the JobLoft.com episode turned out to be pretty entertaining).

    People that aren’t venture fundable

    Bikini Weenie and FaceForm these are ideas that just aren’t venture fundable. While I’m not a VC, I don’t even play one on the Interweb. I’m pretty sure that these wouldn’t event make it through the door for the “No Harm, No Foul” meetings.

    Future perceptions and misconceptions

    Are these stellar “entrepreneurs” what future generations of Canadians have to use as role models? My last concern is that the Dragon’s Den show does not raise the profile of entrpreneurship and venture funding, it does the exact opposition. It makes a mockery out of the folks who choose to create new companies, new products and need financial investment to grow. We need to strive to create companies, products, services that are impossible to ignore! We need students and younger entrepreneurs to see ideas, people and products that are transforming our world and the lives of everyday people. What we don’t need is for that kid who was going to write some new software to decide that she doesn’t want to do it, because of an opinion formed when watching this show.

    We need to create better stories. We need to find the folks doing more with less. We need to talk about the successes that are happening in our backyards, basements, garages and coffee houses. Flickr was Canadian (Vancouver). StumbleUpon was Canadian (Calgary). Both of these folks are now based in Silicon Valley. We need to celebrate the fantastic entrepreneurs and innovators in Canada. It’s too bad I’m not a film/tv producer, I’d be all over this.