nextNY digital, the next generation of digital movers and shakers in NYC.

Archive for the 'nextNY' Category

Nate ‘08 and the Future of the NY Tech Meetup

This week, NY Tech Meetup organizer and Meetup.com CEO Scott Heiferman outlined a vision  for the future of the group that included a board and community elected organizer.  He talked about the meetup becoming more than what it is.

The idea that the NY Tech Meetup could be more than just a monthly meeting with a few presentations is what led me to create nextNY in the first place.  Rather than go with more structure, we've gone with less.  nextNY has no official organizer and everyone is free to run an event and add to our site--which is in itself a combo of a wiki, blog, job board and other stuff that members just put up themselves.  I think it has become the goto place for a real sense of community in NYC tech.

So that leaves open the question of where the NY Tech Meetup fits.  Should it become more like a professional society?  I don't think so.  We've seen two industry professional organizations develop here--the New York New Media Association (NYNMA) and the New York Software Industry Association (NYSIA) and neither proved to be the community unifier that's needed here.  Organic groups have flourished--a testiment to Meetup.com's own philosophy--which makes it somewhat ironic that Scott should look to build more structure on grass roots.

In a city of lots of structure and money, at least on the outside, it seems to me that structure and money isn't often what gets communities moving together--and often times, it can be an impediment.  Not only that, there's no shortage of structure and resources already in place and our biggest challenge is tapping that and making what we have better.

One thing that Scott is right about is that more could be done for the NY tech community.  I'm just not sure that the NY Tech Meetup is the right vehicle for it, but I'm also not one to look a gift horse in the mouth.  You see, a couple of weeks ago, David Rose and I, at a NYC Council hearing, seperately called for the creation of a single position whose role would be to bring together all of the disparate pieces of the NYC innovation community--a community manager if you will.  More than space or money, if NYC is to take avantage of what it already has, it needs a focal point and a conduit for communication.  In a sea of offices, committees, groups, task forces, meetups, unconferences, and incubators, a single human with an email address, phone number, blog, and a Twitter account could accomplish a ton. 

Such a person would go university to university, community group to community group, to all the government offices, VC funds, angels, etc...  and start off with an assessment.  What do we have?  In the process, that person would become a connector.  A person who could put like minded people together two at a time as often as they put 500 people in the same room.

So, its rather fortuitous that one of the largest groups of tech professionals in the city is in the market for a mission statement and an organizer to carry it out.  I think this is the perfect opportunity to put forward a single person whose job it will be to reach out to the various parts of the NYC tech community and inspire them to work together for a common purpose. 

In my opinion, Nate Westheimer is the most appropriate person for that position.

Keep in mind I said appropriate.  He's not the most experienced--there are other folks who have managed larger communities before or who have been involved in the NY scene for 10, 15, or 20 years.  And, he's not a 5 time repeat entrepreneur or successful VC.  

However, I don't think experience is really what's critical here.  Experience, in this case, presents two problems. 

First, experience gives you a view--you form an opinion and perspective as to what the problems and solutions are related to this community.  That's a problem because the person who can bring the community together can't be someone putting forward their own agenda.  Their agenda must be a synthesis of the community's agenda.  They must be an agnostic aggregator. 

The other thing a lot of experience gives you is the perception, and maybe reality, that you already know most of the people you need to know.  The person who would make the best Community Organizer is not the person that everyone already knows--its the person who will strive to expand and diversify their network.  While Nate knows a lot of the up and comer crowd, there are lots of people in "industry" and the academic world as well that don't know him, and I think he knows that.  

What also makes Nate qualified is that his current job as an EIR at RoseTech Ventures should be 100% synergystic with being the NY Tech Meetup Organizer.  The more that Nate reaches out to the tech community, the more he'll learn about different opportunities and the more people will reach out to him for advice, and perhaps financing.  It's also great that he's not working for a VC, so you can be assured that if he does discover investment opportunities in his job, RoseTech and David will likely seek to syndicate the deal like you'd expect an angel to do.  You wouldn't have to worry about RoseTech getting an unfair "first look" at everything because angels don't hoard their deals--they need other angels or funds to get deals done.

The other thing that makes Nate naturally qualified for this job is that it is inherently social and Nate's a very social guy.  To leverage the NY Tech Meetup as a platform for bringing the community together, he'd really have to reach out and participate in the community the way more experienced people who have kids and families generally won't.  I say that having been the junior guy at a VC firm where the partners, at the end of the day, weren't realistically going to spend three or for nights out at various tech events--but that's where community happens--so it was part of my job to participate in that scene.  That means going to the nextNY events, the Media Meshings, hanging out with the NYC Resistor crew, and even travelling--representing NYC out at Web 2.0 Expo in SF and in other places.  Is it possible for someone else with more life responsibilities to take this on?  Sure...  but more often than not, life just puts on you certain logistical limitations that Nate has proven he can work around when he's passionate about something--he just spent nearly a month campaigning for the Obama campaign in Ohio.  It's this kind of on the ground, door to door effort that the NY Tech Meetup needs--more of a servant of the community than a lead. 

