Feathercoin Kickstarter - Ideas are just multipliers of execution
-
[quote name=“T4rQu1N” post=“29267” timestamp=“1380225547”]
Firstly, apologies for not being around lately, I am on trials with work, in a tempested building in a room with no windows…its fun, honest!Anyway, before any project gets off the ground, and as an investor, I would like to see some sort of solid business plan. Nobody in their right mind is going to front up some cash (or coins) without reasonable confidence that something is going to come out the other end. To this end, I suggest each potential project be required to fill out a business model canvas; this youtube video explains it pretty well; [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoAOzMTLP5s#ws]Business Model Canvas Explained[/url]
I have a template somewhere on my gmail I can share with my associates ;), or we could build this into the submission method?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting that every box needs filling, or that there aren’t any decent projects which won’t ever have revenue, but using a structured approach such as this is extremely helpful for the enthusiastic entrepreneur to totally scope out their idea, and prove to the community that they have actually thought seriously about their idea.
[/quote]I would strongly suggest against this model.
Kickstarters are NOT angel investments. They’re funding for a specific product, solution, or concept. You are not an investor in a business, you’re an early adopter and supporter of an individual or group with an idea. You’re purchasing a product, not funding a bankroll. You’re not taking equity, so things like customer segments, value propositions, channels, customer relationships, revenue streams, etc. don’t even matter at all, since the answer to all of those is likely to be, “Don’t know, don’t care. Just buy my product if you think it scratches your itch.” and most supporters are more like, “Shut up and take my money for your awesome product/idea” rather than, “Well how do I hedge my risk?”
[quote]
Another concern I have, is the generation of IP. I completely agree that open source is better; after all, crowd sourcing solutions is a brilliant way to expand and improve an idea, but I would be slightly worried that if I had a really good idea and it was posted in an open forum, someone else could easily take it and build it before it’d even got off the ground. I’m not sure how to address this though… I was thinking if this ‘Koinstarter’ was a separate website, we could at least enforce some kind of NDA for all signups, and somehow link it to a real profile rather than an online avatar? After all, people are investing real money/money with real value into it… I don’t know.Also, if this is a proper website, once we’ve started it up, there are going to be many many copies for all the other cryptocurrencies. I suggest we launch with FTC, but with the immediate option of switching on BTC and LTC funding channels if it is popular. Just my two cents!
[/quote]Open source is better than what? Proprietary? Creative Commons? Licensing? Shared source? Public domain? It depends on what your goal is here, and each model has it’s proper place and time.
If an idea is so easily implemented, then it’s not worth funding, because someone can just go implement it and no need to raise funds. Such problems tend to solve themselves. There’s no way to enforce an NDA, so there’s no point in having one.
-
Thanks so much for all this input! I don’t have time to read all this right now, I need some sleep but I need to reboot this thread because I want more voices in this dialogue. Does anyone object if I create a new thread where we just discuss this process?
-
[quote name=“Kevlar” post=“29276” timestamp=“1380232100”]
I would strongly suggest against this model.
Kickstarters are NOT angel investments. They’re funding for a specific product, solution, or concept. You are not an investor in a business, you’re an early adopter and supporter of an individual or group with an idea. You’re purchasing a product, not funding a bankroll. You’re not taking equity, so things like customer segments, value propositions, channels, customer relationships, revenue streams, etc. don’t even matter at all, since the answer to all of those is likely to be, “Don’t know, don’t care. Just buy my product if you think it scratches your itch.” and most supporters are more like, “Shut up and take my money for your awesome product/idea” rather than, “Well how do I hedge my risk?”
[/quote]
True enough I suppose, if you’re talking products prototypes, and things that have hard evidence of development behind them. Would you back a Kickstarter that was simply a good solution/concept or product idea if the person pitching it hadn’t properly thought it out though? I doubt it very much.
I respectfully disagree with your assessment that this is not an investment, because I think a lot of the ideas that will be coming through will be crypto services rather than complete products they want to sell. As a result, I would expect my coins to represent a small equity in the business model, else where is my incentive to put up some cash? Early access to a service perhaps?
