What gets me annoyed is that we also submitted, didn't get an interview and could have answered those questions easily. We've got some good early validation of the fact that we are filling a need (or would once releasing a V1)...
I'm not sure I agree with all the logic in this article?
Higher Prices: This is not a deregulation, surely it would make AT&T have to compete with other VOIP services? The issue are the necessary safety/security services and hiw these are not well governed in the TCP/IP world?
Service Disruptions: I can't see how both AT&T and smaller operators both using public IP would disrupt? I think there's a trade off between between price and quality of service, those that go with a Cadillac service vs those that know they are getting a slower service albeit at a lower rate?
Inequality and discrimination: This on eis an issue, it's the Governance of "essential service", My sense is the legislation needs to change to a) Force this be be carried over IP (I know there are technical issues) b) Subsidize or keep a lid on prices?
On your point regarding higher prices: I think the idea is that AT&T would be able to charge whatever access fees they want for service to rural and low income areas. They would have to compete with other VoIP services, sure, but those services need to be delivered over some infrastructure.
Re higher prices; the recent evidence in in California where the Public Utility Commission decided to no longer regulate tariffs for normal phone service, I believe they still have a tariff for low cost service for low income households. Not surprisingly, AT&T has raised their prices. Sure there's some competition, but I can't continue DSL service from my preferred ISP (Sonic.net) without an AT&T land line, because I'm behind a remote terminal.
This is an example of a flawed business model, copied (from Groupon, et al), then over-funded so that the economic viability of the Model does not surface as soon as it should. In the finance world these often called Ponzi schemes, just saying...
Very good points d4nt,
1. The unmentionable (elephant in the room) to investment is that typical Investors tend to look for 10x payback, that orients all future business decisions. Getting outside capital has one value in my mind, enables capturing a market quickly that has the potential to scale up fast and has a high ceiling. I too am working on bootstrapping while in another job (In an Enterprise B2B play), I'm 55yrs, my first customer is in negotiation with me, a Fortune 50 company) and this is pre-product. My plan is to fund via Customer investment...
2. My network has also been great. Need to talk with 4-5 Fortune 50 companies? Found them in my LinkedIn network.
3. Totally agree here, life is more than work, as much as you may love it. Ryan Carsons Blogs is excellent, and he's a very balanced person and build a great company (http://ryancarson.com/about). Some great tips about work life balance and focus.
3. Energy is about passion, not physical endurance!!
All good points, but what about someone in my situation, kids all old enough and have left home, location independent, low cost living base, 30 years of hard won experience across both failed startups and amongst Corporates (like IBM and Microsoft)? Energy is a big one, but I find this mostly psychological not physical?
I agree, I think another way to put it (to quote someone else), an idea is worth $20. I think execution of an idea (with pivots off early customer insights), brings it!
