‘Entrepreneurship’ Articles:

Bored or Boring?

January 1st, 2013 by jeremychone | 8 Comments »

With all due respect, and I have some for your very early TechCrunch days, your new post on your ex-blog about how bored you have become made me chuckle.

Chuckle, because it was not the “I am bored and I should do something about it” kind of bored that we all might be once in a while, but rather the typical Arrington way of lecturing an industry by saying “I am bored because you guys are boring.”

Not surprisingly, you have not changed from your tech media mogul days, when you were lecturing the media industry about what was or was not ethical and how real tech journalism should be done, while many could have easily returned the favor if they had a chance or a voice.

Read the rest of this entry »

An Entrepreneur Three Core Values

May 21st, 2009 by jeremychone | 7 Comments »

So, here we go again; I am starting my second venture. The first one, Sportner, did not work as expected and, thanks to some discipline, I managed to fail fast.  Learning from this great experience, I am co-starting a new one, www.ijuris.com. I will talk more about what IntelliJuris actually does later, but for today, I wanted to reiterate my core values going into this venture.

As well explained in the “Built to Last” book, core values can be a critical factor in the success or failure of an organization. Having been a player in this industry for more than 10 years now, I also strongly believe that core values need to be openly defined and shared, and we need to remind ourselves of them. They often tend to be relegated to the shadowy depths of the hiring binder or put on corporate accessories. 

 “Build to Last” also has a nice equation defining the relationship between Core Values and Core Ideology:

Core Ideology = Core Values + Purpose

I truely like this formula, and today, I will define and share our core values. They are only three of them:

Read the rest of this entry »

Are You a Seesmic or Balsamiq Entrepreneur?

March 19th, 2009 by jeremychone | 24 Comments »

In the software industry, and probably in other industries as well, there are two types of startups: the scale-first type and the monetize-first type (sometimes called lifestyle business). Any organization needs to eventually do both, but in the beginning, a startup needs to decide to focus on scale or monetization. Seesmic and Balsamiq are great 2008 examples of each type of startup. (Good comment from Vasudev Ram, Not everyone needs to or wishes to becomes a Google or a Yahoo! or a Microsoft)

Read the rest of this entry »

Internet 2.0 out of VC control

November 18th, 2005 by jeremychone | 3 Comments »

Web 2.0 Out of VC ControlIn the early days of the Internet, innovators and venture firms were equally important forces behind the internet evolution. At the time, most Internet ideas needed some external funding to get started. Consequently, ideas often started with the now infamous PowerPoint presentation to the VC. If ideas were accepted, most first round funds were devoted to building the proof of concept and generating enough buzz to acquire a user base. As a result, venture firms played key role in choosing which idea or group of people would start or not.

Although this model has created some great Internet companies (Amazon, Ebay), it also created the dot-com saga that we know all too much about. Even for companies with good ideas, putting the “Buzz before the Bits” could be very costly.

Read the rest of this entry »

Bits before the Buzz

November 8th, 2005 by jeremychone | 1 Comment »

Bits before the BuzzOne of the most hazardous behaviors in software development is the tendency to deliver the Buzz before the Bits. The software and technology industry probably lends itself pretty well to this practice given its fast-paced and quick return on investment. However, while this custom occasionally may have some positive side effects, the costs usually exceed the benefits.

"Too early Buzz" could:

  • Disappoint early adapters: Having some Buzz before the Bits raises user expectations unpredictably, and therefore significantly increases the potential for disappointment. Disappointing early-adapters could be very harmful and costly, since they are the foundation of future growth.
  • Distract execution: Trying to evangelize to a broad audience a product that has not been validated by end-users might be very disorienting for the product team. After a while, the team might be too off base to be able to get back on the user’s need. Eventually, time, money and interest will run out … and a potential great idea might be lost for a while.
  • Weaken competitive position: Coming out too early and too loud gives a potentially vantage point to competitors.

Adding to the intertwined relationship between idea, buzz and execution, it is important to note that the better the idea, the easier the Buzz, and the harder the execution.

This does not mean that Buzz is bad. Obviously, the right amount of Buzz at the right time is critical. The technology industry is full of successful companies and organizations that have been very diligent and effective in managing this balance, resulting in their success. Unfortunately and probably naturally, there are also plenty of great projects that started with a relatively "high Buzz" but never saw the light of the day.

So, in short….. Bits should be before the Buzz … then the real question becomes when to start Buzzing?