wavesplash

The deeper message "invites should go out to social circles" is spot on. Gmail's rollout policy worked because our network was already accessible (via other email providers).

For something inherently social without a pre-seeded network like wave, it only makes sense to roll it out to social clusters.

He was a bit rambling. But he did it with style ;)

I hate to say it, but most of the valley is just cubefarms in nondescript office parks. A tour heading south on 101 of the more interesting bits could be:

Oracle campus - one of the more eye pleasing campuses from the outside (the inside of the buildings is awful - don't bother going in). Off of 101.

Palo Alto (downtown + Stanford) - take 101 exit to University Ave, drive through University Ave (slowly) to Palm Drive, park in the Oval at Stanford and check out the old courtyard. Stanford is a beautiful campus (at least the old part). In Palo Alto downtown a large number of deal meetings happen at University Cafe (on your right). The original Google offices and the former Facebook offices are all within 2 blocks of the Romona/University ave intersection. Special trivia note: the Persian rug dealers also run an investment group (Amidzad) and the Plug-and-Play Tech Centers (startup friendly office spaces). They got stock in Google when GOOG wanted to rent some of their space on Univ Ave.

Googleplex - take Rengstorff exit off of 101. Buildings 41/42/43 are the core Google campus and the old Silicon Graphics campus as well. You may be able to walk through the center of the campus without being hassled by security. Much better if you can get someone to invite you in for lunch. LinkedIn is at the end of Sterlin Ct (right near the Googleplex). Formerly buildings #7 and #8 of Silicon Graphics campus (the whole Sterlin Ct area was SGI for 10+ years). *) Lion and Compass Restaurant in Sunnyvale (Fair Oaks Ave exit North). http://www.lionandcompass.com/ The building is the original headquarters for Atari. (underwhelming, but a nice bit of trivia)

Apple campus - cupertino (off of 280 near De Anza) - not all that interesting, but at least you'll know where it is.

Sand Hill Road - on the way back up from Apple stay on 280N and exit onto Sand Hill Road. This nondescript road is home to Stanford Linear Accelerator and across the street (left side as you go downhill) most of the more famous VC firms all have their headquarters (Sequoia, etc). It's not much to see, but if you're there around lunchtime, head over to the Quadrus Cafe and have a bite surrounded by whatever VCs aren't doing lunch meetings that day. (warning: boring).

However, I besides Stanford Campus, I might suggest skipping all of this and just heading down to the Monterey Bay Aquarium (if they're open), the 17-mile drive, Natural Bridges in Santa Cruz and maybe swing by Bonny Doon to get some wine on the way back up. During sundown, the ridge above the valley on Skyline Blvd is beautiful.

JWZ isn't being dramatic. The slogan should be "Plam Pre: your life, just slower". I had a Pre for a month, returned it on day 30. It was like living in molasses.

Plus the hardware was way way too cheap (fragile plastic screen, sharp edges on the keytray, poor fit between the sliding halves). I was afraid to use the phone for fear of breaking it. You could hear the plastic crunching everytime you typed on the keyboard.

Sculley nearly buried Apple. It's by no means clear that was a smart decision.

I don't know if it works the same way with GS but with UserVoice the tab is completely optional. You can link to the widget or the forum from any link/button.

UserVoice doesn't require signup to submit an idea by default (it's admin selectable).

If you're walking in the front-door / blind emailing then you'll end up with an associate. Same on both sides of the pond.

The trick is to get referred in via a stronger link (a referral from a successful entrepreneur they've worked with in the past is usually a quick way to get to a partner. Perhaps even an intro from a fellow that does due diligence for them ;).

Excellent points. I have very little to add but a few minor bits:

- Don't worry about NDAs with VCs. At least on this side of the pond, no VC is going to sign them. Don't leave your full deck behind in digital form. Leave them a summary deck on paper if you absolutely must. (just assume the deck will get passed outside the firm).

- Do make sure the VC doesn't have a conflicting investment - if so, assume everything you talk about will be going into the ears of your competitors.

