Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Ten Geek Business Myths

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the it-ain't-busted-until-i-see-kari dept.

hpcanswers writes "Venture capitalist Ron Garret has posted a list of eleven (despite the title) common mistakes entrepreneurs with a technology background make. A common theme is that good ideas sell; in reality, what a customer wants sells. By extension, having a Ph.D. and holding a patent are not particularly helpful if the intended end-user does not have the same level of understanding of the widget as the creator does."

1 of 262 comments (clear)

  1. Beem there, done that... by NetDanzr · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I used to work for a major US research university in their commercialization department. We were the guys who pitched ideas to venture capitalists, wrote business plans and tried to keep the inventors down to earth. I fully agree with what was said in the article, especially how important is to know your customers, but I'd like to add a few points:

    • Sales team. The first person you'll ever need is the VP for sales. Then you'll need a good, experienced sales team. No matter how expensive they are, these people will make or break a business. I ended up leaving my job and joining a startup precisely for this reason.
    • Time frame and financial needs. One thing all startups underestimate is the need for quality assurance. Generally, testing for defects takes more time than assembling a product. Thus, the time to market should be at least tripled and the cost doubled from what you expect.
    • Intellectual property. True, patent protection is overrated. However, there are thousands of inventors and companies waiting to sue your ass off if you infringe on their patents. More important than filing your patent is to research whether you infringe on others' patents or not, and settle any licensing issues. This will get very costly, and in this case getting good lawyers is worth their weight in gold. We pay roughly $5000 per patent examined, but they decreased the number of patents we thought we would license from 40 to 2.
    • Company share. Many inventors don't want to relinquish control over the company, and want to maintain a majority stake at any cost. Most investors wouldn't agree with that, with a good reason - a researcher running a company is recipe for disaster. And as the classic saying goes, it's better to have 5% of $100 million than 100% of nothing.
    • IP ownership. I talked about infringing on others' IP already, but what about the inventor's IP? The inventor must transfer all the rights to the invention to the company. Otherwise, the inventor will exercise undue influence over the business, and sooner or later (rather sooner) this will create conflicts between the inventor and the management.
    There are plenty more rules of the game, but this game is too flexible to make any of them universal. The best thing is to give over your technology to a seasoned entrepreneur and just ride along.