Showing posts with label South Korea. Show all posts
Showing posts with label South Korea. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Open Source Random Automation Everywhere After K-TECH K-Global

I attended another Silicon Valley conference last week, just for kicks. This one was the K-TECH K-Global Silicon Valley 2015. I don't think I'll ever tire of the non-stop innovation merry-go-round of conferences, trade shows, lectures, pitch sessions, and other stuff. One theme from last week's event was the "open source" movement in several tech fields. I absorbed a great deal of what the featured speakers said because I'm like a sponge. Prepare yourselves for a blast of my genius thinking on how it's coming straight to you.


Every multinational corporation that makes anything electro-mechanical is gearing up to market connected living and the Internet of Things. All devices requiring remote power management will have really cool marketing campaigns. Crowdfunding can deliver tiny things that VC funding cannot build. The ugliest things in your neighborhood, like above-ground utility poles and traffic lights, will become exploitable IoT sensor platforms.

Minimally educated non-experts can now program robots to perform complex tasks by moving their armatures around. Mobile phones have reduced computation costs to do more things on chip space, enabling advanced robotics. Robots are coming to your senior citizens' assisted living facilities because the West's demographics are increasing the number of retirees per active worker. Vision sensors developed for gaming will make robots more capable. Open source standards like the Robot Operating System (ROS) make enabling software easier to develop. One dude at last week's conference mis-identified the Unified Robot Description Format (URDF), making me wonder which of his assistants needs corrective training on due diligence.

Robot as a Service (RaaS) is a cute term for hospitality or other service sectors leasing outsourced robot servants. I expect autonomous cars to be part of this category. Programmed drones and cars eliminate operator error. Humans will build trust with these things by experience. Instances like "mobile moments" will need another definition like "autonomous moments" that include the short engagement spaces where humans interact with autonomous things for the first time.

The Open Source Robotics Foundation (OSRF) is right here in the SF Bay Area. I predict OSRF will be as ubiquitous as GitHub and Wikipedia once the automation revolution takes off in our personal lives. IoT devices need APIs and PKIs to interact with networks and cloud platforms. Drones, medical devices, and 3D printing will bring new headaches for tech companies' Chief Data Officers and Chief Privacy Officers. Those things must also tap into IoT APIs and PKIs. I checked for National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) standards covering drones, robots, and other automated IoT things. The NIST search box revealed many preexisting standards for related subjects in manufacturing, design, and programming. The next-gen standards will have to come from places like OSRF pushing NIST to catch up.

We will all need something to do once automation makes our jobs redundant. Basic income guarantees aren't enough without something to occupy our idle time. Video games and creative stuff are primed for an explosion. Social cohesion may explode too. Elites have not prepared memes for the population to adopt in a jobless future. Thought leaders like me will work overtime to sell the good news of open source automation.

Full disclosure: I did not talk to any South Koreans who attended K-TECH. I was only there to listen to speakers on the first day. I have no business interests in South Korea or with South Korean citizens at all. The last time I was in South Korea was January 2000 while performing US military duties.

Sunday, November 17, 2013

Alfidi Capital At K-TECH Conference For Latest In Software Innovation

I attended the K-TECH Silicon Valley 2013 conference this month.  The organizers had a full agenda of exhibitions and speakers for me to check out.  They also had free food, which I never turn down.  I had to see what South Korea's KOTRA and NIPA wanted us all to learn.  I managed to capture myself in the hallway mirror as I snapped my traditional self-aggrandizing conference photo of my name badge with the conference banner.  I must be getting twice as good at everything I do.



The introductory speakers announced the results of the US-ROK ICT Policy Forum.  I'll bet this will make it even easier for Samsung to sell Android smartphones here.  Samsung is also building an R&D center in San Jose, which means we can look forward to even more H-1B Indian tech workers taking jobs that American engineers are qualified to fill.  I like Korean FDI in the US if it means more hot Korean women come here to manage the assets.

