Author: Paul Wallbank

  • Playing the startup lottery

    Playing the startup lottery

    Silicon Valley is in the grip of a mass delusion says Reuters’ Felix Salmon in a blog post that dissects the reality of life as a startup founder.

    The Most Expensive Lottery Ticket in the World starts with nod to Gideon Lewis-Kraus’ No Exit: Struggling to survive a modern gold rush that examines the harsh truths and brutal realities of building a new business.

    Salmon though goes further in skewering some of the myths around startups; pointing out that with 90% failure rates not everyone can be ‘killing it’, yet few startup founders will admit their venture are doing anything else but crushing the market, despite the mantra of ‘celebrating failure.’

    Possibly the most telling point Salmon makes is on the myth of the engineering entrepreneur, the truth is most coders value stability over the uncertain life in startup.

    There is no reason whatsoever to believe that computer engineers make particularly good entrepreneurs. Quite the opposite, in fact: engineers tend to do quite well in structured environments, where there are clear problems to solve, and relatively badly in the chaos of a startup, where the most important skills are non-engineering ones, like being able to attract talent and investors. No Exit makes it very clear that the life of a startup founder is a miserable one, and that engineers are invariably happier when they’re working for a big company.

    Life in a startup, or any small business, can be miserable if you don’t have the skills – and most importantly the risk appetite – for doing your own thing. This is a point often missed by those hyping the start up world.

    Salmon’s piece is a good read and it illustrates that founding a business or taking the risk of working in a startup is not for everyone. It’s a timely reminder for anyone looking at liberating themselves from their cubicle and making the jump into self employment.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts
  • Three screens, four screens, infinite screens

    Three screens, four screens, infinite screens

    This morning I had the opportunity to interview designer of the Fitbit, Gadi Amit, ahead of his visit to Sydney next month.

    I’ll have the full interview written up in the next couple of days, but Gadi made an interesting point about not being in a ‘four screen world’ anymore, but in one where there’s infinite screens ranging from wearable glasses and watches through to smartphones and intelligent signage.

    A few years ago the concept of the ‘third screen’ came into use when we started talking about the smartphone supplementing the PC and the TV, it quickly morphed into four screens as the tablet computer appeared.

    Now the five year old idea of limiting ourselves to three screens seems quaint when there doesn’t seem to be any limits in the way we can view information.

    The end of the three screen theory is an interesting illustration on how quickly technology is moving, it also shows how rapidly business is changing.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts
  • When the connection drops out, will your iKettle work?

    When the connection drops out, will your iKettle work?

    During the dark days of the Tech Wreck, the poster product for the heady excesses of the Dot Com era was the connected fridge.

    Today it could be the iKettle that marks the height of the Internet of Things craze, a kettle you can control from your smartphone.

    While the app doesn’t automatically fill the kettle; it does allow you to turn it on, schedule times and control the water temperatures.

    The problem though is what happens when your kettle or phone can’t connect to the internet?

    Burning data centres

    Over the weekend, Samsung customers learned what happens when a connected device can’t connect when a fire in a South Korean data centre triggered an outage that prevented the company’s smart TV, Blu-Ray player and phone customers from properly using their equipment.

    It would be really irritating if you couldn’t boil a kettle because your internet was down, however the more serious question is what happens when your home’s smoke detectors can’t connect? Or when your smarthome or connected car can’t authenticate your identity and locks you out?

    Securing the IoT supply chain

    For industry, the problems are even more pressing; in the not too distant future a truck carrying perishable goods may well have its deliveries refused by a customer if the cargo has lost connectivity.

    In life or mission critical applications, relying on connections that may not be dependable could have disastrous consequences.

    While the iKettle might be a bit of gimmick, it raises some important issues of what happens should your internet connection go down.

    If the Internet of Things is to be trusted by households and industry, it’s essential that systems are robust and maintain operations when they’re disconnected.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts
  • Do you like your rights?

    Do you like your rights?

    Could liking a brand’s Facebook page cost you your right to sue?

    The New York Times has a story on how corporations are subtly changing the wordings on websites and social media pages in an effort to make it harder for customers to challenge the business in court.

    It’s quite cheeky attempting to strip people who ‘like’ a Facebook page of their rights to take action against a company, it even strikes at the heart of building an online community around a brand.

    The whole point of accumulating real life followers behind a brand’s social media presence is to create a band of fans; by creating suspicion, business destroy the goodwill behind that exercise and possibly render it useless.

    It will be interesting to see how Facebook react to this behaviour as intimidating users and discouraging them from liking brands is a direct threat to their business model, it’s hard to see them not changing their own terms to make this corporate behaviour a breach of their own terms of service.

    For consumers though it’s a reminder that corporations, at least those who operate on twentieth-century mass market principles, aren’t really their friends.

    Update: Since posting this piece, General Mills has backed down on its policy but the point still remains that unfair and over legalistic terms and conditions threaten social media platforms.

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts
  • Peak Google and the limits of internet advertising

    Peak Google and the limits of internet advertising

    Last week, Google’s share price slumped on news of poorer than expected revenue results and website Asymco has a detailed examination of how the company’s growth might have reached its limits.

    Asymco’s warning to the online advertising industry is clear with the warning that revenues might start to decline in 2016.

    That online advertising may have reached its peak means even an even more uncertain future for businesses rely on those revenues, and times have been tough for those sites in recent years as returns have fallen.

    At the same time online ad spending seems to be peaking, print advertising revenues in the United States dropped a further 8% last year with income at now at 1982 levels. It seems publishers can’t win either way.

    So its now wonder that online services like Google and Facebook are looking to payment systems and other ways to generate revenue, for online publishers things are even more problematic.

    What is clear is the advertising driven revenue methods that work so well for the broadcast industry aren’t working for online publishers and quite possibly other internet based businesses as well.

    The online industries need a David Sarnoff to figure out a model that works.

     

    Similar posts:

    • No Related Posts