Perhaps my suggestion is a little in depth for the casual nature of this type of funding, but I for one will be assessing any potential options on the level of detail they provide. I can’t afford to be throwing coins away to someone who raises enough funding, but has no idea of the scale of work required, or hasn’t thought everything through properly. Either way, if you don’t do some kind of assessment of risk, whether official or not, for the feasibility of an idea, then we leave ourselves open to being scammed (cynical much?)
[Quote]
Open source is better than what? Proprietary? Creative Commons? Licensing? Shared source? Public domain? It depends on what your goal is here, and each model has it’s proper place and time.
[/quote]
I guess I meant it metaphorically; as in, two heads are better than one, open source meaning that you can get a lot of useful feedback from your target customers before you make decisions, and thus ensure lean design/minimum viable product, and maximise your resource efficiency.[Quote]
If an idea is so easily implemented, then it’s not worth funding, because someone can just go implement it and no need to raise funds. Such problems tend to solve themselves. There’s no way to enforce an NDA, so there’s no point in having one.
[/quote]Again I disagree. I have an amazing idea which would generate a lot of interest, and could potentially have a great revenue stream for its owners, but I lack the skills to develop it. Someone with those skills however, could probably finish the whole project in a month or sooner. If you are starting a new service, then you can readily agree the terms with which people invest, and become backers.
Having looked back I feel I may have misinterpreted what this kickstarter thing is supposed to be. Are we purely talking product development for cryptocoins? Or are we including services within this category? If services, then I would very much suggest a venture capitalist style approach, simply because it lends itself to these business models. If products, then a Kickstarter copy with cryptocoin payment options would work very well I suppose.
What do you think Kevlar? Or am I missing a trick again? :-\
-
[quote name=“T4rQu1N” post=“29325” timestamp=“1380288905”]
…What do you think Kevlar? Or am I missing a trick again? :-\
[/quote]I think you’re making some very intelligent and relevant points.
[quote]
True enough I suppose, if you’re talking products prototypes, and things that have hard evidence of development behind them. Would you back a Kickstarter that was simply a good solution/concept or product idea if the person pitching it hadn’t properly thought it out though? I doubt it very much.
[/quote]No, I definitely would not. I completely agree that experience, background, and detailed development plans should absolutely be part of the pitch. Not just what, but who, how, and when is very important. This things absolutely form a critical part of the proposal, all I’m saying is that has nothing to do with revenue models or potential market segments.
[quote]
I respectfully disagree with your assessment that this is not an investment, because I think a lot of the ideas that will be coming through will be crypto services rather than complete products they want to sell. As a result, I would expect my coins to represent a small equity in the business model, else where is my incentive to put up some cash? Early access to a service perhaps?
[/quote]The latter, always. If it’s a service, early/discounted access. If it’s a product, the completed product. Trying to turn it into an equity purchase INSTEAD of a sale opens up a ginormous regulatory clusterfuck that is best avoided at all costs. You risk running afowl of public investment solicitation laws, and most people aren’t interested in running a business anyway, and then there’s this whole thing of needing to incorporate and do a formal stock issue and shareholder meetings and omfg just make it stop PLEASE! If you want an investment, talk to an accredited investor, because 99% of supporters won’t be one. This isn’t a sales of shares, it’s a sale of product/service.
[quote]
Perhaps my suggestion is a little in depth for the casual nature of this type of funding, but I for one will be assessing any potential options on the level of detail they provide.
[/quote]As well you should!
[quote]I can’t afford to be throwing coins away to someone who raises enough funding, but has no idea of the scale of work required, or hasn’t thought everything through properly. Either way, if you don’t do some kind of assessment of risk, whether official or not, for the feasibility of an idea, then we leave ourselves open to being scammed (cynical much?)