The Samsung keynote on innovation in a connected world reminded everyone of something I already knew, namely that battery capacity isn't keeping up with smartphone performance and that batteries can't scale up because of their obsolete chemistry.  My regular readers know that I have already identified mobile device power management as a pain point begging for disruption.  Samsung pays attention to the potentially disruptive research from academia.  I do too, which is why I attend technology transfer conferences and subscribe to TVC's Innovation magazine.

Microsoft's keynote on the future of software development was understandably silent on the disappointing sales of its own mobile devices.  They must know Android owns this market but I heard no hint of a new mobile strategy.  Their new search strategy is to have Bing display results from algorithms, machine learning, and friends' opinions in different panes but I can't see how well that translates into a mobile display.  I just don't believe Microsoft is capable of truly embracing the disruption that further progress in mobile and cloud integration will bring.  Their product managers are notorious for killing ideas that threaten to cannibalize their sales and Microsoft's acquisition strategy partially reflects these internal politics.

VentureBeat moderated a panel of Asian hands on the future of Big Data and cloud.  I like this quote the best:  "Data is the new oil because you can generate wealth when you drill for it."  Some ambitious analytics pro should use that quote in their CIO's next all-hands IT meeting when someone asks for a Cloudonomics calculation.  I'm now sufficiently intrigued by Stanford's US-Asia Technology Management Center to consider attending their seminars.  Their representative on the panel made Korea's dilemma quite clear; Korea has a national desire to avoid domination by foreign software firms but its own big companies have difficulty with open innovation.  I must admit that Korea gives us an interesting national case in why Big Data adoption has been so slow.  Big business' internal culture resists it and startups aren't culturally favored enough to push innovation.  IMHO it will fall to non-Korean firms that have a Korea presence, or Korean firms with a Silicon Valley presence, to truly drive full Big Data / cloud integration in the Land of Morning Calm.  The panel got really contentious towards its end when it considered whether Korea could truly leapfrog a generation in consumer tech or would lag in enterprise tech.

The next panel on hot software trends was the VCs' turn to tell entrepreneurs what they want to see from startups.  They observed that brand new markets from brave innovations create many more multiples of value than better / faster / cheaper incremental innovations.  I agree, but those innovations are so much rarer than incremental improvements and the opportunity set of pain points from incrementalism is quite large.  In other words, I say the serial entrepreneur who pursues the low-hanging fruit of small changes will experience more chances for exit events.  I see nothing wrong with getting paid a few million bucks every two or three years for running great acquisition candidates.  I was intrigued that the panel thinks Twitter is an A/B testing vehicle in CustDev, where startups ask their many followers to pick their preferred product style.

These panels start to run together after a while and I wasn't quite sure what to make of the one on software convergence and industry advancement.  Feel free to visualize software comparisons at Information is Beautiful while I figure out what else they wanted to show us.  I don't agree with the idea that scaling complex hardware from "zero to billion" valuation is getting faster.  Hardware is harder than software, not easier, and it takes longer to fix.  They pointed to ISSIP's goal of connecting entrepreneurial teams at many universities but IMHO that isn't going to make hardware development any faster until they all get some hands-on skills in rapid prototyping.  I do like one very brilliant thing the panel said about a startup's ecosystem.  They advocated thinking of who else in an ecosystem makes money when a startup sells its product.  Consultants, system integrators, and vendors all stand to gain and acquirers want to massively increase their own value by introducing an entirely new ecosystem to their own ecosystem.  That's the kind of analysis that reveals the value of a startup in an acquisition.

A former Army officer turned VC moderated the next panel on new business opportunities from mobile evolution.  I had to leave early and didn't get much from this one other than identifying eMarketer as a source for mobile market segment data.  I will never understand the "freemium" monetization model in gaming or why so many programmers think they can mint money by marketing another arcade-style game for mobile.  Tons of those things already exist and hardly any of them will make it.

The second day of the conference brought out some more keynote speakers and panelists in addition to the startup pitchfest.  I think a lot of these Korean startups are going to have a hard time in Silicon Valley for the cultural reasons I mentioned further up this article.  They will have to seek sponsorship from corporate venture arms.  I also wonder why more Korean startups don't try to first penetrate the large Korean-American population in Los Angeles.  That's an excellent test market to assemble use case data before pitching for funding in Silicon Valley.  I also noticed a generational difference in the way native Koreans now address public audiences.  The older Koreans who worked for their government's agencies would bow to the audience in the traditional style before beginning their scheduled talk.  The younger Korean entrepreneurs did not bow at all to the audience.  Korean culture is changing right in front of my eyes.

