Wednesday, December 4, 2019

Startup People of Seattle: Brett Greene (Community Builder and Founder & CEO of New Tech Northwest)

The blog-series “Startup People of Seattle” introduces some of the key personas in the ecosystem to learn more about what they are doing, to share their thoughts and ideas, and to promote networking.

In our 18th (and final) interview, meet Brett Greene:
“Two mistakes I regularly see founders make (being too focused on the own idea and being too focused on exit strategies) have one thing in common – The primary focus is not on solving a problem that matters to people. ‘Matters to people’ means they care about it, are unhappy with existing solutions, and are willing to pay for a better solution. Identifying such a problem is what entrepreneurship is all about, and the most promising way of going about this is by talking to customers!”
Brett Greene is founder and CEO of New Tech Northwest – the fastest growing monthly event group in Meetup.com history (out of 300,000 international organizations) with over 45,000 members.

Q: Could you please introduce yourself and talk about how you got into startups?
A: I am founder and CEO of New Tech Northwest. What I do is connect people. I am building a tech community that offers a support-system for everyone involved. New Tech Northwest is about building relationships rather than just a business network.
I got into startups around 2006. I lived in Boulder, Colorado at the time. I started going to the New Tech events there and mentored some Techstars startups. This was when Techstars just got off the ground. At the time I owned a digital marketing company, so that expertise was what I could offer to founders.
In 2012 I moved to Seattle and together with Red Russak I formed the idea of starting New Tech Northwest.
Q: Could you tell me more about New Tech Northwest?
A: Like I said, New Tech Northwest is a tech community based on the values of building relationships and giving first. We want that members treat each other like neighbors or friends, not just like business partners. So, members are expected to be interested in each other and offer support to each other. 
At the foundation of New Tech Northwest are monthly networking events in Seattle, Bellevue, and Portland. In Tacoma these events take place quarterly as well. What makes the New Tech Northwest events special, I think, is the wide variety of people who attend – students who are in coding school and are looking for jobs, recruiters, investors, founders, engineers, sales people, service providers – A mix of all these people can be found at New Tech events.
Aside from the in-person events, members have formed social media groups to discuss topics, ask questions, share advice, etc. We encourage all members to share whatever it is they need next on their journey with our community. What we see happening is that members help each other find jobs, mentors, customers, etc.
We have about 45.000 members now and grow by 500 every month.
Q: Having been part of Seattle’s startup ecosystem for about seven years now, in your opinion, what are some of its strength and weaknesses?
A: The No.1 strength is the collaborative spirit. In Seattle’s startup ecosystem people want to help each other succeed.
Another strength that stems from the fact that big companies like Amazon, Microsoft, and Boeing have been part of this ecosystem for a very long time is that Seattle’s startup ecosystem is full of ex-employees of those companies who have money, experience, and relationships already when they are starting their businesses. Contrary, in Boulder for example, most founders are younger than 30 and have none of the above-mentioned things. They start from zero. I find this to be a real strength of the ecosystem here. 
On the negative side, the complaint I hear most from founders is that business angels tend to say “maybe” too much. Founders would prefer to hear clear “yeses” and “no’s” over getting advice, spending time implementing the advice, and then in 9/10 cases still never attracting investment from this angel.
Q: You pointed out that you think of it as a strength that many founders in Seattle have had a corporate career which provided them with a certain wealth among other things. 
I have observed two viewpoints regarding this: Some, like you, prefer founders who come from a place of simply believing in an idea and wanting to see it become reality, without the financial incentives being at the core of their considerations. People who have this opinion tend to argue that those founders are more likely to get through difficult times because they can support themselves.
Others argue they prefer founders who cannot rely on their past savings because they are typically hungrier. A lot more is at stake for them, so they tend to work harder and not give up as easily.
What do you think about both those argument?
A: I think that there are a lot of myth about startup success. From my research, statistically a higher percentage of startups succeed in which the founder is over 40. I believe that resources and experience explain this difference. However, I cannot say for certain that I am right about this. Many people have different opinions on what tend to be qualities of successful founders, and I am open to being proven wrong.
Q: What are some of the key organizations in Seattle’s startup ecosystem that you can think off?
A: Seattle Angel Conference has been around for a long time. Fledge is doing great things. WTIA offers a lot for startups. Another key organization is The Female Founders Alliance. Founders Live is helping very early stage companies. Cofounders Connect has a Facebook group and they do events as well. Examples for coworking spaces are Create 33, Impact Hub, and WeWork.
Q: Who are some of the key people in the ecosystem?
A: There are many, but some of the names are: 
  • Elizabeth Scallon
  • John Sechrest
  • Dave Parker
  • Heather Redman
  • Nick Hughes
  • Leslie Feinzaig
  • Red Russak
Q: What recommendations would you give someone who is new to the ecosystem and wants to get involved?
A: I would recommend signing up on the email lists of the Seattle Angel Conference and Startup Digest. There is also an event calendar by Geekwire that I would suggest looking at regularly, and our website can be helpful as well I believe. Under >Connect >Community Connections we list many of the organizations and resources available to founders in the Northwest.
All this is helpful to get an overview of what is happening here in this ecosystem and to filter what is most helpful to the individual. Eventually, though, people must go to events, meetups, etc. to network and build relationships. There really is no shortage of things going on in Seattle, we have about 400 tech meetup groups alone for example, but in the end showing up is key.
One meetup I want to recommend is “6 Month Startup,” which Dave Parker organizes.
Q: What do you think are success-factors for startups and what are typical mistakes founders make?
I think first and foremost a founder must be passionate about his work. Building a company just for the money, and with the exit strategy ‘being bought by another company’ in mind, almost always fails. The founder’s main goal must be to solve a problem and help people. Aside from this, founders also need to have a strong support system that helps them get through the difficult times every founder faces.
Another mistake I often see founders make is: Having an idea for a product/solution, thinking it’s amazing, putting time, energy and money into building that product, and assuming people will buy the product once offered and marketed to its target customers. Founders who go about their startup this way must most often realize the hard way that their assumption ‘people will buy this product’ is wrong. They wasted a lot of resources for nothing. Instead, founders should talk to minimum 20 potential customers before doing anything else to find out: (1) Are they actually interested? (2) Would they buy? (3) What would they pay for it?
Many product companies fail because the founder is overconfident in his ability to understand what people want. Reality is that there is a big difference between wanting and needing. A founder might even identify something that would help people (they need a product to fix a problem), but unfortunately that does not yet mean that those people also want the product and will buy the product. Potentially they don’t care about the problem enough, or they are happy with the solution they currently use.
The two mistakes I regularly see founders make that I have talked about so far (being too focused on the own idea and being too focused on exit strategies) have one thing in common – The primary focus is not on solving a problem that matters to people. ‘Matters to people’ means they care about it, are unhappy with existing solutions, and are willing to pay for a better solution. Identifying such a problem is what entrepreneurship is all about, and the most promising way of going about this is by talking to customers! Thinking off startups this way, being curious about the customer becomes a key trait of successful entrepreneurs.
One thing I implied in all this is that startups must stand out. So, startups must have something that differentiates them from competition. Otherwise, all I have said so far regarding entrepreneurship being about ‘solving a problem for people who are unhappy with existing solutions’ does not make sense. In fact, not “simply” repeating an existing business model is at the very core of the startup definition. 
Startup Def. according to Steve Blank: “A startup is an organization formed to search for a repeatable and scalable business model.” (https://steveblank.com/2010/01/25/whats-a-startup-first-principles/, Last retrieved on 11/07/2019)
What founders want to achieve is that, while there may be competition on the surface – if there isn’t, most likely there is no market – the startup provides some sort of value to customers that is unique to the business and that customers cannot find anywhere else. The book “Blue Ocean Strategy” is an interesting read on this topic.