- Avoid spotters/associates. Get referred in to a partner by another entrepreneur they've worked with before (work your linkedin or xing). Don't take a 1st meeting with an associate (feel free to chat with them on the phone briefly). If a firm wants to see you, then they can find a partner to talk to you. Associates can only say 'no' and generally have limited deal experience and just may not understand your market (of course there are exceptional individuals and firms where this doesn't apply).

- Timing is everything. When you're ready to go out - have a list of VCs you want to speak with and try to get all your meetings lined up for the same two to three weeks. VCs all talk to each other. Once they hear another firm passed on your deal, it's harder to get the next one to bite. Make it a parallel competition. Don't overexpose your company.

- Do research on the firm and the partner that you're pitching. http://www.thefunded.com is free for founders. Get an account and use it for research. (I'm not affiliated with thefunded, just a fan).

The Magnolia trademark hasn't been issued to Magnolia Systems yet. It's only been published for opposition. Which means if the gnolia.com crew have been using the mark in commerce before March, 2006, they can file an opposition claim.

The whole cease and desist letter is bogus until the trademark has been approved. However, if gnolia.com doesn't oppose the trademark claim now, before it's approved, then it's an uphill battle if the other company decides to sue.

Note Magnolia Systems is filing under multiple subsections - the only one you care about is the online commerce section. They can have all the others.

David is legit (founder of Compete.com). Ghostery has been around since late last year and now David is working on it full-time from what I understand.

From what I understand, that's not the YC model at all. YC takes a bet on the team w/ zero prior coaching and the company can turn down YC - no obligation. If the company says yes, then dinners, coaching, etc. commence.

Clean, simple, no misalignment.

It seems that Seedcamp is goofy by front loading the deliverables but won't commit to the investment. That's awkward for the mentors and the companies that are accepted/obliged to take whatever deal is given to them.

That feels like a poor place to negotiate vaulation from, and a major misalignment for the non-investing mentors.

Drew and the crew deserve the success. I'm a very happy user. The file sync is near instantaneous. If I'm working on a document with someone, by the time they tell me they've saved it in the IM window, it's already transferring to my local dropbox.

Very loosely. You have to understand the nature of a business before you start prescribing metrics to watch. A manufacturer wouldn't use these as success metrics. If we just focus on web-tech we're still left with a buch of questions: Is the business B2C, B2B, Symmetric (User pays) or Asymmetric (3rd party pays - e.g. Google users vs. Google advertisers)?

For asymmetric businesses or high-dollar ($10k+/sale) enterprise/B2B most of these metrics are good-intentioned but likely to send the business astray.

For example: in low-volume/high-dollar B2B and most enterprise, 98% of the time needs to be spent focused on Average Sales Price (ASP) and Average Time to Close (ATC). To minimize ATC and maximize ASP you're trying to listen closely to pain points, determine champions, help win cross department fiefdom battles, get the purchasing department to pay before your company runs out of cash, etc.

Dave's suggested metrics start coming into play for symmetric low-dollar subscriptions to thousands and 10s of thousands. These are the types of markets he understands well, and that's aok, but that's not everyone's business and the advise should be taken with a grain of salt.

Take these slides with a grain of salt. Dave's slides are decent for low-touch symmetric high-volume consumer web sites (B2C). Not so great for B2B or asymmetric businesses.

BTW, if you're far enough along with your ideas, see if you can attend Startup2Startup or STIRR's FoundersTable. Both are great ways to meet quality entrepreneurs.

Welcome. Most of the event activity is based in SF. There are fewer events on the peninsula. Mtn. View is kind of boring by itself (not much to do after 10pm even on the weekends) and the social scene is based around established friends networks, dinners, and movies. SF has a mix of real startup folks and some 'tech hipsters' (tech folk trying desperately to think they're no longer the high-school geeks they really are). You'll find it easier to network and attend events in SF.

So, try landing in SF first. When you're actually ready to start something, I might suggest revisiting the south bay. The lack of social events is actually a huge plus for getting work done. Plus the engineers you find in the south bay tend to love their work more (not as interested in the 6pm happy hr).

