XPost: sci.electronics.design, comp.dsp
From: invalid@invalid.invalid
Robert Baer wrote:
> Le Chaud Lapin wrote:
>> On Jul 7, 7:13 pm, Joerg wrote:
[...]
Le Chaud Lapin (never seen that movie ...): I can't see your posts
because of a googlemail block so I can only respond after some else
does, like Robert in this case. Sorry, got no choice here until Google
cleans up their act, meaning all the spam.
>>> The other option is proposals to private enterprise, to corporations.
>>> This is kind of the equivalent of a cold call in sales, except that you
>>> are putting a whole lot more unpaid work into it than a sales guy,
>>> easily a week, and it's in writing. There is no obligation on the part
>>> of the recipient to respond right now, or at all. No pressure. When I
>>> started doing that people scoffed and laughed. Until one of those
>>> proposals hit bulls eye. Big time.
>>
>> Hmmm..sounded like you broke through. I read somewhere that Cisco gave
>> more than 60 pitches before getting a bite.
>>
60? Wow! I didn't need this many. Maybe half a dozen a year, if that.
But they do require a big chunk of unpaid work hours.
>> I've tried the VC route, only to validate what I suspected, that there
>> would be no engagement. I tried perhaps 12 firms total. It has been a
>> bit of a dance. They are always polite in their responses, but I am
>> sure that, even though they do not say so, they simply do not believe
>> it.
>>
Often they do not understand the technology very well. I have spent lots
and lots of time with fund managers. Only after knowing them for a while
did they break the ice. "Hey, could we skulk off and then you could
explain to me how this really works?" ... "Sure". One has got to learn
how to ratchet tech-talk down to a level that bankers can understand.
>> A massive VC firm said:
>>
>> "We do believe the importance of the software as you describe it. We
>> simply do not believe the solution will be deployed at once. It will
>> happen incrementally"
>>
>> Another said:
>>
>> "Your (video) product sounds intriguing, but it seems to be too
>> similar to current investment."
>>
>> Another sent me an email with the word 'test' in it, thinking that my
>> proposal was a joke. After I contacted them to say that it was not, I
>> was chided for having the audacity to think that I had what
>> "researchers have been trying to find for decades." They demanded to
>> have the actual application so that they could run it themselves,
>> without an NDA of course.
>>
ROFL! They must have been really naive.
>> An intermediary tried to set up a meeting with a large company who is
>> actively soliciting our type of product, as well as an aggressive,
>> tech-savvy VC, and were particularly stressed when the VC asked to see
>> me directly, without them acting as intermediary. When thet called me
>> back to give me update...I said to them, "Let me guess...the VC got
>> excited not by the thing you were trying to sell him, but by the thing
>> that made possible the thing you are trying to sell him, and asked to
>> see me and my team directly, and you're worried that I will cut you
>> from any deal made, since it is clear to all of us, including him,
>> where the IP actually lies..." Suprisingly, they agreed that this was
>> their sentiment, and thought that their take of 20% would be
>> sufficient. Usually, there is a counter-argument built upon various
>> types of organic fertilizer when you call a negotiator's bluff.
>>
Amazing. I've never had that happen. But my experience is that ideas are
better lodged with corporations that are familiar with not just the
market but also the technology. They see through any sort of proposed
technology in milliseconds, provided their senior managers are worth
their salt. BTDT, also on the other side of the table, the due diligence
side.
>>> Just don't spill all the beans when writing proposals ;-)
>>
>> True. This is an art. The recipient of proposal could easily enter a
>> state of perpetual ignorance, demanding more and more explication as
>> time passing, neither closing a deal, or terminating discussions. The
>> more radical and/or valuable the product being offered, the more
>> likely the recipient is to play this game while simultaneously
>> endeavoring to keep competition ignorant, unless the provider is
>> already established, or has been known to disengage when the
>> fertilizer starts. In my experience, the vast majority of negotiators
>> will still try such crude tactics.
>>
Not with me. Then I will politely cut them loose in due course.
>> My small company will likely do this the old-fashioned way:
>> bootstrapping. We have a consumer product to get us started. The
>> revenue will not be large, but it will be a start. This method is
>> treacherous also, but at least, after our products are exposed, there
>> will be a clear point of attribution, which can be valuable in itself
>> for the next venture if things go sour with this one.
>>
>> -Le Chaud Lapin-
> Bingo!
> Develop other consumer products as the more there are, the greater the
> possible income and Moses (profit).
> They do not even have to be directly related to your idea; what you
> need is $$ to fund that idea.
> If i was rich like i used to be, i would give you $100K to start with;
> the catch being 10 percent of gross sales over a 10 year period; keep
> the initial amount (by which time the initial amount would be pocket lint).
>
Only 10%? That's pretty generous of you.
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/
"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