Here are some things I learned from this interview:
  • Seattle’s startup ecosystem is very collaborative and many of the people involved have a corporate background at Microsoft, Amazon or Boeing.
  • Angels do startups a disfavor by being unclear about their intentions. A straight ‘no’ allows founders to move on and spend their valuable time talking to other investors who might be a better fit.
  • Being passionate about the business and having a strong support system are key to get founders through the difficult times every startup faces at some point.
  • Having compassion for customers is key to startup success. Startup businesses are about helping people with something important enough to them that they are willing to pay.
  • Primarily founders must be obsessed with the problem they are solving, not their solution or potential exit strategies.
  • A startup business wouldn’t be a startup business if it would repeat what competition already does. Bringing unique value to the customers is integral to startups.

In the interview Brett mentioned some resources and organizations, find out more about them here:

About Seattle Angel:
A strong ecosystem creates an environment that allows startups to thrive. Seattle Angel’s goal is to strengthen Seattle’s startup ecosystem by increasing the access to funding for entrepreneurs to push their ideas further.

About the author: Sven Goepfrich

Sven Goepfrich is currently finishing his MBA in Syracuse. His studies focus on technology, innovation and entrepreneurship. At his school, he is working for the department of finance. Sven was actively interning with the Seattle Angel Conference in summer 2019. He is currently looking for full-time career opportunities in this field. 

Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday, November 26, 2019

Startup-People of Seattle: Sharad Agarwal (Business Angel)

The blog-series “Startup People of Seattle” introduces some of the key personas in the ecosystem to learn more about what they are doing, to share their thoughts and ideas, and to promote networking.

In our 17th interview, meet Sharad Agarwal:
“In healthy real-estate markets, it is possible to achieve a 15% IRR. To achieve a significantly higher IRR in startup investing, you have to find startups that are in the fat tail. If you are investing in startups to fill that high risk – high reward hole in your portfolio like I am, you have to be disciplined to avoid the temptation to invest in low risk – low reward startups.”
Sharad Agarwal is an active angel investor in Seattle. His professional background is in computer science R&D, and he is working for Microsoft.