One of the pitchfest panel judges revealed something anecdotal about the finance sector.  He bemoaned that many people who work at a particular corporate venture arm only got hired there because they knew someone on the inside, not because they had VC experience.  He also said that he knew someone who was hired to be a senior investment banker at a well-known investment bank just because he had dinner with another senior i-banker and came across as likable.  I have no idea who these people were or whether the stories are true, but it just makes me shake my head because it matches what I experienced in wealth management.  People in high-powered finance make hiring decisions based on likability and familiarity, not competence.

The final panel gave me an opportunity to ask my only question.  I wanted to know whether the fashion community's accelerators were working with the tech community on wearable tech.  I may not have been clear enough in getting my question across because one panelist thought I was making a statement rather than asking a serious question, but the answer seems to be an affirmative that the fashion sector will build a business around a good tech idea.  The other panelist remarked that an Indian conglomerate is putting sensors into jewelry.  I'll also note their mention of Guidewire Labs' G/SCORE assessment method for startups.  That reminds me of the US government's technology readiness level (TRL) system.  I'll bet using the G/SCORE and TRL together in a pitch would make a big impression on savvy investors if they prove a startup takes itself seriously.

The K-TECH show was also my chance to get some refresher education on transfer pricing, which will be a subject for another article.  I also got my first interaction with a human-sized touchtable that allowed users to try on virtual fashions.  That's coming soon to a clothier near you.  Once the system is perfected, you'll never order clothes off the rack again because mass customization will stitch a perfectly fitted garment just for you on the spot.  I'm too cheap to pay a premium for instant clothing so I'll wait as long as it takes for the prices of 3D printed garments to come down to my level.  Kamsa hamnida, Korean tech folks.

Sunday, October 20, 2013

Brief Notes on Asia and Hard Assets in Hyperinflation

I'm adapting this brief commentary from a conversation I had today with another private investor.  We discussed the possibility of dollar devaluation as a response to America's continuing debt funding problems.  Hedging against devaluation is not difficult with a broad mix of non-dollar assets.

There's more to hard assets than gold.  Anything I consume - - food, energy, basic materials - becomes very desirable in a currency crunch.  Advanced purchases of raw materials become "secondary" stuff as additional inventory kept for future needs.

The need for hard assets as a hedge against the potential devaluation of the US dollar begs the question of where to obtain said assets.  Why buy stuff in China?  I think the renminbi is as likely to have high inflation as the US dollar.  On the other hand, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Switzerland have well-managed currencies.  China is the least transparent of the G-20 economies.  I believe all of that country's official economic statistics have been falsified for years.

My longtime readers know that I own John T. Reed's book on hyperinflation and depression.  I have implemented many of his ideas at little cost.  His free articles on inflation are worth my time.  Hedging my net worth with a hard asset component of my portfolio gives me peace of mind that I will survive a hyperinflationary depression in the US.  Consumers will have a difficult time shopping for necessities if our currency becomes worthless as a store of value.

Currencies do have value as units of trade, so the yuan may gain some temporary acceptance as a dollar alternative among China's trading partners.  The problem for those who hold yuan will be the same as for those who hold US dollars.  Inflation in China will make the yuan (renminbi outside of China) worth less in that local economy.  Malaysians, Indonesians, etc. will then dump remminbi because they want to preserve their ability to buy things locally.

The secondary effects of simultaneous US and Chinese hyperinflation on Pacific Rim economies are too complex to predict.  Countries that peg their currencies to the dollar will have to de-link immediately or follow through with their own hyperinflation.  Countries that have significant hard asset sectors - mining, energy, agribusiness, timber - and sectors that service hard assets (specifically pipelines, railroads, and barges) are hedged for a currency crisis.

