<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
> <channel><title>Pollenizer: Building and Investing In Australian Web Startups &#187; techcrunch50</title> <atom:link href="http://www.pollenizer.com/tag/techcrunch50/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.pollenizer.com</link> <description>Building and Investing in Australian Web Startups</description> <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 02:19:18 +0000</lastBuildDate> <language>en</language> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>  <item><title>Tim O&#8217;Reilly Says Startups Don&#8217;t Necesarily Need To Focus</title><link>http://www.pollenizer.com/tim-oreilly-says-startups-dont-necesarily-need-to-focus/</link> <comments>http://www.pollenizer.com/tim-oreilly-says-startups-dont-necesarily-need-to-focus/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 10:57:20 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Mick Liubinskas</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[Blog]]></category> <category><![CDATA[focus]]></category> <category><![CDATA[startup]]></category> <category><![CDATA[techcrunch50]]></category> <category><![CDATA[Tim O'Reilly]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.pollenizer.com/?p=173</guid> <description><![CDATA[I was cruising the Demopit at Techcrunch50 and spotted Tim O&#8217;Reilly a serious tech veteran and celebrity. I thought I&#8217;d stop him and get his thoughts on focus. Of course I&#8217;d sure he&#8217;d give us sage advice on why they should be brutally focused. I was wrong. Tim O&#8217;Reilly On Why Startups Need to Explore [...]]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I was cruising the Demopit at Techcrunch50 and spotted <a
href="http://tim.oreilly.com/">Tim O&#8217;Reilly</a> a serious tech veteran and celebrity. I thought I&#8217;d stop him and get his thoughts on focus. Of course I&#8217;d sure he&#8217;d give us sage advice on why they should be brutally focused.</p><p>I was wrong.</p><p><object
width="400" height="300"></object></p><div><param
name="allowfullscreen" value="true" /><param
name="allowscriptaccess" value="always" /><param
name="movie" value="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=6595855&amp;server=vimeo.com&amp;show_title=1&amp;show_byline=1&amp;show_portrait=0&amp;color=&amp;fullscreen=1" /><embed
type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="400" height="300" src="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=6595855&amp;server=vimeo.com&amp;show_title=1&amp;show_byline=1&amp;show_portrait=0&amp;color=&amp;fullscreen=1" allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></embed><a
href="http://vimeo.com/6595855">Tim O&#8217;Reilly On Why Startups Need to Explore</a> from <a
href="http://vimeo.com/user2194399">Pollenizer</a> on <a
href="http://vimeo.com/">Vimeo</a>.</p><p>OK, he&#8217;s right. For some startups, at early stages, exploring is good. Actually in all startups, regularly exploring is important. I&#8217;d suggest that at some point and at most times, the priority needs to be given to focus. But you need to look around. You need to try things. Think of different angles. See what other companies in different markets/industries are doing that you can learn from.</p><p>What&#8217;s the balance? Hmm, let me throw up some completely instinctive thoughts.</p><ul><li>Before starting &#8211; 90% exploring, 10% focus &#8211; going completely wide might drive you completely wild.</li><li>Started, pre-launch &#8211; 30% exploring, 70% focus &#8211; some exploration of people, markets, ideas for your core utility, but mostly focus on that first, tiny product.</li><li>Launched and growing &#8211; 10% exploring, 90% focus &#8211; one thing at a time, focus on getting it done. Some exploring to avoid myopia.</li></ul><p>What do you think?<br
/> Were do you think you are right now?<br
/> Do you have the balance right?</p></div> ]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.pollenizer.com/tim-oreilly-says-startups-dont-necesarily-need-to-focus/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>3</slash:comments> </item> <item><title>TechCrunch50 Business Model Review</title><link>http://www.pollenizer.com/techcrunch50-business-model-review/</link> <comments>http://www.pollenizer.com/techcrunch50-business-model-review/#comments</comments> <pubDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2009 10:53:37 +0000</pubDate> <dc:creator>Mick Liubinskas</dc:creator> <category><![CDATA[Blog]]></category> <category><![CDATA[social event]]></category> <category><![CDATA[techcrunch50]]></category> <category><![CDATA[usa]]></category> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.pollenizer.com/?p=171</guid> <description><![CDATA[Post Morning Demopit Walk First morning of Techcrunch50 and after a quick walk of the Demopit (those that didn&#8217;t make it on stage) I&#8217;m not yet startled by amazing new business models. Most of the same with a bit of spice here and there. Here is a summary after a quick lap. The Usual Prospects [...]]]></description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<h2>Post Morning Demopit Walk</h2><p>First morning of Techcrunch50 and after a quick walk of the Demopit (those that didn&#8217;t make it on stage) I&#8217;m not yet startled by amazing new business models. Most of the same with a bit of spice here and there. Here is a summary after a quick lap.</p><p><a