Feel free to ping me when you get settled in (I'll leave an email hint in my profile).

Could you help clarify this? In my experience the only things that seem to matter are the offering bank and the financials.

a) Why is this news? Hootsuite has been around for forever.

b) 'OwlHuntr'? For Real? Can you be just a little less obvious?

Jason you're projecting your ideology on others. That's a Fail smell.

There's nothing wrong with a decent exit. The old guard doesn't have to die, and right now we're relying on the old guard since they're almost the only way startups can get liquidity.

The Silicon Valley venture game isn't about making lifestyle businesses. It's about making good returns on investment. $170m was a respectable return for everyone involved.

Sarah, it's called selection bias. The companies that are changing the world aren't rushing to get on stage for a blog conference that garners no tangible benefit in their target markets. What's the value prop for TC50? Getting in front of a bunch of investors and bloggers with 50 other companies and trying to rise above the noise for the attention of a questionable judging panel? (what gives these guys any authority in markets they don't understand?).

Investors are a dime a dozen in the bay area, and bloggers are starved for content (including TechCrunch), so they'll cover you anyhow if its relevant - and not in a flood of 50 other posts in under 2 days. Net tangible benefit to TC50 to the revolutionaries?: $0

The collective decision about TC50 in our office was, "Meh, why waste the time?".

Don't be thrown off - that's a New York positive-spin smile. They have some issues to deal with. Arrington huffing and puffing off stage like a baby at the awards wasn't the best foot forward for the show.

For a privately held entity, how exactly would you like a 3rd party to provide evidence? You have to either know someone on the inside or work by proxy. Assuming you don't know someone, your best proxy is the 10x valuation jump. The $145million valuation wouldn't come without proof of the revenue model to an unproven team.

They were executing revenue, and executing very well.

Mint made referral fees on every offer they made "You can make 3% more a year by switching to ING Direct, etc". They made plenty of money, and all they needed was scale (which they proved they could do). The brilliance was that the offers were aligned with the user's wants/desires/needs and were super well qualified so Mint could charge more per referral.

They weren't created to flip - it was a solid business.

James, you're a good man, but try not to get being asian wrapped up in the right wing agenda. Bigotry is generated by lack of exposure. If you want to influence people, then get out in front of large numbers of people with a positive message (think Bill Cosby and Barak Obama). You have to forgive those that are ignorant - many of them come around with exposure (and sadly some don't - but don't let them distract you).

Getting nervous and planning to run away is what rich wimps do when they don't understand the power of influence they can wield to change things. I'm pretty sure that's not your inner character.

1) You price the product based on what the market will bear. If you say "it costs $50k" and they say, "great where do we sign?" you're probably selling too cheap. You need a few 'no's to tell where the top of the pricing range is.

How to guess the initial price? Ask your existing clients how much they'd pay for an off the shelf product.

2) Read up on Enterprise Sales - you're basically doing a small version of that. Academics and Unis are notorious for long sales cycles (years).

Good luck!

Just means he'll have an excuse to value your investment round instead of just participating in convertible. Now in the valley we have SofttechVC, Lowercase, OATV, FirstRound, Baseline, and a handful of others trying to extract 20% from you for money you used to be able to get for 3-10%. On the bright side, more competition is good.

David Weekly and much of the Dojo crew are also the forces behind SuperHappyDevHouse (http://shdh.org).

Most used? My smartphones: I used WebOS (linux underneath) and MacOS (stripped down iphone version) the most.

Great drama, though Mike does have a point - the $1mil prize is only useful if IDG has a magazine in your niche. That said, DEMO still has the most mainstream press walking the floor (nytimes, etc) and it covers much more than just web startups. Quick rule of thumb: you want mainstream press: Demo. You want exposure in Silicon Valley: TC50. Neither event is necessary. Why launch with a flood of 40-100 other companies when you could launch in a down news cycle and get all the attention for your company? And although it's fun, beware of manufactured drama