[/quote]Due diligence is, for better or for worse, an exercise left up to the supporter. There’s been a few great scams/disappointments in Kickstarter’s history. For a great example, Google “Code Hero” and “Alex Peake”. Here’s a well meaning guy who I happen to be good friends with AFK who bit off way more than he could chew, raised over 100k USD and blew it all long before the product was ready to ship. The supporters are pissed, and talk of a class-action lawsuit has been thrown about, but these people really have little recourse: They’re not shareholders, and Alex is legitimately broke. It’s a sad story, but for every failure, there’s 10,000 incredible success stories, and people DEFINITELY are willing to invest more in people who have a history of completion or a background that’s relevant to the project.
[quote]
[quote]
If an idea is so easily implemented, then it’s not worth funding, because someone can just go implement it and no need to raise funds. Such problems tend to solve themselves. There’s no way to enforce an NDA, so there’s no point in having one.
[/quote]Again I disagree. I have an amazing idea which would generate a lot of interest, and could potentially have a great revenue stream for its owners, but I lack the skills to develop it. Someone with those skills however, could probably finish the whole project in a month or sooner. If you are starting a new service, then you can readily agree the terms with which people invest, and become backers.
[/quote]I’m not clear on this one. If someone ELSE with those skills could finish the whole project in a month or sooner, why would I give YOU the money? I’d rather give it to the guy with the skills to pull it off, who’s probably asking less as a result. Supporters don’t care if it has a great revenue stream for it’s owner, because they’re not it’s owner, they’re just users of the product/service. I don’t buy an iPhone because it makes Apple a lot of money, I buy it because it suits my needs and style.
[quote]Having looked back I feel I may have misinterpreted what this kickstarter thing is supposed to be. Are we purely talking product development for cryptocoins? Or are we including services within this category? If services, then I would very much suggest a venture capitalist style approach, simply because it lends itself to these business models. If products, then a Kickstarter copy with cryptocoin payment options would work very well I suppose.[/quote]
Now I think I understand how you’re using the term ‘service’ here. Generally I think of a hosted website as providing a service, but in this case it’s really a product. By that definition, it’s always product development. If you wanted to start an angle investment fund using crypto coins, that would be a completely different animal, and a venture capitalist style approach would be appropriate. That would require a WHOLE lot more work and commitment, and I don’t think this particular model is very well suited for such an endeavor. Crowd funding works because it skips the investment phase, and puts the buyers directly in touch with the seller, and that’s why it’s able to be light and lean as a process. Going back to the traditional investment style of development is an interesting proposition, but would probably require more commitment than most people here would be willing to put forth, and might be better done with a few people who trust each other rather than trying to solicit Joe Public’s support.
-
hey Yo, kevlar! shut up!
Heh I j/k. I value your opinions highly. Without arguments you bring up some good points. I suggested the angel type approach and I’ll take the heat for it, but it did get the brain gears grinding. The last thing we need to do it come up with ideas until they’re all thought of by other people and implemented.
Craft a system that works. I think alt-coins have a barrier to break. Bitcoin can survive without any ground breaking ideas through the nature of it’s inception. Alt-coins require a slightly different approach so in my opinion a typical crowd funding strategy won’t work. We need something fresh, and I for one would love to add a stock-ownership approach to Feathercoin and for that I can see a venture capital/crowd funding hybrid. The “coin” is a hybrid so why not add symmetry to the system.
cryptostocks.com is a good example of this. Why not create a Feathercoinstocks.com, and invest in the technology through there after the business models have gone through an analysis and venture capital has been attained. There can even be a venture capital stock that pays through investments in all the companies it invests in like a ETF of sorts.
Okay I’m rambling.
-
Sorry everyone, I am back on this thread now and just need to catch up.
-
[quote name=“Kevlar” post=“28636” timestamp=“1379697029”]
[quote author=chrisj link=topic=3687.msg28633#msg28633 date=1379694530]
[list][*]How long should people have to get feedback on their idea eg 3 days? 7 Days?[/list]
[/quote]7 days is fair. It’s long enough to weed out the undedicated and let people have a chance to respond, but short enough to keep things moving.
[/quote]
Agreed[quote author=Kevlar link=topic=3687.msg28636#msg28636 date=1379697029]
1% of the total funds raised. If they want 10,000 Feathercoins, they have to put in 100. If they want 100,000, that’s 1,000.