Q: Could you please introduce yourself?
A: I have been an active angel investor for over 5 years. I have 18 companies in my portfolio.
My professional background is in computer science R&D. I am a Principal Researcher at Microsoft Research, and have been there for over 15 years, working on advanced & applied research in mobile computing, datacenter networking, and geo-distributed cloud services. I have co-authored over 35 scientific publications with over 6,000 citations, and co-invented 47 issued patents. I have advanced Microsoft products with my research, including Windows 10 and Windows Phone 8. I recently became an ACM Distinguished Engineer. I have Computer Science Ph.D., M.S., and B.S. degrees from University of California Berkeley.
Q: You have been working for Microsoft for years now. Working for such a large company, how did you become interested in startups and angel investing?
A: I had a lot of experience investing in real estate, stocks, bonds, and mutual funds, and had a diverse investment portfolio across those asset classes. However, I felt that none of those would get me an outsized return, and I needed to include a high risk - high reward component in my investment portfolio.
Working in Computer Science and having moved up here from San Francisco, I have many friends and colleagues who are in startups. Hence, investing in startups felt like the natural choice to fill that hole in my investment strategy.
Q: On LinkedIn, I saw that you participated in SAC between 2014 and 2016. How was that experience for you and how did it lead you to Grubstakes?
A: I participated as an investor in SAC VI, SAC VII, and SAC VIII, and then as the Assistant Fund Manager for SAC IX. I had a tremendously positive experience going through SAC. John Sechrest is doing the entire Seattle startup ecosystem a huge service in training new angel investors and new entrepreneurs in the process of investing and fundraising. There is huge untapped potential in Seattle – we have many accredited investors who have not yet invested in startups, and we have a lot of experienced talent at companies like Microsoft and Amazon who have not yet embarked on their entrepreneurial journey. The almost decade long effort that John has been leading with Seattle Angel Conference is exactly what our community needs, and our community has already benefited tremendously from it, including myself.
SAC is the ideal start of an angel investing journey but should not be the end. It is first and foremost a learning opportunity. Once an investor has learned the ropes at SAC, they should be able to define their investment thesis and evaluate the different investment entities and vehicles out there for the next phase in their investment strategy.
At the end of SAC IX, a few investor colleagues and I felt the need to continue our investments in a collaborative group setting. Existing angel investing groups did not have the structure and process that we wanted. This was the genesis of Grubstakes. Together with Javier Soto, David Grampa, Ravi Grover, and Yoko Okano, we founded the network of angel investors known as Grubstakes.
Q: Could you talk more about Grubstakes? How does Grubstakes invest in startups and how involved are you in mentoring entrepreneurs through Grubstakes?
A: Grubstakes is comprised of about 50 angel investors in Seattle. We are a network of angel investors in Seattle that fund and mentor startups. Our mission is to foster an engaged, collaborative, and smart angel investor community, and to ensure that startup founders are well financed and succeed through exit. Our defining characteristic is our collaborative spirit. Grubstakes members are accessible to others, responsive to inquiry, and generous with their time. We help each other and the startups we fund. Startups that we invest in must have an ambitious vision and a realistic plan to get there. We have resources, experience, and the right attitude to partner with startups that we invest in for the long haul.
Any member of Grubstakes is able to bring a company to the membership for consideration of investment. Those members who are interested will form a due diligence team, investigate, and independently decide to invest. If some members do decide to invest, we will help them create a Grubstakes SPV in the form of an investment LLC that will pool the individual cheques into a single investment and line item in the startup's cap table. We have our own lightweight process for LLC formation, legal docs, banking, and annual LLC maintenance that the elected managing member of the LLC can follow. We also have established relationships with several investment entities in our ecosystem, including SAC, SeaChange Fund, OVF, AoA, Flying Fish Ventures and SWAN Venture Fund.
We actively mentor entrepreneurs that need and/or ask for mentorship. This includes startups that we have invested in, and those that are too early for our investment but nonetheless have the potential to one day attract our investment.
Q: What was the biggest surprise about Angel Investing for you?
A: The power law of investment returns. This was not so much a surprise because many articles have been written about it, but something that I did not fully internalize until I got into it. In healthy real-estate markets, it is possible to achieve a 15% IRR. To achieve a significantly higher IRR in startup investing, you have to find the startups that are in the fat tail. If you are investing in startups to fill that high risk – high reward hole in your portfolio like I am, you have to be disciplined to avoid the temptation to invest in low risk – low reward startups. Each dollar that I invest in the latter is a dollar that I do not have available to invest in the risky ones that may net me the higher return.
Q: What are some of the things you have learned about startup investing?
A: You have to actively manage your investments. Simply writing the cheque is not enough. Many entrepreneurs need help, feedback, advice, referrals, and recruiting talent. When I invest in a company, not only do I want a high return, I also get emotionally attached to the entrepreneur's success. I like to believe that my money is greener than that of typical angel investors because I am available to help. With my growing portfolio that is at 18 companies now, I cannot help every one of them. I focus on the ones that I can have the most impact on with my involvement and where the founding team is interested in my help.
