Slashdot Mirror
20 Tech Ideas VCs Want to Fund
An anonymous reader writes "CNNMoney reports on the top 20 technology ideas that our beloved VCs want to throw money at. Are these the brilliant ideas that will change the world (and make you rich in the process)?" From the article: "Delivery of new types of Web search to mobile phones. Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo are all taking a swipe at this, but Rimer believes they're betting on a losing strategy by simply shrinking their existing desktop features into a handheld package. He says he's willing to invest in new search applications that, for example, depend as much on voice recognition as on text input and would offer up everything from shopping and news headlines to driving directions and restaurant reviews with a few voice commands and keystrokes ... What he'll invest: $2 million for a working demo application."
So drivers can read email while driving.
That's just fucking retarded. People have trouble driving while "reading" the road and traffic conditions. Why split their concentration any more?
Don't you need internet access on your cell phone before mobile search engines hit it big? In which case there would need to be almost nothing different than current websites. Maybe they should focus on getting decent broadband to mobile phones in the area of $20 a month before worrying about super-duper mobile phone websites. Otherwise nobody will use the websites....
Hot tip to VC... if you really want to do something with a database, pick one of the existing "flyweight" OS databases and put together a sales and support organization... don't reinvent the wheel.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Quite often the best business ideas (as in, the basis for a business that makes money) are evolutionary, not revolutionary. It's a worthy goal to take the state of the art and add something that just makes it better.
Think how much Linux is benefiting from things like desktop interface improvements - it's not cutting edge amazing ideas, but it does have value. The same thing applies in business.
Really the right place for basic research is in the public domain where the stakes are high and the rewards few and far between. It makes the search for groundbreaking ideas more efficient because people can trade information with no fear or losing out on millions.
This also means that the basic research is then available to businesses who can add *their* value in turning it into something usable for the rest of us... along with another bunch of businesses ensuring that competition brings it's benefits to bear. To look back at the Linux analogy, this is essentially how we are seeing the Open Source model turn out high quality at low cost - the research is all public, and the refinements to make it accessable are driven by people who want to sell it.
Think of the Children; Sleep with your Sister
You are 100% correct. Just a nit to pick: it's not just the US - it's everyone. Profit-driven business are - generally - too constrained by the need to increase shareholder value RIGHT NOW to take on large, speculative research projects, so it falls to governments to spur advances in this sector.
there is no need to sign your posts. this isn't usenet. your username is right there above your post. stop it.
What they want now: A driver's tech fantasy fully realized: an in-dash computer with a keyboard built into the steering wheel and a full-screen heads-up display projected on the windshield.
What they'll invest: $5 million for a deeply qualified 20-person team to deliver a prototype and a plan for pitching a commercial version to automakers within three years
Gee, a whole $5 million for a DEEPLY QUALIFIED 20 PERSON TEAM FOR 3 YEARS. LOL.
Apparently, on-shore development teams need not apply.
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
5 out of the 20 were about different ways to advertise. One was about a way to automate product placement on TV shows and in movies.
There are a lot of technology-gone-horribly-wrong scenarios; the one that leaves me in a cold sweat is inescapable advertising.
Insisting on "correct" English is like saying that there is only one, definitive recipe for chili.
Don't forget, this is a list of projects they are willing to discuss publicly. They don't have to worry about someone stealing an old concept for a product and they might just get someone to call them up with a way to do it. They guard the innovative stuff a little more jealously.
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
>With an LCD windshield, coupled with a sufficiently advanced computer and external cameras
Hmmmm... One crash (computer) could lead to another (car) and a new definition of Blue Screen Of Death.Some mornings it's hardly worth chewing through the restraints to get out of bed.
It specifically said:
Just because you the poster failed to read that last word does not mean you get to then say what he wants as if it was your idea,and slam him for not thinking it. Mods, please take appropriate action regarding parent post.
That said, your idea is a paltry imitation of his. He wants more than a sales organization. He wants a company that can take on the big boys on their own turf: big database work. That means application support that goes beyond the little stuff done by most (all?) current DB smaller companies.
My Suburban burns less gasoline than your Prius.
OR to put it another way, we all stand on the shoulders of midgets.
Is is just me, or are most of these ideas pretty anemic? Pathogen detection sounds pretty far out, but much of the rest is questionable. They either want an incremental software upgrade or a monumental leap in the energy field.
Of course you want a li-ion battery with 5 times the power, we all do. R&D labs have been working on it for years, remember li-poly? And your investment? 2M, that's 66k / person for 2 years! And I need PhDs for this kind of work! 2M won't even cover salary and ops expenses for 1 year, let alone startup fees. A new battery is worth billions, not millions, this money is a fraction of what's needed and the 15 underpaid geniuses have to find a way to succeed where other R&D research labs have failed. This looks pretty bad.
FTA: One idea offered $5 million for a deeply qualified 20-person team...commercial version to automakers within three years. That's 86k per person per year, clearly not enough.
As to software, you want a working version of the next MMO, web-based Excel, cell phone search? If I'm that far along, why do I need your money? If I have established a user base in one city or an established user community, what's the difference between your $5M and a $5M loan? Venture Capital is defined as high risk, but if I have working tech and a defined user base, you're basically an investor.
BTW, what's this about the 20 smartest companies to start now? It seems to me that most of these would be bad companies to start now. If you had a working version and really needed the VC, well then here's your hookup. But starting some of these ideas now could be really fatal (i.e. spreadsheet blown away by Google's, NetSuite upgrading their software).
The only way I can see any of these working is for an existing company to gather a team and apply for this VC with hopes of a quick turnaround. Even then, the company will definitely be dumping a chunk of their own money on the project, so I don't see how the VC will get a reasonable cut.
These are not the 20 smartest ideas, just 20 reasonably good ones.