[/quote]
I think this is a bit too high and remember there are people from developing countries on here too who might not be able to afford it. Perhaps we could give people the ability to fund raise for the deposit itself. So maybe the deposit is something like 1% of the overall target, they must put in at least 250FTC of that but the rest can be raised subject to special requirements?I will also speak a bit later on how I would prefer it if the funding is staggered over time.
[quote author=Kevlar link=topic=3687.msg28636#msg28636 date=1379697029]
Yes. Elevator pitches are important, but so are the detailed solution. Videos should be encouraged too. Above all, TRANSPARENCY needs to be encouraged. Investors deserve to know WHO they are investing in, and people should not hide behind forum handles. This is real money we’re talking about here.
[/quote]
I am concerned that would put people off from investing. Maybe each investor could say up front if Identity is a requirement? Also one thing we could do give users Front End Anonymity such that Feathercoin (or some other entity) knows who they are but we don’t reveal that to the public. This could be a feature of the escrow facility that Bush and Maria are building in the Marketplace.I like the idea of video, I think everyone should be allowed to communicate their idea in any way they see fit. I am aware that with Kickstarter and others if you don’t look good on camera or can’t afford to have a video made you are discriminated against so I would like it if we could maintain as level playing field as possible.
[quote author=Kevlar link=topic=3687.msg28636#msg28636 date=1379697029]
Let their be a round of voting each week, as well as a “no confidence” option. You must beat every other project in votes, AND beat the no confidence vote as well. The one who does each week progresses, or if no confidence wins, no one progresses.
[/quote]
Interesting, so you’re saying that only [i]one[/i] project can graduate from idea to project each week? That’s interesting, that would certainly help to find the ones most able to execute.I’d like to hear you talk about the people like UKMark who just like to go off and do stuff regardless, they still need our support and I would like to include them as part of this initiative but sometimes these types of entrepreneur don’t even know they need funding, they go off, do an excellent job but then get stuck because they should have got more support at the beginning. I would like us to help these people too.
[quote author=Kevlar link=topic=3687.msg28636#msg28636 date=1379697029]
No. Zero tolerance for deadbeats. If you take the money, and you don’t deliver, you can’t ask for more, and you can’t do something else. If you deliver late, but you deliver, then you’re ok to go again, but the public will know last time you delivered late.
[/quote]The compassionate side of me is screaming out that this could be a missed opportunity to really help the people who often times find it hard to ask for help and over promise and under deliver.
However what I do like in what you are saying in the last few points you have made is that we should be very strict on delivery and deadlines. I definitely think people who miss those should pay a penalty but I also think we should always be here for them so that they are always able to turn the bad in to good.[quote author=Kevlar link=topic=3687.msg28636#msg28636 date=1379697029]
There should be no penalty for not getting funding, and no reward for not helping someone get funding. If the campaign is a success, the organizers can take a percent for themselves before the person gets their funds, but if the campaign doesn’t reach it’s funding goal, then all the money goes back to it’s owners, and NO rewards for failure should be given out.
[/quote]
I agree with all of that. But what I meant in my original post was: what do we do with the [i]deposit[/i] if the person fails to reach a target deadline. I understand that if they don’t get all their funding then of course it should go back to the investors but what if they get the funding, spend it (with deposit in tact) and then fail to deliver. Where should the deposit go? I don’t think Feathercoin should keep it.Going to carry on reading the rest of the thread…
-
[quote name=“zerodrama” post=“28640” timestamp=“1379698120”]
Can we replace stupid perks (my activist side just plain reels back from these abominations) and instead make clear what portion of the project would be possible at each stage?Maybe the donors who get the project from one stage to the next could be personally invited to a short chat about what that stage of the project is about.
Too many crowd funding systems treat people like they are five years old.
[/quote]Yeah I agree, they are very patronising and fail to realise that the most important thing about any kind of startup is not the coming up with the idea or the creation of an impressive looking pitch it’s the delivery. Setting deadlines, managing agreements and expectations and holding people to account is what is really important.