Q: What investment thesis do you have? What are some of the criteria you use when making investment decisions?
A: My investment thesis is to make money. I don't intend to be glib in that answer, but truthfully, I do not limit myself to startups that fit a specific mold. There are many criteria that I look at in each investment, including the credentials of the founding team, product-market fit, customer excitement, willingness of the founding team to stick with their vision despite all the roadblocks they will encounter, and so on. I have no special criteria that other investors will not also have. However, there are two criteria for me that I will not compromise on. The founders have to be honest and truthful in my due diligence – I cannot invest in a team that lies or hides. The business model must be ethically sound.
Of course, all startups at the angel investing phase have many holes and unanswered questions. In doing due diligence, I have to be convinced that it is possible to fill those holes and that this team is capable of filling those holes. There are some technologies and markets that I am more familiar with, such as cloud services and B2B SaaS, so I tend to be more confident about my investigations of startups in those spaces and am able to measure the investment risk and return more accurately.
Q: What would you say is more important, portfolio diversification or investing in startups within an industry you are familiar with?
A: It depends on your ability to mitigate the risk in either strategy.
A big risk with focusing on a specific industry is quantity of quality deals. Depending on the market you are in and the industry, it may take a long time to deploy a bucket of investment dollars without lowering your investment quality bar.
In my case, I have a network of phenomenal investors who cover a wide variety of industry expertise. These are individuals in Grubstakes, some of whom I've known for years, whose opinion and expertise I value and trust. Their due diligence gives me the confidence to invest in industries that I am not familiar with. Similarly, they can rely on me to help evaluate companies in my wheelhouse and be open and honest with them about what I have found. With such a great network of people who rely on each other, I have no need to limit myself to industries that I am familiar with.
Q: How difficult is it to see companies fail early on while waiting to get cash back through an exit by a company?
A: This is the issue that I see new angel investors struggle with the most. Angel investing, specifically in companies that are at a very early stage, is a long game. You will see your failures first and your successes last. Your big successes will need time to grow the team, evolve the business model, perhaps pivot, before they make it big and get to an exit. It does not make sense to calculate a ROI before 10-15 years from the start of your angel investing, and perhaps even longer if you do not grow your portfolio quickly. You have to invest in a large number of companies and wait for the small number of big hits that will make your return.
Seeing companies in my portfolio fail is simultaneously painful and gratifying to me. So far, I have had 3 failures and 1 successful exit in my portfolio. Every company that I invest in, I get emotionally attached to, so I personally feel the impact of the failure, obviously not as much as the entrepreneurs do. It is gratifying to see the failures at the same time. I want the companies that will fail to fail early. I want the entrepreneurs to learn from the failure and move on to something else that will be successful. I see little value in prolonging the pain. The challenge for them of course is to discern the fatal roadblocks from the surmountable roadblocks. In each company's failure, I want to learn why they failed, but not memorize those lessons as there are many factors that typically lead to a failure.
The most common reason I have seen for failure is when the founding team strays from the key business thesis that they created their startup to answer. There are many distractions on the path of a startup's success that can lead you astray. One of those is relying too much on one big customer. That one customer's needs may not fit your business thesis perfectly. If you build a large team to service that one customer, and that customer disappears, then you have a lot of hungry mouths to feed with too little else growing in the garden. It is not easy to find the right balance between short-term revenue from one large customer and long-term growth.
Q: What other challenges have you experienced in angel investing?
A: Something that I don't see enough investors do (including myself) is due diligence on past investors in a company you are considering, and investors in later rounds of companies already in your portfolio. I have seen investors take a large position in a company and then lead the company astray. It is rare, but a risk worth mitigating by carefully vetting others who are or will be on the cap table.
Q: What are some other key organizations in Seattle’s startup ecosystem, like accelerators, incubators, coworking spaces, makerspaces or angel groups that you know of?
There are many and I'm sure I will miss some. Here are the ones that I interact with that I have not mentioned above:
  • Startup Grind
  • Techstars
  • Startup Haven
  • WeWork Labs
  • AI2 Incubator
  • Riveter
  • CoMotion Labs
  • Pioneer Square Labs
  • SURF Incubator
  • Madrona Venture Labs
  • Puget Sound Venture Club
  • Galvanize
Q: What recommendation would you give someone who is new to the ecosystem and wants to learn more about startups? Are there any Meetups, Books or Courses/Programs for example that you recommend?
A: This is where being in Seattle gives you a distinct advantage. Seattle has many open opportunities for learning about and engaging in the startup ecosystem. Seattle Startup Week has many fun events. The Seattle chapter of Startup Grind that Mike Grabham organizes has many events to hear from influential people in our ecosystem and to network with others who are also learning about startups. Startup Haven that Bob Crimmins founded organizes periodic events as well that I enjoy. Try to snag an invite to Techstars Seattle Demo Day. Of course, Seattle Angel Conference will give you the most in-depth information, especially at the workshops that are organized prior to the start of each conference. A book that I thoroughly enjoyed is Shoe Dog by Phil Knight - the Audible version is very well narrated.

