ImaginativePRO Blog

ARE AMERICA'S FUTURE ENTREPRENEURS CAPABLE OF FOSTERING A NEW ERA OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP?

This Thanksgiving it might seem that there’s a lot less to be thankful for. One out of ten of Americans is out of work. The common wisdom says that the chickens have all come home to roost from a disastrous series of economic decisions including outsourcing the manufacture of America’s physical goods. The United States is now a debtor nation to China and that the bill is about to come due. The pundits say the American dream is dead and this next decade will see the further decline and fall of the West and in particular of the United States.

It may be that all the doomsayers are right.

But I don’t think so.

Let me offer my prediction. There’s a chance that the common wisdom is very, very wrong. That the second decade of the 21st century may turn out to be the West’s and in particular the United States’ finest hour.

I believe that we will look back at this decade as the beginning of an economic revolution as important as the scientific revolution in the 16th century and the industrial revolution in the 18th century. We’re standing at the beginning of theentrepreneurial revolution. This doesn’t mean just more technology stuff, though we’ll get that. This is a revolution that will permanently reshape business as we know it and more importantly, change the quality of life across the entire planet for all who come after us.

There’s Something Happening Here, What It Is Ain’t Exactly Clear

The story to date is a familiar one. Over the last half a century, Silicon Valley has grown into the leading technology and innovation cluster for the United States and the world. Silicon Valley has amused us, connected (and separated us) as never before, made businesses more efficient and led to the wholesale transformation of entire industries (bookstores, video rentals, newspapers, etc.)

Wave after wave of hardware, software, biotech and cleantech products have emerged from what has become “ground zero” of entrepreneurial and startup culture. Silicon Valley emerged by the serendipitous intersection of:

• Cold war research in microwaves and electronics at Stanford University,
• a Stanford Dean of Engineering who encouraged startup culture over pure academic research,
• Cold war military and intelligence funding driving microwave and military products for the defense industry in the 1950’s,
• a single Bell Labs researcher deciding to start his semiconductor company next to Stanford in the 1950’s which led to
• the wave of semiconductor startups in the 1960’s/70’s,
• the emergence of venture capital as a professional industry,
• the personal computer revolution in 1980’s,
• the rise of the Internet in the 1990’s and finally
• the wave of internet commerce applications in the first decade of the 21stcentury.

The pattern for the valley seemed to be clear. Each new wave of innovation was likepunctuated equilibrium – just when you thought the wave had run its course into stasis, a sudden shift and radical change into a new family of technology emerged.

The Barriers to Entrepreneurship

While startups continued to innovate in each new wave of technology, the rate of innovation was constrained by limitations we only now can understand. Only in the last few years do we appreciate that startups in the past were constrained by:

1. long technology development cycles (how long it takes from idea to product),
2. the high cost of getting to first customers (how many dollars to build the product),
3. the structure of the venture capital industry (a limited number of VC firms each needing to invest millions per startups),
4. the expertise about how to build startups  (clustered in specific regions like Silicon Valley, Boston, New York, etc.),
5. the failure rate of new ventures (startups had no formal rules and were a hit or miss proposition),
6. the slow adoption rate of new technologies by the government and large companies.

 

The Democratization of Entrepreneurship

What’s happening is something more profound than a change in technology. What’s happening is that all the things that have been limits to startups and innovation are being removed.  At once.  Starting now.

Compressing the Product Development Cycle

In the past, the time to build a first product release was measured in months or even years as startups executed the founder’s vision of what customers wanted. This meant building every possible feature the founding team envisioned into a monolithic “release” of the product. Yet time after time, after the product shipped, startups would find that customers didn’t use or want most of the features.  The founders were simply wrong about their assumptions about customer needs. The effort that went into making all those unused features was wasted.

Today startups have begun to build products differently.  Instead of building the maximum number of features, they look to deliver a minimum feature set in the shortest period of time.  This lets them deliver a first version of the product to customers in a fraction on the time.

For products that are simply “bits” delivered over the web, a first product can be shipped in weeks rather than years. 

Startups Built For Thousands Rather than Millions of Dollars

Startups traditionally required millions of dollars of funding just to get their first product to customers. A company developing software would have to buy computers and license software from other companies and hire the staff to run and maintain it. A hardware startup had to spend money building prototypes and equipping a factory to manufacture the product.

Today open source software has slashed the cost of software development from millions of dollars to thousands. For consumer hardware, no startup has to build their own factory as the costs are absorbed by offshore manufacturers.

The cost of getting the first product out the door for an Internet commerce startup hasdropped by a factor of a ten or more in the last decade.

The New Structure of the Venture Capital industry

The plummeting cost of getting a first product to market (particularly for Internet startups) has shaken up the venture capital industry. Venture capital used to be a tight club clustered around formal firms located in Silicon Valley, Boston, and New York. While those firms are still there (and getting larger), the pool of money that invests risk capital in startups has expanded, and a new class of investors has emerged. New groups of VC’s, super angels, smaller than the traditional multi-hundred million dollar VC fund, can make small investments necessary to get a consumer internet startup launched. These angels make lots of early bets and double-down when early results appear. (And the results do appear years earlier then in a traditional startup.)

In addition to super angels, incubators like Y Combinator, TechStars and the 100+ plus others worldwide like them have begun to formalize seed-investing. They pay expenses in a formal 3-month program while a startup builds something impressive enough to raise money on a larger scale.

Finally, venture capital and angel investing is no longer a U.S. or Euro-centric phenomenon. Risk capital has emerged in China, India and other countries where risk taking, innovation and liquidity is encouraged, on a scale previously only seen in the U.S.

The emergence of incubators and super angels have dramatically expanded the sources of seed capital. The globalization of entrepreneurship means the worldwide pool of potential startups has increased at least ten fold since the turn of this century.

Entrepreneurship as Its Own Management Science

Over the last ten years, entrepreneurs began to understand that startups were not simply smaller versions of large companies. While companies execute business models, startups search for a business model. (Or more accurately, startups are a temporary organization designed to search for a scalable and repeatable businessmodel.)