I remember being in South Korea in 1999 just after the Asian currency crisis had passed.  South Koreans donated their private gold holdings to the government so its currency could regain value.  The US dollar traded at a very beneficial exchange rate for Yankees like me who spent money in the local economy.  South Korea suffered because its main sectors were automobiles, semiconductors, and shipbuilding.  Those sectors were fully exposed to export markets.  I don't want any exposure at all to dollar-denominated fixed income during US hyperinflation.  The Fed under Janet Yellen will keep is foot on the QE gas pedal.  

Sunday, September 22, 2013

The Limerick of Finance for 09/22/13

Korea tech startups are hot
Word of mouth is how they hit the spot
Get cash from Samsung
Make it past the first rung
Incubators can give them a shot

Alfidi Capital at Korea's beGLOBAL 2013 Conference in Silicon Valley

I haven't been to South Korea since early 2000 but recently South Korea came to my neighborhood.  This month's beGLOBAL 2013 conference brought Korean hi-tech startups to meet Silicon Valley's leading lights in new venture investment.  I attended because I wanted to get a flavor for the innovations that beSUCCESS and several Korean government agencies are supporting in Korea.  Anyone who wants to go all the way to Korea should attend their beLAUNCH event.  Check out my summary paraphrasing of the key participants' public comments below; as always, my own original observations are in italics.

I got to mingle beforehand with some of the entrepreneurs who would pitch their startups later that day.  They were all social media and e-commerce applications.  Those don't fit my portfolio but I was impressed that their technologies were mature enough for deployment.

The first panel made history with three generations of VCs in the Draper family - Bill, Tim, and Adam - on stage together for the first time ever.  I got to shake Tim's hand while he worked the crowd and we chatted briefly on Korean geopolitics.  The Draper family is quite media-savvy.  I'd sure like to appear on Jesse Draper's Valley Girl Show about Silicon Valley.  I'm sure my wit and charm would just bowl her over.  I was disappointed that actress Polly Draper wasn't on hand.  I fondly recall seeing her bare derriere in a racy swimming pool scene on thritysomething way back in my teenage years and I'll bet her caboose still looks nice.  Anyway, my photo below shows the VC Drapers on stage together just after their panel concluded.  I respect these folks way too much to ruin the shot with a LOLcat-type caption.



John Nahm from Strong Ventures moderated the Draper panel.  John thanked Bill for his service in the Korean War, and Bill remarked that it was normal back then for young Americans in the Greatest Generation to expect a call to service that would interrupt their lives.  I wish I could say the same thing today.  My own calls to US military service have severely degraded my civilian career.  Private sector employers viewed my background with disdain until I started Alfidi Capital.  I should have told prospective employers that military veterans William H. Draper and Georges Doriot pretty much invented venture capital based on their wartime experiences in developing technology.  Bill recalled his friendship with another Army lieutenant who was KIA during combat in Korea and said that his death was worthwhile now that South Korea is prosperous and free.  He cited the book Nothing to Envy on the deplorable living conditions inside North Korea.  I fully endorse Bill's assessment.  I received nothing but thanks during my two active-duty tours in South Korea from Koreans who were old enough to remember the war.  My only glimpse of North Korea was a visit to the UN Joint Security Area (JSA) at Panmunjom in December 1995.  South Korea in the 1990s was one of the world's leading makers of automobiles, computer chips, and ocean cargo ships.  Former President Kim Young-Sam's "segyehwa" policies saw South Korea embrace global culture and trade.  Seoul's urban sprawl reminded me of Los Angeles and Pusan's hills reminded me of San Francisco.  Only after moving to San Francisco did I realize that Seoul is its official sister city.

Tim Draper remarked that he had invested in a Korean venture fund that returned 1x in spite of the dot-com crash.  He credits the exposure of virtual goods' value in a Korean video game as the factor that opened his mind to Zynga.  Adam Draper said that Bitcoin is the closest thing now to a global currency, and his involvement in several Bitcoin startups made him proud to be the first Draper to receive a subpoena.  His grandfather Bill then joked that he'd be the first Draper to go to jail.  The Drapers concluded by saying that crowdfunding will change the LP/GP relationship in VC and that it allows entrepreneurs to accelerate their ventures.  Hardware is now a hot idea again with VCs because crowdfunding makes it cheaper than ever to raise capital.