Plus, I'm sure he'll have help.  I don't know what the board will look like, but ultimately, I'm sure that folks like myself, Scott, Dawn Barber, etc. will support his efforts along the way.

As to who else might run?

Well, first off, I'm definitely not running.  I have more than enough to do and my priority is Path 101.

The subject of conflicts is important here, and I want to take a second to address that.  There are people here in the city who are making very successful businesses out of creating communities around them.  That includes Mashable, the Hatchery, SobelMedia, BDI and others.  Those are great business models and their efforts are an integral part of the ecology of the tech community.   However, their mission conflicts with the idea of having the NY Tech Meetup be the center of the NY tech community in a way that just running another non for profit meetup doesn't.  They have a direct business incentive to build community around them and so I wouldn't support the candidacy of any owner of those businesses, despite the fact that they are a group of very savvy and sophisticated people who contribute a lot to the community.  I would not support their candidacy or participation on the board.  The board should, however, make room for NYC government folks and venture capital firms.

And, I'll say it, and I'm not trying to be mean...   but Richie Hecker isn't the guy either.  Richie, you mean well, but I think you have a lot to learn about how to contribute to the community rather than distract it by promoting your own efforts.  I don't want to be negative, but I know Richie will probably run and get a bunch of friends to vote for him, so I just want to cut that off before it gets out of hand.  Again, not a bad guy, but not the right guy for the job.

Thanks for reading this whole post.  I know it was long.

Gannett Acquires Ripple6

NYConvergence ORIGINALWe spoke with Ripple6's Director of Marketing Chris Kieff this morning about the acquisition of the NYC-based social-media services provider following his post on Twitter about it. The company will become a wholly-owned subisidiary of Gannett, much like PointRoll,...

Artificially Repositioning Vs. Evolving

Evolution In my prior post, Don’t Try To Force Fit Your Model Into A VC’s Thesis, I tried to highlight the importance of not artificially repositioning a business plan in order raise capital from VCs.

I wanted to offer some additional color. There is an important distinction between artificially repositioning a business and genuinely evolving the business plan.

By “artificial repositioning”, I refer to making unrealistic claims about the business. For example, after hearing that an addressable market size is not large enough to meet a VC’s investment criteria, claiming that the addressable market size is actually much larger than previously stated (without a new plan to sell to new customer groups) is disingenuous. In situations like these, the underlying business plan has not changed – just its positioning.

If, however, after management was told that its addressable market was in fact too small for the VC’s needs, the management team then identified a new customer segment to target, it would be reasonable for the team to come back to the VC pointing to a larger addressable market. This is an example of a management team evolving in response to feedback. Not only does the evolution of a plan justify a new discussion with the VC, but constant, thoughtful reimagining of a business is also a good thing early in the life of a company.

It’s worth noting that some models cannot evolve to meet the requirements of a specific investor. For example, some VCs don’t invest in hardware-dependent businesses. If an entrepreneur pitches a business that is dependent on hardware to such a VC, it might be impossible for this company to ever meet fit the investor’s thesis.

At the end of the day, there is an important distinction between artificial repositioning and evolving a strategy. If you can evolve the company (and like the new model), do so. If you can’t, don’t try to artificially reposition the company – it will do more harm than good.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Co-Op Video Demo

co-opCo-op combines a quick update tool like Twitter with inline time tracking and project management. Earlier this week, Co-Op presented a demo of their application at the NY Tech Meetup. We covered the launch of Co-Op last month.

The Intern’s Picks: November 13th

Top 5

Compliments of Alex Horn

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Tech Meets Media Taste Making Panel

Traditional media as we know is changing and today's content producers must embrace the transition from silver screen to web. KlickableTV is bringing together industry taste-makers and new media visionaries in "Tech Meets Media: a panel discussing how technology has influenced the changing landscape of traditional media" on Thursday, November 13, 2008 at HighBar in NYC. The panelists include Genna Terranova, Senior Programmer, Tribeca Film Festival, John Vanco, Vice President & General Manager, IFC Film Center, Christopher Horton, Head of Acquisitions, Cinetic Rights Management, Paul Kontonis, Chief Executive and Co-founder, For Your Imagination and is moderated by Roger Wu, President and Co-Founder, KlickableTV. Plan to enjoy an open bar and mix and mingle with television, film and new media professionals and trendsetters at Midtown's Trendy new location - HighBar - located at the top of the Hilton Gardena Inn. Please RSVP at klickabletvpanel1.eventbrite.com.

nextNY Business Development Discussion (video)

nextnyTonight the nextNY group held a business development session named, "The Business Development Discipline: Practitioners' Roundtable". About 50 people attended the session where a variety of business development topics were discussed. Most of the discussion was around business development for "major" startups and large companies.