Here are some things I learned from this interview:
  • If you are investing in startups to fill that high risk – high reward hole in your overall investment portfolio, you have to be disciplined to avoid the temptation to invest in low risk – low reward startups.
  • Many entrepreneurs seek more than just money, so business angels should be prepared to also invest time to help through their know-how and network.
  • When wanting to invest in a variety of companies in different industries, having a strong network of experts in different fields is extremely valuable.
  • Business Angels will see companies fail first when starting to invest. Big successes will need time to grow the team, evolve the business model, perhaps pivot, before they make it big and get to an exit.
  • Relying on one big customer can be deadly to a startup.
  • Seattle has many open opportunities for learning about and engaging in the startup ecosystem.

In the interview Sharad mentioned some resources and organizations, find out more about them here:

About Seattle Angel:
A strong ecosystem creates an environment that allows startups to thrive. Seattle Angel’s goal is to strengthen Seattle’s startup ecosystem by increasing the access to funding for entrepreneurs to push their ideas further.

About the author: Sven Goepfrich
https://www.linkedin.com/in/svengoepfrich/

Sven Goepfrich is currently finishing his MBA in Syracuse. His studies focus on technology, innovation and entrepreneurship. At his school, he is working for the department of finance. Sven was actively interning with the Seattle Angel Conference in summer 2019. He is currently looking for full-time career opportunities in this field.

Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, November 20, 2019

Startup-People of Seattle: Peter Chee (Entrepreneur and Founder & CEO of thinkspace)

The blog-series “Startup People of Seattle” introduces some of the key personas in the ecosystem to learn more about what they are doing, to share their thoughts and ideas, and to promote networking.

In our 16th interview, meet Peter Chee:

“I think one of the biggest problems that people face after quitting their job at Amazon, Microsoft, or Google is that they don’t have a network in the startup-world. So, they need to be connected to the right people and resources.”
Peter Chee is founder & CEO of thinkspace. He is fascinated by the personality of entrepreneurs and enjoys being surrounded by people who do things that have never been done before.

Q: Could you first talk some about your background and how you got into startups?
A: I have been surrounded with entrepreneurship ever since I grew up. After graduating from the University of Washington with a degree in MIS I was working for a startup company called Starwave. That was my favorite professional experience throughout all my career. I especially enjoyed working with so many innovative people. This is also what inspired me to found “thinkspace.” Since I love the mindset and energy of entrepreneurs, I wanted to be surrounded by those people all the time.