Instead of adopting the management techniques of large companies, which too often stifle innovation in a young start up, entrepreneurs began to develop their own management tools. Using the business model / customer development / agile development solution stack, entrepreneurs first map their assumptions (their business model) and then test these hypotheses with customers outside in the field (customer development) and use an iterative and incremental development methodology (agile development) to build the product. When founders discover their assumptions are wrong, as they inevitably will, the result isn’t a crisis, it’s a learning event called a pivot — and an opportunity to change the business model.

The result, startups now have tools that speed up the search for customers, reduce time to market and slash the cost of development.

Consumer Internet Driving Innovation

In the 1950’s and ‘60’s U.S. Defense and Intelligence organizations drove the pace of innovation in Silicon Valley by providing research and development dollars to universities, and purchased weapons systems that used the valley’s first microwave and semiconductor components. In the 1970’s, 80’s and 90’s, momentum shifted to the enterprise as large businesses supported innovation in PC’s, communications hardware and enterprise software. Government and the enterprise are now followers rather than leaders. Today, it’s the consumer – specifically consumer Internet companies – that are the drivers of innovation. When the product and channel are bits, adoption by 10’s and 100’s of millions users can happen in years versus decades.

The Entrepreneurial Singularity

The barriers to entrepreneurship are not just being removed. In each case they’re being replaced by innovations that are speeding up each step, some by a factor of ten. For example, Internet commerce startups the time needed to get the first product to market has been cut by a factor of ten, the dollars needed to get the first product to market cut by a factor of ten, the number of sources of initial capital for entrepreneurs has increased by a factor of ten, etc.

And while innovation is moving at Internet speed, this won’t be limited to just internet commerce startups. It will spread to the enterprise and ultimately every other business segment.

When It’s Darkest Men See the Stars

The economic downturn in the United States has had an unexpected consequence for startups – it has created more of them. Young and old, innovators who are unemployed or underemployed now face less risk in starting a company.  They have a lot less to lose and a lot more to gain.

If we are at the cusp of a revolution as important as the scientific and industrial revolutions what does it mean? Revolutions are not obvious when they happen. When James Watt started the industrial revolution with the steam engine in 1775 no one said, “This is the day everything changes.”  When Karl Benz drove around Mannheim in 1885, no one said, “There will be 500 million of these driving around in a century.” And certainly in 1958 when Noyce and Kilby invented the integrated circuit, the idea of a quintillion (10 to the 18th) transistors being produced each year seemed ludicrous.

Yet it’s possible that we’ll look back to this decade as the beginning of our own revolution. We may remember this as the time when scientific discoveries and technological breakthroughs were integrated into the fabric of society faster than they had ever been before. When the speed of how businesses operated changed forever. As the time when we reinvented the American economy and our Gross Domestic Product began to take off and the U.S. and the world reached a level of wealth never seen before.  It may be the dawn of a new era for a new American economy built on entrepreneurship and innovation.

One that our children will look back on and marvel that when it was the darkest, we saw the stars.

COMMENTARY:    I like Mr. Bank's enthusiasm, upbeat nature and positive outlook, and I hate to splash cold water on Mr. Banks, but there are also some very negative trends which could stifle U.S. entrepreneurship innovation and hinder its growth:

• Scarcity of venture capital - VC firms are undergoing difficulty in raising capital for their portfolio investment funds.  The VC industry is experiencing a period of consolidation. Many have stopped funding altogether.  Out of frustration, many senior manager's are leaving firms to find greener pastures or start their own ventures.
• Era of Digital Commoditization - The Internet is not the untamed "Wild West" of the 90's.  Many Web sectors are now reaching maturity with one or two market leaders.  You see this happening in social media, online video, music downloads, ecommerce, online auctions, web analytics and social games.   Location-based social networks and cloud computing are but a few sectors that still have room for growth and fresh entrepreneurs.  The central problem:  Web business models are mostly unsustainable due to low barriers to entry.  Too many wannabe's.      
• The Death of Traditional Print Media - Traditional print media channels like book publishing, newsprint and magazines are all giving way to digitized content.   
• Digital and Mobile Device Commoditization - Mobile devices, namely cellular phones, music players and tablet computers are also reaching commoditization.  There is very little product differentiation.  The Apple iPhone and iPad offered some hope, but the competition has caught up and the wars continue.  Everyone is competing in red oceans on the basis is price. Distribution channels are vital, with few monopolizing a channel as before. Soon, competition will be solely on the basis of price.  The low cost leaders will win.  
• Consumer Electronics Has Reached Commoditization - The entire home electronics sector from HDTV's to camera's has now reached commoditization.  Competition is solely on the basis of price for the majority of the market.  You don't want to be caught in the low-end or high-end segments, where margins are thing and the market is too small and margins are too low.  The middle is where you want to be, but competitors are losing competitors to the high-end (the affluent) and low-end (low wage earners)  
• U.S. No Longer Center of Entrepreneurship - The U.S. once used to be the Mecca for entrepreneurship.  Our Capitalistic system was dependent on innovation and entrepreneurship.   The baton is slowly changing hands to some very innovative and bright entrepreneurs from India and China whose business models are much lower than the U.S. VC's realize this, and are shifting their investment dollars overseas, making it more difficult for Americans to obtain funding.
• Technology Incubators Reaching Critical Mass - There are now too many technology incubators.  Competition is fierce and too localized.  The opens the opportunity for remote virtual technology incubators.  I think this will be the next thing.  I have spoke with a couple of individuals want to form remote virtual technology incubators.  

I also worry that tomorrow's young American entrepreneurs will be ill equipped to compete against foreign entrepreneurs in the emerging technology sectors.  Our educational system is shot, we have lost the edge in math and science, and our colleges and universities need to change their culture to teach these academics and inspire entrepreneurship.   

Big corporations have forsaken America for profits.  We no longer make things.  We are solely a nation of white collar consumers.  Millions of jobs have been exported overseas. Some experts put this at over 15 million jobs lost to Asian countries like China and India.  Those jobs are lost for good making for a very dim future.

The U.S. is entering a period of prolonged high unemployment, with young entrepreneurs forsaking working for technology companies, but going off on their own.  This is a positive sign. The negative is a lack of capital.  As a consultant for many startups, I run into this all the time.     