The evening's speakers included:
  • Chris Phenner - VP of Business Development, Thumbplay (left side of camera)
  • Dan Rosenberg - VP of Business Development, Rave Wireless (right side of camera)
  • Matt Milner - VP of Social Media, Hearst Corporation (right side of camera)

I was able to tape the first hour of the discussion and part one (30 minutes) is below. The other half of the discussion will be posted on Tuesday morning.

Earlier this year, the nextNY group held a workshop on hiring for startups. If you plan to do any hiring for your startup, the videos are a must watch.

Obamania rules Ad:tech

Randall Rothenberg, Tina Sharkey, Rob Norman at Ad:tech

There was no avoiding Obama at Ad:tech. The Interactive Advertising Bureau is bracing for the coming regulations.

‘Unquestionably the biggest idea that America has had in decades is Barack Obama,’ proclaimed Paul Woolmington. The British/South African cofounder of Naked Communications moderated a panel on The Big Idea 3.0, Redefining Creative in the Digital Age.

‘You can now be subversive and be mainstream,’ said Jessica Greenwood, Deputy Editor of Contagious Magazine. She was talking about graffiti artist Banksy who’s known for anti-Wall Street and anti-McDonald’s guerilla work, but also produces advertising for Nike and Diesel.

‘He does that on the side,’ Greenwood said. ‘Nobody really knows about it. You can be many different things to many different people.’

On election day IAB-chief Randall Rothenberg kept returning his panel on the The State of the Industry to the coming regulations under an unnamed new administration. ‘I knew this question was coming,’ said David Morris, CBS Interactive’s Chief Client Officer.

Morris gave the official company line. ‘We have to explain to our customers in a very clear and concise way how we’re collecting information, what kind of information we collect and exactly the four or five things we do with that information. I don’t think the FCC is concerned about someone going to Cnet that looks at a camera review and then goes to CBS Sports.com and we serve him a Nikon add there.’

Rothenberg pointed out that’s exactly the kind of advertising that could be banned under proposed legislation in New York State, Connecticut and Massachusetts. ‘The tendency is to define all interactive advertising as behavioral and to put a regulatory umbrella around that,’ said Rothenberg.

‘Both the Online Publishers Association and the Interactive Advertising Bureau as industry groups have the responsibilty to keep government out of our business,’ said Tina Sharkey of BabyCenter. ‘We can self-regulate and we have a proven track record of doing no harm.’

The IAB has been working with the 4A’s, ANA, OPA and other organization on the development of ‘a self-regulatory mechanism and enforcement capability’ for a year and a half. ‘We’re pretty confident we’re able to come out with a public path towards a solution by January,’ Rothenberg said.

Term sheets: Exploding Offers

Bomb One of my mentors once said, VCs love to be the first to be second. They don’t want to be the first to issue a term sheet, but will issue one quickly once someone else has.

As a result, VCs often make their term sheets exploding offers – they expire within a defined timeframe. This enables them to reduce the odds that other VCs will be able to make competitive bids to invest in the startup before the entrepreneur has to make a decision.

If you like the VC you’re working with and the terms are fair, this isn’t an issue. However, this dynamic is something that you should be aware of, as you will need to be prepared to quickly review the terms of the term sheet.

The good news is that term sheets typically aren’t issued out of the blue – if you watch for the signs that you are close to receiving a term sheet, you can be prepared to respond to exploding offers.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

SuiteMatch - Find Shared Office Space

suitematchToday I wrote about coworking for my InformationWeek column. We've written about coworking many times on CN and have reviewed shared office space provider SunshineSuites as well. What about if you have an office and want to share space with another company or if you are looking for space for your team?

Hoboken-based SuiteMatch is like Match.com for office space. You can post open space at your office and you can search for space for you and/or your team. Currently they are listing open space in New York, San Francisco and Chicago. While they are in beta postings are free and they note that after that there will be a fee to post.

I love the design of the site - the information is very well presented and the Google Map not only shows you the location of the office space but nearby establishments (coffee, food, etc.). To be honest, they need to take their setup and duplicate it to work for apartments off Craigslist. That would certainly be a step up from the crappy experience Craigslist provides.

Sam at LeveragingIdeas wonders if they will be able to get past just startup listings and into real open space. Frankly this is a perfect time for SuiteMatch to go after large company openings as companies potentially layoff staff and have open spaces. I've written before that large corporations should embrace startups in their environment and SuiteMatch could be the tool to help bring both groups together.