I want the Feathercoin Kickstarter to be defined by its ability to help people follow through on their ideas, not create some kind of distorted market place where the best looking projects win over the more deserving.
So something like a chat with the founders would be nice. Also I am thinking that Investors should be able to receive some kind of recognition and credibility in the community for having seen the potential in someone else and being willing to help them. I think right now we have too narrow a definition of success when it comes to business.
Does that sound about right?
-
[list][list][quote name=“mirrax” post=“28702” timestamp=“1379754673”]
[quote author=chrisj link=topic=3687.msg28633#msg28633 date=1379694530]
Right let’s make this happen.There are decisions to be made, should we thrash them out in here or set up a new thread?
They are:
[b]Ideas Board[/b] This is the first round where people pitch their idea, if they are selected they get to progress on to the round 2
[list type=decimal]
[*]How long should people have to get feedback on their idea eg 3 days? 7 Days?[/list]
[color=red][b]14days[/b][/color]
[list][*]Should they have to raise a deposit?[/list]
[color=red][b]they must[/b][/color]
[list][*]If so how much?[/list]
[color=red][b]10% or more of target amount[/b][/color]
[list][*]Should there be a format to the pitch, ie Brief Summary, Description of Problem, Solution?[/list]
[color=red][b]no[/b][/color]
[list][*]How should people qualify for the Projects Board? Should there be a panel of judges?[/list]
[color=red][b]i have no idea for this point[/b][/color]
[/list][b]Projects Board[/b] This is round 2 where people are held accountable
[list type=decimal]
[*]Should there be mods like [url=http://forum.feathercoin.com/index.php?topic=3687.msg28328#msg28328]@T4rQu1N[/url] who watch each project and keep people held to deadlines?[/list]
[color=red][b]yes[/b][/color]
[list][*]On what condition should people lose their deposits? E.g. If they make the deadline but fail to deliver on what they proposed? OR If they fail to reach deadline[/list]
[color=red][b]both conditions[/b][/color]
[list][*]Could we do a 3 strikes and you’re out rule to take the edge off?[/list]
[color=red][b]no[/b][/color]
[list][*]If the deposit is lost how should the FTC be distributed? Given out randomly to community members with a Reddit style Tipbot? Given to someone else in Projects Forum as investment? [/list]
[color=red][b]again no idea from me[/b][/color]
[/list]
[/quote]
[/quote]Great so you’re saying 14 days to pitch the idea, this is a long time in crypto world and could really help to weed out those who aren’t committed for the long term. I think something like 7-14 days is fine and might not make too much difference.
You want people to raise a 10% deposit, [b]do you think for those who might find that difficult that they should be able to raise a certain amount from the community but have to raise at least 250FTC themselves?[/b]
You believe people should be held to account after the fact, that seems to be a consensus view now.
And like Kevlar you are taking a zero tolerance approach to people who fail to deliver with no 3 strikes rule.
Thanks so much for your feedback, if you have anything else to add let me know.
-
[quote name=“Chaoskampf” post=“29047” timestamp=“1380038596”]
I’d be interested to see this or another system for crowd sourced investment used to encourage crypto service start-ups. While this could just pertain to services involving cryptocoins, I think it would be more important to encourage all kinds of service work. The development of the service sector is integral to the enrichment and expansion of cryptocurrency.We shouldn’t limit the coins to be used only to buy goods, gamble, or trade on the exchanges. I should be able to have my lawn mowed, my car washed, and my son tutored for FeatherCoin/Bitcoin. While getting these services up and running doesn’t require a Kickstarter in the fiat world, having something analogous in the crypto world might help accelerate the economic development of the servicee sector (which is lagging behind the fiat one very badly).
Just a thought, what do you guys think?
[/quote]So how would you see it working? How could we as a community facilitate people charging for their services in Feathercoin? To me that would be more in terms of Merchant Services like exchange from FTC>USD/EUR etc. What might be nice is a Point of Sale app on the android such that a builder or kid washing cars could just take payment with their phones, perhaps using UKMark’s SMS Wallet?