Courtesy of an article dated November 24, 2010 appearing in Steve Bank Blog

CROWDBOOSTER: BRINGS SUPER-CHARGED TWEET REACH ANALYTICS TO TWITTER

Crowdbooster, a brand new Y Combinator company, is about to give its consumer users free access to all the Twitter analytics they can handle and then some.

Crowdbooster, the brainchild of three Stanford guys, gives its users “tweet-level analysis” to understand the exact performance metrics of individual tweets — all within a user-friendly, color-coded UI that quickly and simply highlights your best tweets and areas for improvement.

The product does some serious number-crunching to calculate the total reach of a given tweet, which includes all the followers of the people who retweeted them, and displays it on a scatter plot. It’ll also show you replies and retweets for each tweet you sent out.

The scatter plots become an at-a-glance visual tool for exploring your highest-performing tweets this week, this month or for a custom period of time.

But Crowdbooster isn’t just navel-gazing and narcissism; it will also give you the tools to optimize your tweeting so your updates are most effective.

The platform will also be able to calculate the best time for you to send out a new tweet. This calculation is based on how well your tweets have performed historically at different times of day, as well as when yourTwitter followers are most likely to be online.

In addition to reach and timing, Crowdbooster can also show you the types of content your audience will be most likely to respond to.

 

The best news for most of our readers is that Crowdbooster is free for consumers. For businesses, the company charges $200 per month for their reports.

Another feature that’s likely to be more interesting to businesses is FollowBuilder, which allows the user to “discover and connect with potential customers and advocates” through engagement rather than spamming.

Current business users include Vayner Media (Gary Vaynerchuk’s social media consultancy), Eventbrite and Stanford University.

The people at Crowdbooster need to add this YouTube parody video titled, " Twitter the Social Network".   I think it clarifies any misconceptions people may have concerning Twitter.  It is the ultimate minutia. 

 

Twitter analytics has been an area of great interest to those who would profit from the social web, including third-party services such as Crowdbooster and Twitter itself. At Chirp this past spring, Twitter metrics was identified as one of the surest bets for making money in the Twitter ecosystem. In fact, Twitter’s product VP Jason Goldman said that Twitter wanted to build some analytics tools for companies as well as an API that included analytics information.

Twitter made an interesting analytics acquisition over the summer, and rumors have been swirling lately that the social service might roll out its own analytics dashboard before the end of 2010.

Still, this is a space that’s ripe for innovation, and there’s plenty of room for plenty of interesting products. We’ve enjoyed playing around with Crowdbooster so far; if you’d like to get into the site and use the tools yourself, just go to the Crowdbooster homepage and sign up for an account. When filling out the web form for your account signup, mention that you heard about the service from Mashable, and your application will be one of the first ones processed.

Give Crowdbooster a shot, and let us know what you think in the comments.

COMMENTARY:   Crowdbooster appears to be a worthwhile app for serious Twitterers.   There are certainly a lot of Twitter analytical tools out there.  You will find a lot of them on @pistachio's (Laura Fitton's) www.oneforty.com.   I will give Crowdbooster the benefit of the doubt until I have an opportunity to try it out.  Oh, I looked up the meaning of "minutia" in the Twitter parody video and it means, "A minor detail or piece of information, sometimes unimportant or useless banter."  That's Twitter alright.  

Courtesy of an article dated November 19, 2010 appearing in Mashable/Startups

WILL GEN-Y SOCIAL, CULTURAL AND ECONOMIC NEEDS PUT A STOP TO AUTOMOBILE PURCHASES?

America's youth-driven obsession with cars goes way back to well before rebels were without causes. And it has transmogrified over the years from muscle cars to vans to the import-craze that has fueled franchises like Hot Import Nights and the rise of "drifting" in the U.S. But a new survey suggests the engine could be stalling out.

A study by Washington, D.C.-based KRC Research -- commissioned by car-rental company Zipcar -- says half of all 18- to-34-year-old drivers are driving less, and nearly two-thirds would drive less if alternative transportation options were available.

KRC Research, which conducted the survey of licensed drivers last month, found that 45% of Millennials said they had "consciously made an effort to reduce how much they drive," and 64% said they would drive less if alternative options including public transportation, car sharing or carpooling were available in their area.

Cost of ownership was the biggest reason respondents gave for wanting to give up wheels. Eighty percent of the Millennial respondents said ownership is unattractive because of car payments, gas, parking and maintenance.

The study -- based on a pool of 1,025 adults age 18 and over, of which 966 were licensed drivers -- said social media are responsible for less driving by 18- to-34-year-olds because they are visiting friends virtually. Fifty-four percent of respondents said they choose to spend time online in social networks with friends instead of driving to see them, versus 46% for 35- to-44-year-olds, 34% for 45- to-55-year-olds, and 18% for 55-year-olds and older.

The study also found that Millennials are more likely than other age group to be influenced in their driving habits by environmental concerns around global warming and pollution. Forty-five percent of respondents said as much versus 39% of 35- to-44-year-olds and 37% of 45- to-54-year-olds. The study found that paradoxically, 42% of over-55-year-olds said they would drive less to protect the environment.

The study found other hurdles for new car ownership by Gen Y. About 37% of 18- to-29-year-olds have been unemployed or underemployed lately -- the highest share of that age group with that status in three decades. Only 58% pay bills on time each month, 70% of them are not building up their savings, and nearly half are digging themselves into a credit hole, starting with a $23,000 post-college student debt. Only 61% said they were covered by any kind of health plan.

COMMENTARY:  I have done quite a bit of research on Millennials' opinions concerning automobile ownership, and many of them are opting to ride a bike, take mass transit, car pool with friends, rent a car as needed or walk.   This is the first time that I have heard that social media has affected Millennial automobile buying habits, because they can meet their friends "virtually", instead of in person.   The real reasons have a lot to do with cost of ownership.  Gas is too expensive, and parking is difficult to find in large urban areas and quite expensive.  Insurance premiums for a young Millennial can also be expensive.   Millennials are also very aware of the damage automobiles are causing to the environment due to carbon emissions, and they simply prefer not to own an automobile.   Many Millennials rode a bike while in college, and many continue to do so after graduation, adding that this keeps them in better physical shape and much easier to park than a car.  