title="Problemator at Techcrunch50 2009 by bigmick, on Flickr" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/adwentures/3920057304/"><img
src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3432/3920057304_378cdac2b2_m.jpg" alt="Problemator at Techcrunch50 2009" width="240" height="160" /></a></p><h2>The Usual Prospects</h2><ul><li><strong>Advertising</strong> &#8211; and everyone adds &#8220;It&#8217;s super targeted&#8221;, &#8220;It&#8217;s specific, locally targeted&#8221; or &#8220;We&#8217;ve got tags&#8221;. In this group but not particularly mind-blowing was <a
href="http://www.meaningz.com/">Meaningz</a>, <a
href="http://www.7ages.com/">7ages</a>,<a
href="http://www.lifemee.com/">Lifemee</a> and <a
href="http://www.pip.io/">Pip.io</a>. <a
href="http://www.iate.com/">iAte</a> was interesting in that it searches through Twitter and finds reviews of restaurants, then collates them and builds a reputation of them. No great business model yet, but looked like they were creating value.</li><li><strong>Freemium</strong> &#8211; you give it away and hope to charge a percentage of people a subscription for more features. (<a
href="http://www.viddler.com/explore/bigmick/videos/16/">I&#8217;m not a fan</a>) &#8211; Such as <a
href="http://www.problemator.com/">Problemator</a> &#8211; where users pose questions and answers bubble to the top.</li><li><strong>Fee for service</strong> &#8211; you actually charge money (<a
href="http://www.pollenizer.com/content/premiree-more-premium-less-free">I like this more</a>). A good example of this was <a
href="http://www.askyourtargetmarket.com/">Ask Your Target Market</a>, which matches your survey to an audience and gives you a simple tool to analyse the results. The more focused the target, the more you pay. Love it. <a
href="http://www.trademarkia.com/">Trademarkia</a> was also interesting, letting companies to IP searches for current as well as lapsed marks (e.g. Trademarks). They say that Google is actually the second Google.</li><li><strong>Licensing</strong> &#8211; charge money to use the technology. A good example of the this is <a
href="http://www.tucoola.com/">Tucoola</a>, which has methodologies in the area of Early Childhood Development and lets companies plug it easily into games. This helps them actually be good for the kids, as well as being fun. It also includes analysing the impact such as music exposure, literacy, hand-eye coordination.</li><li><strong>Micro-Payments</strong> &#8211; charging small amounts of money for tiny transactions. Two examples here, firstly <a
href="http://www.tapjoy.com/">Tapjoy</a>, which touts itself as an alternative to the iPhone App Store, but allows smaller fees for applications, e.g. 5 or 10 cents. They say that Apple is OK with it. Hmmm. Second was <a
href="http://www.cloudmach.com/">Cloudmach</a> which has a browser-based virtual world, which I believe can be embedded anywhere which will be selling virtual goods, e.g. 1 cent for a hug, 5c for a kiss.</li></ul><p><a
title="Trademarkia Techcrunch50 by bigmick, on Flickr" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/adwentures/3920055826/"><img
src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3439/3920055826_d8630eaacd_m.jpg" alt="Trademarkia Techcrunch50" width="240" height="160" /></a></p><p>So that&#8217;s just a first look at the business models being touted here. I hope to see a few more interesting ideas. Don Dodge is on stage asking the &#8216;What&#8217;s your business model?&#8221; question to Penn and Teller&#8217;s iPhone app, so it&#8217;s still firmly in the investors mind &#8211; of course.</p><p><a
title="Mike Arrington at the start of Techcrunch50 2009 by bigmick, on Flickr" href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/adwentures/3919291919/"><img
src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2449/3919291919_385c052422_m.jpg" alt="Mike Arrington at the start of Techcrunch50 2009" width="160" height="240" /></a></p><p>Techcrunch50 has now officially started. Jason and Mike on stage, talking proudly of Mint which one the first Techcrunch40 back in 2007 that just got acquired by Intuit for $170m. Onto the second pitch &#8211; Story Something, which is personalised books for the digital space. Looks like they are looking to the iPhone for monetization too, which might become a new usual suspect.</p> ]]></content:encoded> <wfw:commentRss>http://www.pollenizer.com/techcrunch50-business-model-review/feed/</wfw:commentRss> <slash:comments>0</slash:comments> </item> </channel> </rss>
