Hmm... not sure about the web 2.0 era comment. Silicon valley existed before the web, during web 1.0 a, web 2.0, web 3.0 etc. And it is more than just google etc. My memories of that time (maybe that's my problem... i'm like a hippy left over from woodstock) is about all these different software companies trying different things (and I am not talking pet food here).
Anyway as Clay Shirky says - we are reinventing the printing press, and just as that changed the world drastically over a 200 year period ( an extreme but interesting example is the question would we have communism and hence Russia and China today if the world couldn't print Das Capital on mass). To see how real this statement is, you just have to look at all the talk about the death of news papers, and even TV - and we still don't know what is going to replace it, only hints to what version 1.0 will look like. Social changes ? systems to fix those social changes.... we all know the theory. If anyone wants a great example of all how big some of the opportunities are going to be , Ballmer does a great take here : http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=2216 Web 2.0 is also all the smaller companies that added their bit either as one or more technologies or as a set of services (which later where acquired) or even still run today. I myself know of 2 companies where ex-coworkers were involved in startup VoIP companies that where later purchased (I see VoIP also as a web 2.0 tech). We in Oz may never have heard of them, but they existed and those with options made a decent amount of money. What about the set of bio-tech startups in oz (of which we have a few). New energy companies. Never in the history of man have so many problems (opportunities) (okay - the problems are of our fault, but hey they are still problems) existed. But there are different classes of businesses - some (many) are good businesses but they many not be fund worthy (they make money as it is, but not enough for a VC to make any off the deal) , but there are others that need say 2M in funding. (For example, the upcoming real time web thing will be more than just twitter streams. That is just the start, and some of the next gen issues will require new types of servers to handle it, new programming techniques - before it stabilizes down - look how long it has taken us to start getting a handle on the current web development model, we haven't even started going full on with "real time" web development). There are some really smart guys out there with great ideas. Big ones. They may need to invent a technology, not just provide a service. (hey I am willing to admit my problem is that I see the world as a geek see's it - if it doesn't exist, we can build it - and I am willing to admit this probably blind sides me). Don't we need a culture for both types of companies? It would be great to see we as Australians dream at that level, or try to dream at that level. I am probably going to be attacked by MBA's that say we should just go and build sustainable income streams with a smaller business - and they are probably right - its not a bad idea, but it may not just be interesting enough. This line of thinking is not wrong, its just doesn't see all the angles. Let me illustrate with 2 examples. I know of one person that today runs an advanced Uni Engineering departments in one of our Top Uni's that can be quoted as saying "why do we need Mosaic, when Gofer and ftp work fine" (and he was very emphatic about it). I know of another leading academic that maybe rumored to be a Dean of a Computer Science facility in Australia that is rumored to be partly responsible for suggesting to one of the co-developers of Mosaic/Netscape working for him at the time that he may wish to leave if he wanted to continue development on the then young browser as it wasn't what he was being paid for - DUH!!!! - (he should of been saying - thats cool, can I join) - again very smart people just not seeing it at the time, or maybe the ideas where just too big for them to visualize at the time. I think we need a culture where both types of businesses can exist. I think you are correct. We as a community are working on the small to great businesses. But we need systems that let us develop the other big ideas. Or at least try. In the past, there does seem to be a degree of evidence that ESOP seem to help in attracting the right people to join risky ventures versus a stable job with a big company. okay, back to the point (enough ranting). I was talking to my accountant last week about what options we have left to put ESOP in place. They were saying they have a client that just spent a reasonable amount of cash over the last month or so to put a ESOP in place. All that is now down the drain, and they don't know if they can even move forward now on the ESOP. This is a mid size firm. Wanting to do the right thing to those that have contributed to the success. But also one looking to go to the next level with their business. As a side note - Their response to my query was - we really don't know yet. We are trying to work it out. So why my interest - at one level i feel confused by the logic of it (as pointed out also on the the video Elias provided - taxing against income that may never happen?) when there are other options. Second, what do we need to know with our businesses moving forward if we want to use ESOP ? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Silicon Beach Australia mailing list. No lurkers! It is expected that you introduce yourself: http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia/browse_thread/thread/99938a0fbc691eeb To post to this group, send email to silicon-beach-australia@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to silicon-beach-australia+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/silicon-beach-australia?hl=en?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