The recession, the high price of gas, and lack of financing, put the brakes on automobile purchases. There is a lot of pent-up demand for automobiles, and the gradual switch to hybrids and electric cars, has will make cost of ownership lower over the long run, and environmental pollution is greatly reduced or eliminated.  Over 10 million Millennial couples are planning are having children, and bikes are just not going to do it if they need to get around, so I think this will play into increasing the demand for automobiles than the other way around.

Courtesy of an article dated November 22, 2010 appearing in MediaPost Publications Marketing Daily

DOING THE MATH AND SOME ADVICE TO MERCHANTS ON WHETHER TO USE GROUPON

I have been reading with great interest (especially here) the stories of retailers sharing their experiences using Groupon. For those of you not familiar with Groupon, the company partners with local businesses to send a daily coupon e-blast to its members. The members who buy the coupon get 50 to 70 percent off on a product or service, and Groupon splits the proceeds with the retailer — usually leaving the retailer with about 20 to 25 cents on the dollar of retail value.

I have never seen anything that is both so celebrated and demonized at the same time. There has been talk that Groupon might be worth as much as $3 billion, and yet here are some blog comments from retailers who’ve tried the service:

• “It is for desperate businesses.”

• “The financials just can’t work out.”

• “Groupon is the worst marketing ever.”

• “We did Groupon. It was O.K. It brought in new customers — we kept most of them. But the margins are a killer.”

As a retailer who has used Groupon — as well as traditional advertising — to build my business, I’ve come to the conclusion that there’s a lot of misinformation out there. Is Groupon the worst marketing ever? Or is it the best marketing ever? Probably both. One thing is for sure: Groupon is a beast.

What else would you call something that can deliver 2,000 customers to your store? It’s a beast that can propel your business or smother it. It depends on your business. It also depends on you. Here are some key factors:

• Type of Business - The first is the type of business you have. How many potential customers in your area don’t know about you? Do you have excess capacity? Can you handle a surge?
• Effect On Your Brand - The second factor is about branding. Do you believe that by giving out a large discount you risk damaging your brand? It is a judgment call. I am sure that it is a bad idea in some cases.
• Does It Makes Economic Sense - And then there is the math, which may be the most important factor. I have seen it attempted many times — but if it is not done properly, it can result in very misleading conclusions.

Groupon is advertising. If you don’t need or believe in advertising, there is no reason to look at this. It costs money. Instead of writing a check for an ad, you are choosing to lose money on sales. This can wreak havoc on the brain cells of a good retailer who is always watching profit margins. It can feel wrong, especially when the coupon customers don’t spend more than the amount of the coupon.

That is why it is critical to do the math. Math is cold and unemotional — and eye-opening. Unfortunately, it is much easier and much more accurate to do the math after you try the program, because you will not have to guess on as many numbers. There are eight key calculations you need to consider to determine whether this is a better advertising vehicle than something else you may already be doing:

1. Your incremental cost of sales — that is, the actual cost percentage for a new customer. If you are giving boat tours and have empty seats, your incremental costs for an additional customer are next to nothing. If you are selling clothes, your incremental costs might be 50 percent of the sale price. Food might be 40 percent. In any case, don’t include fixed costs that you would be incurring any way.
2. The amount of the average sale - If the coupon is for $75, will the customers spend more that that? I have seen more than one retailer complain that nobody spends more than the value of the coupon. That’s unlikely but I am sure it can feel that way, and that is my point: Keep track.
3. Redemption percentage - You don’t really know until the end, but from my experience and from what I have heard, 85 percent is a good guess.
4. Percentage of your coupon users who are already your customers - I’m sure this number varies tremendously depending on the size of your city, how long you have been around, and the type of business.
5. How many coupons does each customer buy? - (The more they buy, the fewer people are exposed to your product or service.)
6. What percentage of coupon customers will turn into regular customers? - Again, it can seem as if they are all bargain shoppers who will never return without a discount, but that’s almost impossible. Is it possible 90 percent won’t return? Sure.
7. What is the advertising value of having your business promoted to 900,000 people — that’s the number on Groupon’s Chicago list — even if they don’t buy a coupon?
8. How much does it normally cost you to acquire a customer through advertising? - Everything is relative.

Let’s look at an example of how this might work for a restaurant. Suppose you sell 3,000 coupons with a face value of $75 for $35. Then let’s assume the following:

1. 40 percent incremental costs (mostly food).
2. $85 average ticket ($10 more than the coupon).
3. 85 percent redeemed.
4. 40 percent used by existing customers.
5. Two bought per customer.
6. 10 percent come back again — or send friends.
7. $1,000 advertising value.
8. $125 typical cost to get a new customer through other advertising methods.

Now, let’s do the math:

Number redeemed: 3,000 x 85 percent = 2,550.

Revenue:
3,000 x $35 x 50 percent = $52,500 (Groupon sends a check).
2,550 x additional $10 = $25,500 (additional money spent by each customer).
total revenue = $78,000 (plus, you also get the $1,000 advertising value of having all those people introduced to your product or service).

Expense:
2,550 x $85 (average retail value) x 40 percent incremental cost = $86,700.

In this example, the restaurant took in $78,000 at a cost of $86,700, which means it cost $8,700 to run the deal. The key question is how many return customers the restaurant will get for that expense. If you divide the 2,550 total coupons by two (the average number of coupons bought by each customer), you get 1,275 customers. Multiply by 60 percent (to exclude existing customers) and you get 765. Multiply again by 10 percent (the percentage of new customers who return), and you get 76 new repeat customers.

Divide the $8,700 cost by 76 new customers, and the restaurant paid $114 for each new regular, which in this example is roughly what we assumed it would cost with conventional advertising. The question the restaurant has to answer is whether it was worth the trouble to get 76 customers — especially given that it probably annoyed some of its existing regulars. On the other hand, maybe it kept some of  its employees busy when they otherwise would have had short hours.