Q: Could you talk some more about the founding story of thinkspace?
A: When I started thinkspace eleven years ago, very few coworking spaces existed in Seattle. Only one other coworking space, Office Normads, launched six months before me. There were very few incubators at that point even. For me, it was always about being around people who do things that have never been done before. My preference was to work with people in technology simply because that was my background. So, therefore thinkspace focuses on tech startups.

Q: You have also been involved as a judge in a business plan competition at the University of Washington. Could you share your thoughts on student entrepreneurship?
A: Being a graduate of the University of Washington, I always enjoy having the opportunity to give back and help current students with their learning. Therefore, I spent time not only judging, but mainly mentoring students who were coming up with startup ideas. Aside of sharing my perspective and feedback with them, I also helped them with connections to move their ideas forward. 
I think student entrepreneurship is a fantastic learning opportunity for students. It also provides them with opportunities to network, and it’s a new experience – Their school is a safe environment to try entrepreneurship without having anything to lose.

Q: What would you say are the differences between co-working spaces and incubators?
A: I think there are huge differences. Incubators are typically investing money into the startups and their programs are typically only 3-12 months long.
We, as a tech-focused coworking space on the other hand are here to support companies for as long as they feel it is helpful to them. We don’t kick them out. We also don’t invest money.

Q: You say, “supporting the companies.” How exactly does thinkspace support member-companies?
A: I think one of the biggest problems that people face after quitting their job at Amazon, Microsoft, or Google is that they don’t have a network in the startup-world. So, they need to be connected to the right people and resources. What we offer startups at thinkspace is numerous connections. We always know good resources and people to talk to whatever problem founders might be facing.
We also provide founders with flexible, monthly space for their company. For them this means they don’t need to sign a long-term leasing contract. If a company doesn’t know whether they will survive the next year, they are better off without making any longer-term contracts. So, we provide value to them because we eliminate some risk.
Aside from all that, thinkspace offers office hours during which members can meet different kind of experts and ask for their input and advise.

Q: How would you recommend someone to stay informed about what is going on in Seattle’s startup ecosystem?
A: One email I have in my inbox every Monday is Seattle Startup Digest. I think this is a helpful resource and a good starting point for people who want to get involved in the community. I also want to recommend Startup Haven Seattle Poker 2.0 which is run by Bob Crimmins. I think this is the best startup event in Seattle. If you want to meet other founders, this is the place to go.

Q: You have been involved with startups for such a long time now, what would you say makes a startup interesting to you?
A: I think most interesting are the founders themselves. 

Q: What are attributes of a successful entrepreneur, and what is some advice you’d give a founder?
Successful entrepreneurs are the ones who are open to learning and open to receiving feedback. 
I commonly see very smart founders who have strong technical and coding skills, but they underestimate the sales and marketing side. Also, marketing in startups under very limited budget is a whole other story than marketing in a big, established company. This needs to be considered when making a hiring decision for example. Someone who ran a whole marketing department before, might not be a great fit for a startup role as the conditions are totally different.
Another mistake to avoid is putting too much energy into technology and coming up with a solution too soon. Founders are fascinated by solving a technological problem and creating something because this is what they enjoy doing. What they should do first though is talking to customers and figuring out what their needs are and what they are willing to pay for. I think customer validation is much more important than the technological aspect.

Here are some things I learned from this interview:
  • Incubator programs typically only take in startups for a short, predefined time period. They also invest in startups. Coworking spaces get money from startups to provide flexible space and access to resources and connections.
  • Successful entrepreneurs are open to learning and receiving feedback.
  • The importance of marketing and sales are often underestimated by founders.
  • Many startups fail to first learn about their customer’s pains before starting to develop a product.


In the interview Peter mentioned some resources and organizations, find out more about them here:

About Seattle Angel:
A strong ecosystem creates an environment that allows startups to thrive. Seattle Angel’s goal is to strengthen Seattle’s startup ecosystem by increasing the access to funding for entrepreneurs to push their ideas further.

About the author: Sven Goepfrich


Sven Goepfrich is currently finishing his MBA in Syracuse. His studies focus on technology, innovation and entrepreneurship. At his school, he is working for the department of finance. Sven was actively interning with the Seattle Angel Conference in summer 2019. He is currently looking for full-time career opportunities in this field.

Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)