The Drapers judged the first round of startup pitches.  Their comments were terrific fire-hose introductions to VC thinking.  They wanted to see user traction, size of market, path to monetization, and differentiation from competitors.  Tim Draper is skeptical of serial entrepreneurs because he thinks they tend to jump to competitors rather than stick with a funded startup.  It's rare for me to hear such skepticism.  I had previously thought that serial entrepreneurs were a success factor because they knew how to get to an exit event.  Some VCs also dislike paying for the key-person insurance policies for serial entrepreneurs.  One of the funniest moments was when Bill Draper asked one entrepreneur, "So we've heard about the company . . . who are you?"  The pitch-person didn't tell the panel what their role was with the startup.  I thought it was cute that one of the female Korean entrepreneurs demurely covered her mouth while giggling; that's a Korean cultural habit that still hasn't disappeared.

The next panel was Samsung's fireside chat about open innovation.  Samsung invests in seed-stage ventures and uses its Open Innovation Center (OIC) as an accelerator.  The Samsung rep thinks its accelerator gives startups access to Samsung's huge platform as a distribution channel.  The OIC removes the administrative overhead burden so startups can focus on product development.  Individual entrepreneurs can enter the OIC with employment agreements.  Samsung Ventures invests larger amounts in Series B and later startups, while the OIC invests in seed to Series A and considers M&A to be an critical part of its business process.  Samsung owns the startups they bring into their accelerator and pays entrepreneurs a full salary.  If a mature product doesn't fit Samsung's ultimate strategy, they consider spinouts.  Samsung sounds like an extremely generous benefactor.  Selling out to a big global company provides entrepreneurs with a clear choice.  They can sell out early and become wholly-owned employees or take their chances with later stage investors if they stay independent.

Other local VCs addressed the ROI of investing in Korea and Asia in the next panel.  VCs think Korean entrepreneurs are passionate and driven.  Korea has great Internet infrastructure, it serves as a gateway to other Asian markets, and the country's top education system generates talent.  There also a few things VCs don't like about Korea.  The notion of entrepreneurship is still alien to most Koreans; I believe it's because Asians generally fear that failure results in a loss of face.  Exit events in Korea often have lower multiples than in the US mostly due to the smaller size of the Korean market for many products.  US VCs still need to be convinced to invest in Korea; it's not always a given.  Koreans also think the founder embodies the entire startup and that her/his departure ends the company.  Contrast this with the US view that a startup CEO is a manager whom the VCs can replace.

The ROI panel thought many Korean executives lack marketing skills.  Korean demographics are not diverse and are very concentrated.  That's why word-of-mouth marketing is easier.  The downside to this strength is that Koreans don't get to develop other marketing methods.  US VC liquidation preferences are usually 1x for Korean investments.  Some liquidation preferences may run afoul of Korean trade restrictions, and Koreans are unfamiliar with US liquidation preferences.  The Korean government can make entrepreneurship socially acceptable and not just by providing funding.  Korean-Americans have an untapped opportunity to find investments in sectors where both the US and Korea are strong.  Customer acquisition cost is very low in Korea and that's why it's a great platform for early growth.  This leads me to believe that future beGLOBAL events should focus on Los Angeles, home to one of the largest concentration of ethnic Koreans outside of Korea.

Dr. Jeanie Han presented her experience with the LINE mobile app as a case study of a successful Asian startup.  I've never heard of LINE before because I don't do much mobile messaging and I don't have a smartphone.  I think the originality of this app is its ability to brand individual text messages with known icons.  Postmodern communication is now post-literate.  These icons are all purely emotional, devoid of any intellectual content.  I might use an IM app if the only character icon is a raised middle finger.  Their success in Europe laid to rest internal concerns that their style was too Asian.  Cute character stickers are a universal language with crossover appeal.  Their avatar rooms are gateways to e-commerce with a focus on celebrity-endorsed virtual rooms.  I avoid social media investments because they all share the same vulnerabilities.  They have no barriers to entry from capital costs or switching costs, and thus they have no defensible economic advantage.