But keep this in mind: because of the huge volume, if you change any of the variables, you can get very different results. For instance, if the customers had spent an average of $95 instead of $85, the restaurant would have actually made money on the promotion — something it’s almost impossible to do with traditional advertising. Of course, it goes the other way, too. If the customers spend only the $75 coupon amount, the cost to the restaurant will be $24,000 — an expense most owners probably never even consider.

Best marketing ever? Worst marketing ever? It all depends on a few little numbers. Here is the big difference between traditional advertising and Groupon: Traditional advertising requires spending some money and knowing that it can be lost if the ad doesn’t work. With Groupon, you spend no money up front but you mess with your formula for making money. You can win big and you can lose big.

It is a new world. The old math still works in it.

COMMENTARY:    Excellent article.  Finally, someone who helps you determine whether Groupon is right for you and either puts an end to or increases the bad rumors concerning Groupon.

In my opinion, the decision to use Groupon depends on the following:

• Type of business - A restaurant has a higher intrinsic value to a customer than a discount of diaper service.  There are a lot less mothers looking for diaper service than there are restaurant customers.  People got to eat.
• Profit Margins - Groupon makes more sense economically if the profit margins are high.  With low margin products and services, the potential to lose money increases exponentially with each new customer.
• Excess Inventory - If you have a lot of old or excess inventory in stock, that is loosing its market value the longer it remains unsold, it makes sense to get rid of it using Groupon or a fire sale.
• Seasonality - It makes sense to clear the shelves of inventory merchandise that is seasonal. Example:   If you have a lot of  umbrella's left over from winter, and you are nearing Spring time, I say put them on sale or clear them out through Groupon.

Desperation comes into play as well.  I worked for a company that had a lot of excess paint.  Obsolescence was going to become an issue, so we had a contractor's sale.  What we didn't sell to contractor's we sold to consumer's.  We managed to get rid of 95% of our inventory. We didn't make a lot of money, but we didn't have to write-off the entire stock.  

Courtesy of an article dated November 23, 2010 appearing in The New York Times

 

BRITISH STARTUP MMIC SOLUTIONS' DEVELOPS MILLIMETER WAVE TECHNOLOGY FOR USE IN SECURITY BODY SCANNERS

A start-up company aims to dramatically change the economics of millimetre wave technology, with some startling results. Nick Flaherty talks to MMIC Solutions chief executive officer Rodger Sykes.

Millimetre wave radio technology, from 40GHz upwards, has traditionally been limited to military systems and radar. And it has been limited by being costly to produce and not very scalable. This is not the preserve of ordinary silicon technology, and is only now able to use silicon germanium (SiGe). Instead it is Gallium Arsenide (GaAs) and indium Phosphide (InP) and big, chunky machine metal blocks that are needed for millimetre systems.

Part of the problem is that at these frequencies, 40GHz to 100GHz, the many of the field effects of the electronics are actually above the device, rather than inside it, and so precisely shaped cavities are needed, and this is expensive to develop, make and tune, says CEO Rodger Sykes.

MMIC Solutions was set up to commercialise the millimetre wave space, from 40GHz upwards, with a technology that allows systems to be made dramatically smaller and cheaper. It has an exclusive license for technology from UK defence research organisation Qinetic that allows subsystems to be built with much cheaper materials, making them 10 or twenty times cheaper. This opens up several new application areas, says Sykes, and also the possibility to use more integrated devices for the first time that can also reduce costs even further.

The company closed a funding round of over £2.5m earlier this year, on top of £1m seed funding to commercialise the technology in several application areas, although home networking is not one of them as there are many competing companies in that area, says Sykes.

Instead imaging is a key opportunity, he says, as millimetre waves penetrate clothing but are reflected by skin. This allows it to be used as a screening technology to detect objects under clothing, and is not limited to metal detection. This is key for airport security, as it would detect non-metallic guns and knives, as well as drugs, and the UK's customs service is already using such cameras to detect drug smugglers.

The real value is that a highly sensitive, low noise system can use the ambient radiation and not require additional sources, so cameras and sensors can be placed anywhere. The MMIC technology can cut the cost of these scanners and cameras to a tenth of their current cost, and this is the area where the company already has paying customers for 94GHz subsystems.

The 60-65GHz V band is unregulated, and there are opportunities for communication equipment makers to get bandwidth of over 1Gbit/s for metro area wireless networks, but the cost of equipment is currently too high. Similarly the regulated 75-95GHz E band is of interest to cellular operators for higher bandwidth backhaul to link their cell sites to the Internet if the cost is right. Reducing the cost of transceivers brings both these areas would open up new markets, says Sykes, and products for these markets will be out at the end of this year.

Similarly radar systems in cars are still expensive, but reducing the cost could make adaptive cruise control as common as ultrasound parking sensors in the future. There is also the opportunity to integrate more of the processing into the sub-system to make it easier to install in the vehicle.

Military and aerospace is where the technology started, and making millimetre wave equipment much smaller and lighter has significant appeal to the military and aerospace markets. Qinetic is a key equipment provider in these areas, and MMIC works closely with Qinetic on many projects, says Sykes, with unmanned aircraft (UAVs)and radar systems obvious opportunities that would benefit from the commercialisation and lower costs.

There are also opportunities in biotech and healthcare, although these are further out, says Sykes. Millimetre waves penetrate a few millimetres below the skin to the nerve endings and so have opportunities as a non-invasive anaesthetic.

All of these can be done with the existing technology, which allows existing devices to be put into smaller, cheaper packages. But this also opens up several opportunities for integration as more integrated devices can be used effectively without having to be tuned. While MMIC buys in devices today, there is the opportunity to develop its own devices and that work has already started, says Sykes.

COMMENTARY:    Terrorism has become a constant threat in recent years. Gun and knife crime is also on the increase in many countries. So, the detection of weapons and explosives concealed under clothing has emerged as one of the most urgent security issues of our time. However, the technical challenges in successful detection are substantial. In some scenarios, large numbers of people must move rapidly through airport concourses, railway stations, and other buildings. In others, subjects cooperate by divesting themselves of phones, coins, etc. In still others, people must be screened at a “stand-off” distance, sometimes covertly without their knowledge.