Then you could add refunds facility etc later on.
-
[quote name=“ADSactly” post=“29125” timestamp=“1380124994”]
I have spoken to Chris a few Days ago regarding working together with the Feathercoin Community to get the Capital needed to make pretty much anything possible with the Feathercoin Community we all have great ideas and many of the people in this great community are very skilled in Training, Article Writing, SEO, Advertising, Art, Graphics, Programming…
[/quote]Hey Micah, one of the things I would love to do is raise some funding from outside investors in to the Feathercoin community. I often have meetings with investors in the city of London here in the UK and they ask how they can invest in Feathercoin and I say:
“well yes you [i]can[/i] do that but actually what would be better is if you invested in the people behind the currency rather than just speculating on the market.”
Could you help us with this?
-
I really want to address this whole equity funding suggestion properly.
I imagine this topic is being suggested because of the JOBS Act and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which this week inked rules that govern how startups can publicly vie for investors’ attention. Many entrepreneurs expect this legislation to solve one of the core problems facing early-stage businesses: limited access to capital. Often companies are left with few options besides self-funding or cobbling together funds via thin connections to angel investors. Those who couldn’t attract funding might wind up watching their companies fade under the weight of diminished resources.
While this legislation certainly provides another path for capitalizing a business, it’s important to ask the critical question: Is this a good thing?
The process of raising capital for a company is time tested, and despite its flaws (insufficient funding for minority or women-owned businesses, very low returns for most venture funds) has helped build many of the great companies that have significantly advanced our economy and society. When we think about the dislocation in the startup market, the imbalance is not a lack of capital but rather a lack of good ideas.
This crowdfunding legislation enables anyone to try to raise money from a new investor class. I think it’s inarguable that predominantly first-time entrepreneurs will attempt to access this new funding source. In addition this new capital base will likely be comprised of mostly new investors with little to no experience in early-stage investing.
I am a strong believer in entrepreneurship and its massively positive impact on our economy and society. However, starting a company is extremely difficult and is not for everyone… trust me, I’ve driven a few into the ground before learning how it’s properly done. When you combine novice entrepreneurs with inexperienced investors, the outcome is probably not going to be what everyone hopes.
Equity crowdfunding proposes a fair shot for all instead of just the wealthy and accredited, but as with most things in a capitalist structure, only the strong will survive. There will be adverse selection. Good entrepreneurs will not go to crowdfunding sites as they can raise capital the traditional way. Good investors are not going to crowdfund because they do not struggle to connect with good entrepreneurs. Thus, equity crowdfunding sites will be left with entrepreneurs who couldn’t raise capital and investors who couldn’t get into deals.
Professional investors (angels, seed investors, venture capitalists) add a tremendous amount of value to the company creation process. These investors help form ideas, build teams and craft business processes. They also make introductions to customers and partners. Good investors can make a company a success. By contrast crowdfunding will not provide these partners as the investors will either be too inexperienced to add value or have invested so little that their interest will be limited. Like founders, investors need skin in the game. This mutual risk and collaberative partnership is absolutely critical for running a successful business and without it most are doomed to fail miserably.
Starting a company is hard. Most entrepreneurs fail, even with the support of experienced investors the abundant capital available in the venture community and an incredible ecosystem of supporting structures. Likewise, venture investing is hard. Most venture investors fail to generate a positive return on capital, let alone the returns necessary given the risk involved. Venture investors with access to the best entrepreneurs and the best deals still struggle to generate the returns necessary to justify their existence.
Bottom line: it’s safer, and prudent, to prevent everyone from swimming in the deep end of the pool. If equity crowdfunding is your only path to raise capital you should probably not quit your day job. If it’s your only path to invest in startups, buy stock in Google.
The reason that crowdfunding has been so successful so far is precisely because it does an end-run around these problems, connecting buyer with seller directly and skipping the startup, eliminating equity, ignoring the business, and giving the finger to traditional thinking about how to make a product successful. Instead of saying, “We need to start a business to get this product to market”, crowdfunding allows people to go, “I’m going to get this product to market without the overhead of running a business”, and THAT is the game changer.