More angels and VCs ran the after-lunch panel on seed funds going global.  BTW, the Four Seasons Silicon Valley provided an excellent lunch.  There's no one-size-fits-all approach to seed funding.  Investing styles must match an investor's strengths.  Bingo!  That's why crowdfunding platforms are so diverse.  Many early-stage venture funds don't invest outside the US because they aren't sure how to add value.  Speaking the local language and knowing the culture are the barriers IMHO.  That's how you avoid getting ripped off.  Successful startups need seed-stage mentoring to meet the gateways that will get them to Series A.  That's the disadvantage of crowdfunding.  Joe Six Pack may not have the high-quality operational knowledge to add value with his $500 investment.  Working with great startups regardless of geography enables investors to share the best lessons with other startups closer to home. Investors sometimes overrate the quality of the advantage they think they can provide to a startup in another country.  That's a long way to go for a learning experience.  It's why venture investing works best when it's close to home.  I learned right here in the SF Bay Area that no one wants to take a risk with me because of my military background.  I didn't have to fly off anywhere else to learn that I "failed fast" by trying to convince people my military experience mattered.  

The next fireside chat was about global entrepreneurship and paying it forward.  The Meltwater Group creates a startup in a new national market it wants to enter.  Check out their MEST project for training African software entrepreneurs.  Pragmatic value propositions sell in the US for better/faster/cheaper products.  Other countries have non-rational cultural barriers to overcome, where trust matters.  Meltwater runs potential hires through workshops and exercises to assess their entrepreneurial attitude.  The Meltwater guy talks about empowering African entrepreneurs because the region is growing, but IMHO he ignores the governance ecosystem and rule of law that make entrepreneurship viable in the US.  Africa is growing because of Chinese investment in large infrastructure projects and the West's interest in natural resources.  Those have little to do with our understanding of hi-tech entrepreneurship.  Meltwater recommends bootstrapping your startup as long as possible to strengthen its DNA (culture, resilience, etc.) before going to VCs.  Good hiring is crucial initially to get the right people in a startup.  They will be senior execs when the company is much larger years later.  Seeing the world through a positive mindset determines one's entire life trajectory and is crucial to a startup's success.

The Korean VC funds on the next panel discussed how they invest in Silicon Valley.  Big Korean firms invest in Silicon Valley VC funds mainly to make money.  Finding VC firms they like means they can find local partners.  Investing in US VCs allows Korean firms to learn the US market.  That's a lot more expensive than talking to local chambers of commerce or the South Korean embassy and consulates in the US.

Ben Huh and Emily Huh of the Cheezburger Network had an awesome title for their panel:  "Entrepreneurial LOL, Fail, and Meme."  Ben bought the "cheezburger" site at the beginning of the Web meme phenomenon.  They had no grand plan but wanted to experiment with different ideas.  They were willing to fail; they quickly learned from mistakes and moved on.  Ben's most awesome quote went something like this:  "Entrepreneurship is the difference between opportunity and the cost of risk."  That belongs in every MBA course syllabus that discusses strategy and the cost of capital.  Ben advised us to survive to fight another day by mastering one market first.  Learn your lessons there, then apply them in a new market.  Proving you can accomplish something attracts investor capital.  LOL memes are popular in English-speaking countries but not in Asia.  Humor is cultural.  Use data analytics to motivate your people.  It's very difficult for people to argue with metrics.  Start every meeting with KPIs.  That drives the point that everyone is in it together to drive progress in those metrics.  Ben's observations were awesome.  I'd work for this guy if I weren't so averse to working for human beings.