The traditional approach is detection of the electromagnetic signature of metal objects. Developed over many years, metal detector systems can now detect very small quantities of both ferrous and non-ferrous metals in, for example, foodstuffs. Metal detector archways are used to screen people in airports worldwide, balancing sensitivity and detection against the rate of false alarms which severely constrict passenger throughput. However, metal detectors are ineffective against new, non-metallic, threats such as plastic and ceramic weapons and explosives.

New Threats – A New Technology

In the face of new challenges, new approaches are being developed. Imaging using low levels of back-scattered X-rays has been proposed for cooperating passenger checkpoints. Excellent resolution is countered by slow throughput and public resistance to being irradiated with X-rays. A very promising new approach uses millimeter waves (MMW) which pass through most fabrics to form images of concealed metal and non-metallic objects.

Ka and W-bands are both used in imaging. The higher frequency band enables higher resolution, but also requires more expensive components. Between 20 and 30GHz an “active” radar-like approach is needed for resolution good enough to detect objects of a few centimeters (one inch). Low levels of MMW radiation are transmitted, and the reflected signals used to build an image of the contours of the body. Remote screeners examine the image for anomalies and inform checkpoint operators, as the level of detail and artefacts in the image make automated detection with low false alarm rates much more difficult.

Systems at W-band are usually entirely passive, using naturally occurring MMW, and the inherent “temperature” of the body, to build an image similar to those from infra-red thermal cameras. Working on the contrast between objects and the background body, passive MMW imagers have far fewer problems with concerns over personal privacy. In addition, threat detection can often be performed automatically by software analysis of images, reducing dependence on the human factors.

Ka band imagers for passenger checkpoints can mechanically rotate a detector array around a standing person to provide a 270° image. In this case, the benefits of close-range, almost 3D, images are balanced against the time taken to perform the scan on queuing passengers. Recent Ka band imagers are now using phased array techniques to scan subjects with large numbers of beam steering nodes. At W-band, “pseudo optics” are common, using mirrors or lenses to focus the MMW onto an array of receivers (a Focal Plane Array). To avoid sudden changes in direction at the end of each line of an X-Y scan, off-axis mirrors rotating at constant speed are a common scanning solution.

Resolution and Sensitivity

From experience with camera phones and digital cameras, everyone knows that an image made from more pixels will contain more detail and be more useful (e.g. for detection purposes). Resolution is the key parameter both in still images and in video clips. Optical effects, such as diffraction, affect the resolution of MMW imagers. The smallest object an imager can resolve is driven by the aperture of the system, the target range, and the wavelength. Most imagers for detecting weapons and explosives at a range of two or three meters achieve a “spot size” of a few millimeters, using apertures less than one meter.

Resolution is also very dependent on the number of receivers, which happen to be the most expensive component of MMW imagers. Unlike optical cameras whose chip sensors comprise millions of pixels, MM-wave imagers scan 100-200 discrete detectors across the field of view between four and ten times per second to provide near real-time video.

In passive MMW imaging, the time the receivers have looking at each ‘pixel position’ (the integration time) affects their sensitivity, the minimum “temperature” difference they can detect. This obviously determines the type of threats such an imaging system can detect. Today’s best W-band receivers can distinguish a Noise Equivalent Temperature Difference (NETD) of 0.4 Kelvin in a room temperature scene around 300K. Enhancing threat detection by improving sensitivity requires both better receivers and extended integration times. Constrained by the need for high speed image acquisition for near real-time video, higher numbers of receivers address both the sensitivity and the resolution requirements of future MMW imagers.

MMW Receivers
The phase and polarisation can also be useful at a system level to distinguish objects in the MMW images. Ka-band imagers often use heterodyne receivers, which can provide some additional information (e.g. phase). However, at W-band the greater complexity and cost of a coherent down conversion is prohibitive, and W-band imagers almost exclusively use lower cost “direct detection” receivers, measuring the total power received across the operating frequency band.

The amount of energy emitted by the human body is 100 times less at, for example, W-band than the level of infra-red radiation. For this reason, Low Noise Amplifiers (LNAs) made from advanced compound semiconductors such as Gallium Arsenide (GaAs) and Indium Phosphide (InP) are required to give high gain (some W-band receivers require more than 50dB gain). Highly responsive detector diodes are also required to give high output voltage from the received MMW energy. Low noise figure is also vital as the receiver’s own noise directly affects its sensitivity, the minimum “temperature” difference it can detect. 

In addition to the active components, MMW receiver modules are expensive due to precision machining of metal, and manual assembly, tuning, and test. The receiver array is almost always the largest cost component of a MMW imaging system, which limits the number of receivers and the system resolution and sensitivity. 

MMIC Solutions in the UK is specialising in MMW imaging. Its innovative technology enables the use of lower cost materials and module construction techniques, as well as allowing automated manufacturing of the receiver modules. By managing the feedback paths, oscillations, and resonances that occur inherently at MMW (when the wavelength is the same size as the features of the semiconductor packaging), its receiver modules are circuit boards rather than machined metal boxes, screwed together. This enables a substantial reduction in cost, and also a smaller form factor to allow receivers to be more tightly packed in an array, supporting higher resolution imager systems. The new MSi200 series of modules are thought to be the smallest W-band receivers available anywhere. For the future, the technology also enables higher levels of chip integration than has so far been possible at MMW frequencies.

Stand-Off versus Portals

Threat detection by MMW imaging is now being deployed at checkpoints worldwide where cooperating passengers walk-through “Portals.” With a similar Concept of Operation (ConOp) to metal detector archways, the subject is less than two meters from the imager, and turns 360° in a well-controlled indoor environment to maximize the probability of detection. Two imagers can also be set up in a walk-through area to provide a simultaneous front and back view without the subject having to stop and turn.

The new challenge facing scientists is to extend the range to support “Stand-Off” imaging of people in queues or in waiting areas, or approaching a checkpoint, both indoors and outdoors. This is obviously invaluable for detecting large person-borne explosives, such as suicide vests, which can cause injury and damage over a wide area. W-band systems with an aperture under one meter and a range greater than seven meters are now being used. To achieve good resolution and longer range, without a considerable increase in size of the aperture and equipment, even higher frequencies are now being used.