-
[quote name=“T4rQu1N” post=“29267” timestamp=“1380225547”]
Firstly, apologies for not being around lately, I am on trials with work, in a tempested building in a room with no windows…its fun, honest!Anyway, before any project gets off the ground, and as an investor, I would like to see some sort of solid business plan. Nobody in their right mind is going to front up some cash (or coins) without reasonable confidence that something is going to come out the other end.
[/quote]Hey right I have decided to address each point in a post because it was becoming difficult to write a response with all the BB Code.
I use the business model canvas a lot in my mentoring too and I like it as a guideline, like a framework for the mind of those are not naturally business minded.
To me a business is simply a sequence of activities brought about by a group of individuals with a shared vision.
So I definitely see a place for this but I am inclined to agree with [b]kevlar[/b] that we wouldn’t want to make this a rigid framework since we are not set up to provide full scale business finance.
However this is a discussion about what we want this to be so I think we should not shy away from these kinds of ambitions. Perhaps this could be a part of the business development.
-
[quote name=“Kevlar” post=“29276” timestamp=“1380232100”]
If an idea is so easily implemented, then it’s not worth funding, because someone can just go implement it and no need to raise funds. Such problems tend to solve themselves. There’s no way to enforce an NDA, so there’s no point in having one.
[/quote]I can’t stand NDAs. I think a simple non compete agreement works just fine. This is simply an agreement between two people that one party won’t go off and set up a competing business within a reasonable time frame. You cannot protect an idea.
And this goes back to the title of this post.
-
[quote name=“T4rQu1N” post=“29325” timestamp=“1380288905”]
[quote author=Kevlar link=topic=3687.msg29276#msg29276 date=1380232100]
[Quote]
If an idea is so easily implemented, then it’s not worth funding, because someone can just go implement it and no need to raise funds. Such problems tend to solve themselves. There’s no way to enforce an NDA, so there’s no point in having one.
[/quote]Again I disagree. I have an amazing idea which would generate a lot of interest, and could potentially have a great revenue stream for its owners, but I lack the skills to develop it. Someone with those skills however, could probably finish the whole project in a month or sooner. If you are starting a new service, then you can readily agree the terms with which people invest, and become backers.
[/quote]
[/quote]
When it comes to running a business I think what really matters is how much you care. The people that succeed in the long run aren’t the ones who just come up with ideas they are the ones who have the grit and determination to keep on going through the dips and all the troubles.In the past you could throw brute money at the problem and file patents and that worked for a while but now information travels so fast and the cost of starting a business is decreasing entrepreneurs can be more responsive to the changing nature of realty. I think having a forum like this is vital for that.
There’s an interestling book called [url=http://sethgodin.typepad.com/the_dip/]The Dip[/url] by Seth Godin. It simply states that the businesses that thrive do so because of something called the dip, which is a period of time usually just after the initial launch of a business and all the hype has died down. The dip is the period of time when most people give up but the ones with passion and purpose are able to persevere and it acts as a filter.
I think what crypto does is present us an opportunity to:
[list]
[*]Help people financially without the barriers of the legacy banking industry
[*]Provide support by drawing on a diverse range of experiences on a public forum
[*]Be responsive with this support and get to the needs of entrepreneurs in a way that traditional mentorship programs can’t
[/list]I can see both [b]Kevlar[/b] & [b]T4rQu1N[/b] complementing one another really well as judges.
[quote author=T4rQu1N link=topic=3687.msg29325#msg29325 date=1380288905]
Having looked back I feel I may have misinterpreted what this kickstarter thing is supposed to be. Are we purely talking product development for cryptocoins? Or are we including services within this category? If services, then I would very much suggest a venture capitalist style approach, simply because it lends itself to these business models. If products, then a Kickstarter copy with cryptocoin payment options would work very well I suppose.
