Comments on: wednesday in london

By: AA

AA — Mon, 20 Jun 2005 20:57:44 +0000

Perhaps the title of the cartoon should be F.ART (Fine Art) explained!

By: hugh macleod

hugh macleod — Sun, 19 Jun 2005 01:54:39 +0000

Well, my way of looking at capital is– it’s just one more commodity.
And commodities, including capital, can be outsourced.

By: PeterS

PeterS — Fri, 17 Jun 2005 00:05:24 +0000

But what about if your idea is for a cool new, mass market widget? And say that widget costs $100 to produce in, for instance, China. Is the market ready to “wait” while their order is built-to-order? If not then inventory must be purchased and that takes dough, sometimes alot of it. Hugh, you had to invest $$ in your t-shirt inventory. Where is the balance between keeping things as close to just-in-time as possible and fulfilling the demands of the market? IP-based products are a no brainer. Atoms-based things still make me scratch my head.

By: Hamish

Hamish — Thu, 16 Jun 2005 18:17:44 +0000

One of my favourites for the cartoons.
But some business do needs lots of capital.
Like WebVan
Boo.com
Dr Koop.
Oh. Right.
Basically, if you need capital it is either for development time, or infrastructure. If it is development time, find a new model or a smaller starting point. (Sig I know has been noodling awy quitely at the software in his other life, so not burning up capital to stay alive.
If it is infrastructure, ask yourself what purpose it must serve. The only need for infrastructure is if you are starting a local business that serves a physical need, like a cafe or a laundrette. Otherwise someone in the developing world will do it cheaper, better and quicker.
Its an expression I often hear, and agree with. “Never be the first, and never be the last.”

By: Jim Wilde

Jim Wilde — Thu, 16 Jun 2005 05:58:35 +0000

Many products and services are invented in the basement (Ideascape); however, marketing to people that don’t surf the net or read blogs leads many of us to plan “b”. What’s plan ‘b’? Call every mfr in the phone book.

By: frosty

frosty — Thu, 16 Jun 2005 02:01:03 +0000

Steve, in a lot of cases you can sacrifice the bullshit and end up cheaper *and* better.
Not everywhere of course, but in a lot of things. The Delicious example: Sacrifice paranoia and cut your labor costs (work out of a coffee house, don’t pay for offices, get people to cut you slack on the paycheck in return for flexibility, etc.) — and watch productivity increase because your belief in your product is inspirational.
One of the intriguing things about the blog(vertising) phenomenon is that you just might be able to sacrifice traditional marketing, with all its associated costs, and get to Point B even faster. Whether you pass those savings on to your customers is another question. Seth Godin got a choice quote from the CEO of JetBlue on that subject, which you can read here:
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2005/06/the_seduction_o.html

By: Sam Sugar

Sam Sugar — Thu, 16 Jun 2005 01:24:13 +0000

Ouch — the comment on capital rings true Hugh but hurts a little too. I’ve spent a year working on a new business that’s moving forward very nicely.
My need for a little money (a few thousand dollars instead of a few hundred) is because I need technology for the web that doesn’t exist in the form I need it. Building it requires geek-time that I need to pay for.
Point is — sometimes invention requires investment. Especially when you’re inventing outside your own field. I guess I could learn to program and do it all myself but the cash is a shortcut.
Some ideas start by generating a few dollars. Others a few hundred thousand (with varying degrees of profitability). Mines in the latter category so relatively speaking the money I’m investing isn’t that significant. I

By: Steve Warrick

Steve Warrick — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 22:55:41 +0000

There’s always a market for cheaper versions of any brand. It is not, however, sustainable. To be cheaper you must sacrifice something; usually quality, finish or service, but ultimately, that, which is your core value…individuality/status. The client does not want to share his expensively won, bespoke product with anybody other than those of his choosing or peer group. Consider the example of Burberry. I rest my case.

By: hugh macleod

hugh macleod — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 22:22:10 +0000

Yep. That’s very cool.
I like businesses that can “travel light”. Suits my transient nature etc.

By: frosty

frosty — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 22:01:11 +0000

Oh yeah, and actually it’s more than just the two guys, but the team is small enough they can still all fit in the cafe.

By: frosty

frosty — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 22:00:16 +0000

Delicious Monster is in Seattle. http://www.delicious-monster.com/ Here's the Wired story about them and the coffee house: http://www.wired.com/news/mac/0,2125,66276,00.html They basically just have one product, and it has a pretty fanatical following even by Mac standards. But that's not surprising when you consider the founders are from OmniGroup (actually one of the founders of that is a Delic founder), which for years has been one of the best small Mac-specific software outfits. http://www.omnigroup.com/ Anyway, having spent some time in Seattle coffee joints, I can say that this development model gives a whole new meaning to the word "Agile."

By: Peter Orosz

Peter Orosz — Wed, 15 Jun 2005 21:28:57 +0000

Except if your business plan looks something like FedEx, which is pretty far from flawed but which probably needed a boatload of money to get off the ground.
Then again, if I were to start a company tomorrow, I would pick a business I could be in with a laptop, a telephone and not much else.
There’s a cool software company on the West Coast called Delicious Monster, they make a piece of software for the Mac that lets you organize your books. They’ve been raking in the awards and the cash since last fall, yet when it comes to office space, they use a local coffehouse. It’s two guys with a Powerbook each and that’s it. Wonderful.