For medium-range Stand-Off screening of crowds, queues, etc., smaller handheld MMW systems are also being developed. This kind of covert threat detection will be crucial for intelligence-led operations by law enforcement and security services.

Conclusions

Due to the ability to penetrate clothing, MMW screening is fast becoming the best approach for detecting the new threats, non-metallic weapons and explosives, concealed under clothing in a wide range of deployment scenarios. With new, low-cost, receiver technologies now becoming available, future systems will undoubtedly have much larger numbers of receivers providing substantial increases in resolution and sensitivity to enhance detection of these threats.

High performance receivers are the largest single cost component of millimeter wave imagers, but MMIC Solutions’ patented technology enables the use of innovative materials and construction, and automatic manufacture, which brings significant reductions in size, weight, and cost. Our range of receivers for W-band passive imaging is outlined below. We are also developing new state-of-the-art modules for security and industrial screening applications: portal, stand-off, and hand-held.

The obvious advantages of MMIC Solutions' MMW technology are:  1) lower cost, 2) ability to detect not only guns and knives, but concealed non-ferrous (non-metallic) items like explosives and liquids and 3) stand-off detection.  

Stand-off detection allows body image scanners to be placed in passage ways and waiting rooms eliminating the need for individual scanning.  Present airport security full body imaging scanners, requires the passenger to stand in a portal or archway and be scanned.   This slows down the scanning process, creating long waiting lines and a lot of irritated airline passengers.  

MMIC Solutioins' MMW technology could lead to doing away with physical pat downs of passengers, a process that has caused tremendous passenger irritation and complaints with TSA agents located at  several major U.S. airports. 

MMIC Solutions Ltd is based in Bromesberrow, Herefordshire, UK. www.mmicsolutions.com

Courtesy of an article dated August 9, 2009 appearing in EngineerLive and an article in the August 2009 issue of Microwave Product Digest

POT VILLA, A PARODY ON 'FARMVILLE', THE POPULAR SOCIAL GAME

I saw this video when somebody posted it in a comment here in the Unigamesity and I said that I have to share it with the world: it’s a really cool FarmVille parody video promoting a game called PotVilla. I guess you can all imagine from the title what it’s all about, so I have just two words for you (OK, more): watch the video parody of FarmVille and be amused and regret that there isn’t actually such a game out there. Because, as the creators of the video say, PotVilla would’ve been a game everybody would’ve loved to be your neighbor!

 

COMMENTARY:    Pot's a crop is it not?   Will Zynga add pot farming to Farmville?  I just love parody's don't you?  

Courtesy of an article dated February 11, 2010 appearing in Unigamesity

SURVIVAL STRATEGIES FOR EXECUTIVES MAKING THE TRANSITION FROM A LARGE CORPORATION TO A SMALL STARTUP

Mid-level or even top executives who “grew up” in large companies often look with envy at startups, and dream of how easy it must be running a small organization, where you can see the whole picture and it appears you have total control. In reality, very few executives or professional stars from large corporations thrive in the early-stage startup environment.

The job of a big-company executive is very different from the job of a small-company executive. The culture is different, the skills required are different, and the experience from one may be the exact opposite of what you need for the other. Michael Fertik, in a recent Harvard Business Review article, summarized the key differences for people trying to survive the transition:

• Forget influence- and empire-building. Establishing and wielding influence may help you move resources in your direction in a large business. Similarly, acquiring a larger footprint of direct reports is often a sign of success at large businesses. These instincts kill you in a small company, where requiring more resources is a negative.
• Solve everything yourself. This is one of the harder transitions for people joining small businesses. The axiom applies to all matters, tiny to large. Small-company heroes are consistently self-reliant. At a small company, if you're constantly demanding more support, you risk turning your net impact into overhead creep rather than value creation.
• Never cover your a$$. There's no place for CYA in a small company. This attitude sows division and mistrust at exactly the early stages when the business most needs to build precious esprit de corps. When you're considering a job at a small company, look for colleagues and founders who don't tolerate CYA.
• Go faster. Large companies move slowly because they are usually in reasonable financial condition, with less urgency, have a lot to lose from making bad decisions, and have built layers of management sign-off over the years. These conditions don't apply in a small business. Speed gives you the greatest chance of success.
• Don't solve problems you don't have. Managers at large companies often have the obligation and luxury of thinking about problems that may arise at some future time if things go well. Startups spend little time on this — the risks of enormous success are so remote they aren't worth major planning.
• Get used to dynamic budgeting. Large companies usually operate with annual budgets, and often the budgeting process is locked down months before the start of the fiscal year. At start-ups and smaller businesses, budgeting can happen opportunistically, monthly, or even on an ongoing basis.
• Understand that your daily impact is huge. Many of your managerial decisions will have enormous and possibly fatal effects on a small business. Larger companies rarely face life-or-death opportunities or threats. Small companies can face them daily. The most practical way to adapt is to focus on learning to evaluate and trust your judgment.

I’ve spent years in large-company environments, and many years later in startups, so I’ve seen and felt the pressures of both. One positive aspect of having worked in a large company is that they usually provide actual training and education for a new role, rather than all “on-the-job training.” This transfers well to startups, and should give you an advantage.

On the other side of the ledger, big company executives tend to be demand-driven by initiatives handed down from the top. In contrast, when you are a startup executive, nothing happens unless you make it happen. In startups, you have to drive multiple initiatives concurrently or the company will stand still. Well defined and well documented processes don’t exist to guide you.

Overall, the time to do the people filtering and fit analysis is before the hire. Look at their previous results, and listen for evidence of self-sufficiency, problem solving, and a thorough understanding of your product, technology, customers, and the market. If you don’t see a self-awareness of the differences required, your candidate probably won’t bridge the gap.

COMMENTARY:   I have worked for subsidiaries of both large Fortune 500 corporations and small, fast growing startup companies, and I completely agree with this article.   My advice:  Get used to wearing a lot of hats, working long hours, for very little pay.

I can remember working for a small advertising agency and helping the art director "cut and pasting" typeset copy on art board for a newspaper ad so we could meet the client's deadlines.  

