Startup.com

There's nothing like writing a review about a movie 2 1/2 month after you watched it. I actually mean that in a positive respect in this case. The perspective of having listened to our guest speakers and having taken this course after having seen the film actually allows you to understand the mistakes that were made in the running of the business depicted in the film more clearly. When one of the speakers says "business can complicate family relations and ruin friendships", you can think back to this film and say "yep, i can see that'. Another example would be "have a clear organizational structure, and chain of command", you can think back to the film and say to your self; "co-CEO's, bwahaha". It also emphasizes the fact that walking away from something is not necessarily the same as failure, sometimes it is the smartest thing you can do. Meaning it is important to recognize when your company has headed in a bad direction and there is nothing you can do (i'm speaking of not just the partner in the film that got out early, but also all of the guest speakers that said something like "i walked away from that project"). One of the final mistakes that  I recognized while actually watching the film was; don't hire 50 people to sell your product and only ~5 to actually create it. The best sales staff in the world is not going to help you if your product looks like the result of leaving a 6 year old in front of a html editor unsupervised. And finally and most importantly kids, DON'T EMBEZZLE form your company.

ELEVATOR PITCH:

Me: (Gets in elevator, recognizes potential investor) -Hello, Mr SoNso?
Mr. SoNso: yes, do I know you?
Me: No, but i recognized you from [insert place]. Anyway, I run a company called DeadLast_Games, we build custom modified high-end gaming machines and workstations, think: Orange county choppers, except with computers [breaks forth wall and gives professor Fry the thumbs up]. I would like to offer you a unique investment opportunity.
Mr. SoNso: [Any answer but "leave me alone"]
Me: Wee have positioned ourselves in the market as a premium product and built our brand on a reputation for excellence and precise engineering. We make the fastest, most powerful, and most expensive PC's money can buy. We able to do this with custom component modification and fabrication and exotic cooling solutions (industry term, all non-air-cooled solutions are deemed "exotic"). We are a small company right now, but we have enjoyed a fairly consistent yearly growth of  about ~28%. That growth has been largely due to the quality of our products coupled with our social media gorilla marketing campaign. Right now we are meeting demand for our product, but we need to expand our employment and ramp up production to continue to do so. We also wanted to expand our advertising efforts to increase our market presence and generate new business to offset the cost of the salaries for the new employees. Of coarse, all of this costs money, which is why we are currently seeking $200,000 in exchange for a 10% stake in the company. This would allow us to increase our advertising budget and give us 6 months of runway to hire the new employees and get them up to speed while production ramps up. Would you be interested in a copy of our business plan?

Dot-com to dot-bomb:

This was an extremely interesting lecture, because even though I am one of a handful of people in this class who is old enough to remember this time in a meaningful way (born 1978), I was only casually aware of these events. I was just starting as a chef at the time all of this was going on, though i was and am a fairly early adopter when it comes to technology. From the end user perspective, I remember reading about this but not having it really affect me directly that i was aware of at the time. It was for this reason that I found this lecture so fascinating. As someone who has waited 4+ hours for something to download on a 26k modem just to be Rick-rolled by a friend, I clearly remember this time frame, but still struggled to recall any of the events of the dot-com bubble. Somewhere between Clinton impeachment and y2k, this was quietly building in the background. I mean, clearly remember the events of 911 and the Disney fueled copy-write protests that went on around the time of the collapse (roughly), but could probably not have explained the dot-com collapse in detail with a gun to my head before this lecture. The events leading up to and surrounding the collapse can be viewed as a cautionary tail about being over extended and not having proper contingencies in place. I get that the bigger a company is the harder it is to pivot, but i guarantee that some people actually made a lot of money from this event in the long run. I guess that boiled down to recognizing that there was a bubble and planning ahead. 