What do you think Kevlar? Or am I missing a trick again? :-\
[/quote]You haven’t necessarily misinterpreted it because we are still in the process of defining it. That’s what this dialogue is all about.
-
[quote name=“Kevlar” post=“29352” timestamp=“1380301205”]
No, I definitely would not. I completely agree that experience, background, and detailed development plans should absolutely be part of the pitch. Not just what, but who, how, and when is very important. This things absolutely form a critical part of the proposal, all I’m saying is that has nothing to do with revenue models or potential market segments.
[/quote]Thanks for all the time you have put in to responding to this thread.
It sounds like to you what’s most important is the integrity of the person behind the idea. And I think what this gets to is how we overcome the anonymity that the internet, and particularly the cyrpto community, affords.
How can we persuade people to step out from behind the curtain in such a way that would reassure a business mentor and investor? Given that time is an investment as well as money.
##quick digression##
This is what I am trying to do with the videos by the way. Try to get to the people behind this technology. Because at the end of the day it’s not about the technology, that should be invisible*, it’s not money we want it’s what it buys us. It’s the freedom it gives us. The financial sector has become this huge profit centre when in reality it should only be a marginally profitable activity. It exists to free up the rest of us to get our goals and needs met.If only we could find the people in the world willing to take up that task.
*Just because it’s invisible doesn’t mean everyone shouldn’t at least have a basic understanding of it.
##I agree with you that we should not try to turn this in to an equity purchase, but we might be able to partner up with some other companies like [url=http://www.seedrs.com/]Seedrs[/url] (who are friends of mine) who might be able to take care of this.
Do your best, link to the rest.
-
Hi Chris thank you for all the support you are providing us… Yes Chris I will be able to help you find Investors and get the word out about Feathercoin infront of Millions of people who are tired of the Corrupt Fiat Money System.
I will be in contact with you on Monday.
-
Apologies for the late response, I’ve been without my computer all weekend.
[quote name=“Kevlar” post=“29352” timestamp=“1380301205”]
I’m not clear on this one. If someone ELSE with those skills could finish the whole project in a month or sooner, why would I give YOU the money? I’d rather give it to the guy with the skills to pull it off, who’s probably asking less as a result. Supporters don’t care if it has a great revenue stream for it’s owner, because they’re not it’s owner, they’re just users of the product/service. I don’t buy an iPhone because it makes Apple a lot of money, I buy it because it suits my needs and style.
[/quote]
I agree with the rest of what you were saying, so this is why I’m only responding to this particular quote.
In essence, my idea could easily be stolen, so I would be trying to form a team of enthusiastic people who would want to share in that revenue stream. I suppose there is nothing stopping that person from stealing the idea once I’ve disclosed it though, hence why I haven’t posted it here a long time ago :(. If supporters shared a part of that revenue stream, then it becomes more like an investment, and my particular role becomes the project manager/owner. I could then use the funds to pay someone with web development skills as you suggest, but I’d rather the investors form the core team, and split the workload that way, thus removing my image as the middle man!
Going down a rabbit hole there, but I hope you get my point. Personally I would find a percent of the profits more attractive than a few months early access…but you’re right, this opens it up to a world of potential pain.
Good debate!
Here’s a project then that should benefit those of use with ideas and a vision, and no real technical skills…lets make a matchmaking service which builds the ideal team. Discuss!
[quote author=chrisj link=topic=3687.msg29617#msg29617 date=1380449247]
I can see both [b]Kevlar[/b] & [b]T4rQu1N[/b] complementing one another really well as judges.
[/quote]Just seen this! Let the games begin! ;D
-
[quote name=“T4rQu1N” post=“29879” timestamp=“1380573935”]
Just seen this! Let the games begin! ;D
[/quote]This is all very good but I need to resurface this thread to get more views on it because so far it’s just you, Kevlar and me that have really put the work in and it needs to be more representative.
Won’t get time until tomorrow afternoon after the News Letter.
-
Corather brought up [url=https://cryptostocks.com/]cryptostocks.com[/url] but I don’t think it’s been addressed.
Any thoughts?