More "entrepreneurs from the east (coast)" populated the next panel, specifically Koreans who had launched successful startups.  I haven't heard this many insights into Korean mindsets since I left that country years ago.  Here they come for your benefit.  Korean culture has a strong aversion to failure.  Korean entrepreneurs who have experienced failure manage to overcome that aversion.  Founders must get rid of that fear.  Stop worrying about how you look in others' eyes.  The US's strong bankruptcy protection laws enable recovery from failure.  Koreans like to drink!  "Liver equity" instead of sweat equity goes into deals because there's always a green bottle of soju handy.  That's one Korean cultural trait that really helps.  I remember back in 1999 when I was making the rounds of the GI bars in Songtan outside Osan Air Base.  The Korean bar girls would charge different prices for the services they offered, and this one gal would . . . oh, well, you get the idea.  The rest of my Korea drinking stories are reserved for an in-person audience that pays for my drinks.  The panel closed with the admonishment to learn how other cultures use tech, and not to give up.

The final panel featured accelerators with "global" in mind.  The panel said cross-border M&A is widely accepted and that smart, creative people are better off launching startups than doing internships.  Startups join accelerators because they want access to networks.  "Tech tourism" happens when founders and executives visit regions like Silicon Valley to learn local entrepreneurial culture.  Korean startups venturing into Silicon Valley will be hard-pressed to keep some engineering capability in Korea, but they should do so if they're serious about building a global corporate culture that retains local market knowledge.  An accelerator's key success metrics must include how much capital its mature startups can raise after graduating.  Good mentors keep startups focused on their core functions:  gaining traction, building products, getting sales.  I must say that the best panelist by far was Jonathan Nelson of the Hackers / Founders Meetup group.  Check out the official H/F site.  His comments and Ben Huh's observations made this entire conference worthwhile for me.  Jonathan said accelerator platforms will increasingly separate their advice function from their funding platforms.  He believes that entrepreneurship is a craft we can learn from doing projects.  Accelerator volunteers excel by referring participants to experts.  His own goal is to move GDP.  Jonathan thinks entrepreneurship is an illness and addiction.  YES!!  I totally agree.  Founders just think differently from normal wage-earners IMHO because their brains are wired to process signals in a unique way.

This beGLOBAL conference rocked and so did the afterparty.  I got to mingle with some folks who run professional mixers and roundtable groups for the Silicon Valley area.  I can hardly believe my good fortune to be accepted as a peer among this crowd.  It's more of a welcome than I got from most people in San Francisco. The Silicon Valley mentality is all about Horatio Alger self-made types bootstrapping themselves from rags to riches.  The San Francisco mindset is about keeping the riff-raff like me out of the private clubhouse.  I don't want to leave San Francisco because my resentment for small-minded preppies is a big part of my motivation.  I'm spending a lot more time in the Valley these days because people there are still willing to stand behind a brand new thing from out of the blue, regardless of pedigree.  That helps me stay positive whenever The City tries to turn me negative.  Thanks, beGLOBAL.  

Monday, May 23, 2011

Monday News Reel for 05/23/11

Here's news that is real, on the news reel.

China inexorably draws its neighboring trade partners into its orbit.  Two generations after the first Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, a new hegemon arises to forge a bloc.  The next step is the displacement of value-added manufacturing from Japan to China.  In return, Japan's flooded out workers get to be migrant labor in China that will keep down the cost of native Chinese labor.  Farfetched, you say?  Stranger things have happened in that neighborhood.

A South Korean company is going to earn billions by building power plants in Iraq.  There's another big contract award shutting out American companies.  I hope Fluor (FLR) and Halliburton (HAL) weren't counting on post-war development contracts as a fall back plan after the occupations end. 

Remember how the Swensen model took institutional investing by storm a few years ago?  Its emphasis on illiquid assets was cute until it blew up the endowments at Yale University and other schools.  Like many innovations, it peaked too early.  Illiquid assets will have their day again and forests are as good as any place to start.  Prices for forest products are way up.  Yale and its Ivy League sisters just had to hang on for a few more years to see their commitments to forest investing pay off. 

The hits just keep on coming - to Greece's sovereign credit rating.  I hope Athens has a few dozen warehouses full of freshly printed drachmas ready to hit the streets, because they'll need them if Germany puts the breaks on further lending.  The IMF would rather focus on bailing out Portugal than on bailing out its disgraced leader.  The venerable fund has its priorities straight. 

Full disclosure:  No positions in FLR or HAL.  Long FXI with covered calls.