Pricing:




For builds with off the shelf components, a flat $80 fee is charged on top of components, this is
in line with what Microcenter charges (the only company currently doing mass produced
hard line liquid cooled PC’s). For more custom builds, we charge $40 per an hour + cost of
components + machine fee x time.
this price structure is sustainable at either 4 hours a day, or 2 regular builds per day to make $50,000 per year. It is important to note that none of the major boutique builders offer fabrication or modification of parts apart from the application of off the shelf  water blocks / distro-plates. CAD design for custom blocks would also be covered by the $40 per hr fee, and production would be covered by materials and machine time fees. Anything requiring fabrication or CAD would be subject to a non-refundable deposit before any actual planning could take place. This safeguard would prevent loss of wages due to projects that fall through (my time should not be had for free being the basic principal). Other considerations such as sourcing special requests would be spelled out to the client during the planning phase, and subject to the $40 per hour fee as well. Given that 20 - 40 hours of work can go into a single custom rig, with non standard parts, ~1 per a week would roughly cover my operating expenses initially. As i moved into a larger space, acquired personnel and machinery, and grow as a  business expenses would go up but i believe that this model should scale fairly well.

Stephanie McKenzie:


I have known Stephanie for roughly 20 years but had lost touch with her until I came to University of Washington Tacoma. I did not know the struggles that she faced making her business work and keeping it viable. Of our guest speakers, i believe that this was the only one taking the "just run the business" approach. This was an opportunity to learn about a different type of entrepreneur, the type that only cares about one thing, and doing it well. Many of other speakers have taught us about pivots, or when to move on from a venture, but this is the first one that was content to simply do the one thing that made them happy. All things considered, even with the amount of risk that comes with being a small business owner, she also explained that there was a fair amount of security that a well run small business can provide. The ability to employ family and loved ones when times are hard is a huge advantage. All things considered, working hard to do what makes you happy seems to be a better idea than working hard just to make money, even if it is more money. Also, it was again reiterated to us the importance of interpersonal relationships when running any sort of business. Hearing from a range of different types of entrepreneurs seems to bring a wider variety of perspectives and approaches. All of this is valuable information when thinking about starting your own business even if it does not relate directly to what you are trying to do.

John Dimmer:

This speaker provided the most complete picture thus far as how funding works. Comprehensive graphs with detailed descriptions of when to seek funding, and from whom were provided. Also discussed were various pitfalls of running a business while seeking funding. This was an extremely informative lecture, and i am very happy I was able to attend it. He also discussed his work as an investor and discussed  some do's and don'ts of seeking funding. It was insightful to hear this information from an investors point of view. Some of the things I learned from this lecture include how to avoid diluting your ownership, how much (roughly) of your business to allow investors to purchase and at which phase of funding, what size investors to seek, and why. It was a very frank and to the point explanation of how things actually work. While all of our guest lectures provided invaluable information, this one provided the most comprehensive view of how to grow a business financially .Essentially, a large part of my take away was seek to take on as few investors as possible, while giving up as little of your business as possible, and to only seek funding upon reaching the appropriate milestone. On a side note, we were also prompted to read our mission statements before hearing from this lecturer while he was seated in the audience, it was interesting to see him either nodding or pursing his lips as we presented as if he were also evaluating the content of our presentations as if measuring their efficacy.

Erik Hanberg:



I was forced to miss this speaker due to medical issues, never the less i attempt to capture the gist of this presentation from reading blog posts from other students. Mr. Hanberg is a writer and publisher that is also responsible for founding channel 253 (a podcasting channel). He has also written and directed films as well as currently sitting on the metro parks board in Tacoma. On paper he appears to have a well accomplished career, and by most accounts (by classmates) was a fairly inspiring speaker. I once again find myself poorer for having been forced to miss class. He utilizes Amazon marketplace for much of his book sales and also advertises through Amazon as well. Becoming a successful published author is impressive enough, but much of his success seems to build toward other success (at least according to a quick google search). Other useful information provided includes topics such as how to build an income graph, which can be used to help build our business plans. This speaker seems to be an example of continuous multifaceted entrepreneurship, or a "many irons in the fire" approach to entrepreneurship. With this approach any one endeavor could have a bad quarter or fail outright, and because your eggs aren't all in the same basket, there is always something to fall back on. This seems to be a reasonable approach assuming that one has the time, energy, and money to peruse multiple ventures simultaneously. This approach has the problem of possibly diluting ones efforts in any single business endeavor if done poorly...