Generation-Y's have launched a lot of startups, but very few of them them have the skill set or experience to run them as they grow from the seed stage to a company generating $100 million in revenues.    

During the filming of a CBS "60 Minutes" profile of Facebook founder Mark "Zuck" Zuckerberg, he openly admitted that he did not know all his employees by first name and that more seasoned, experienced executives were needed to run a company the size of  Facebook.    

An executive making the switch from a large company to a startup will often experience a lot of anxiety and frustration.  There's never enough money.   Think "guerilla" all over again.  Forget the fancy office.  Think "virtual".  Don't get carried away and set out to build a large corporate structure.  It's first grade all over again.  

Ben Horowitz write an excellent blog article titled, "Why it is Hard to Bring Big Company Execs into Little Companies".  I think it makes some very valid and excellent points.

Courtesy of an article dated November 23, 2010 appearing in Startup Professionals Musings

OPERA: 90% OF GEN-Y'S USE THEIR MOBILE PHONES MORE THAN A DESKTOP OR LAPTOP COMPUTER TO ACCESS THE INTERNET

Mobile browser maker Opera has released its latest report on the mobile Web and this time it's come to a conclusion you'll arrive at soon enough as the family gathers for the holidays and everyone under 30 has their nose buried in a mobile phone - "Generation Y chooses the mobile Web".

 

In fact, most 18-27 year-olds surveyed in the report user their mobile phones to browse the Web more often than a desktop or laptop. The report offers a number of telling statistics on where the world is headed and it all boils down to one word - mobile.

According to Opera, the largest demographic of Opera users are between the ages of 18- and 27-years old in 13 countries representing major and emerging markets. The report highlights show mobile phones becoming ubiquitous in this generation, with definite variations:

• Almost 90% of respondents in the United States aged 18-27 have used their phones to share pictures. Of the profiled countries, Vietnam -- at 67% -- had the lowest use of mobile phones to share pictures.
• Respondents in the United States are least likely to have asked someone out on a date via SMS (44%). Respondents in China (84%), Germany (84%) and Vietnam (83%) are most likely to have used SMS texts to ask someone out on a date.
• Generation Y in both China and the United States share a disdain for printed newspapers. 53% of respondents in the United States and 57% of respondents in China rarely or never read physical newspapers.
• Watch your privacy policies. Respondents in South Africa (49%) and the United States (44%) were somewhat to very uncomfortable sharing their personal information online.

"We have often said that the next generation will grow up knowing the Web mostly through their mobile phones," said Opera co-founder Jon von Tetzchner of the results. "We see this trend already emerging in different regions around the world. The mobile Web will bring a profound change in how we connect with one another. I think the results from this survey already show that change taking place."

Interestingly, the report also found that countries with the highest percentage of users using desktops and laptops were also those with the highest percent of smartphones. That is, smartphones are not replacing laptops and desktops, but rather going hand-in-hand. "This result," states the report, "presents a challenge to the long-standing belief that smartphone uptake will be the major driver of mobile web usage globally."

If you have any doubts, just wait until the family gathers for the holidays and see for yourself - Generation Y certainly has chosen the mobile Web.

COMMENTARY:    Opera started in 1994 as a research project inside Norway’s largest telecom company, Telenor. Within a year, it branched out into an independent development company named Opera Software ASA.

Opera Software ASA (OTC: OPESF.P) develops the Opera Web browser, a high-quality, multi-platform product for a wide range of platforms, operating systems and embedded Internet products – including Mac, PC and Linux computers, mobile phones and PDAs, game consoles, and other devices like the Nintendo Wii, DS, Sony Mylo, and more.

Opera’s vision is to deliver the best Internet experience on any device. Opera’s key business objective is to earn global leadership in the market for PC/desktops and embedded products. Opera’s main business strategy is to provide a browser that operates across devices, platforms and operating systems, and can deliver a faster, more stable and flexible Internet experience than its competitors.

Opera Software's Operating Data:

• In October 2010, Opera Mini had over 76.3 million users worldwide, a 7.1% increase from September 2010 and more than 92% compared to October 2009.
• In October 2010, Opera Desktop Browser had over 50 million users worldwide, an 11.1% increase from September 2010.  
• Opera Mini users viewed over 41.6 billion pages in October 2010. Since September, page views have gone up 12.6%. Since October 2009, page views have increased 142%.
• In the quarter ending September 30, 2010, Opera Software had revenues of $178.3 million, an increase of 32% over the same quarter 2009.
• Year-to-date revenues through September 30, 2010 were $498.7 million, an increase of 6% over the year ending September 30, 2009.
• Net income for the quarter ending September 30, 2010 was $20.2 million compared to a loss of $12 million for the same quarter 2009.
• Year-to-date net income through September 30, 2010 was $44.7 million, an increase of 66.2%.
• In October 2010, Opera Mini users generated over 616 million MB of data for operators worldwide. Since September, the data consumed went up by 15.1%. Data in Opera Mini is compressed up to 90%. If this data were uncompressed, Opera Mini users would have viewed over 5.7 petabytes of data in October. Since October 2009, data traffic is up 134%.
• Kazakhstan, Belarus, Egypt, the Philippines and Bangladesh all went up in the top 20 countries ranking, while Kenya, Poland and Germany went down in the rankings.

Courtesy of an article dated November 24, 2010 appearing in ReadWriteWeb

HOW TO STRUCTURE YOUR BUSINESS TO MEET THE NEEDS OF TODAY'S GENERATION-Y

I am frequently asked about the various revenue streams of our company -- currently we have four -- and if they lend themselves to success or potentially distract us from our primary focus. Recently, I've found myself increasingly discussing this topic, which has led me to analyze the necessity for a diverse business model, especially when seeking the attention of Generation Y.

When our company, Sugar, Inc., began four years ago, the intent was to develop original content with a focus on women, ages 18-34, and their core passion points. Though we were one of the first blogs in this space, we found the competition stiff and the battle for mindshare getting tougher in no time. We were quick to take stock in our business and examine the core audience and what they were doing digitally -- we were born in the digital space and had no intent of building offline.

We made a calculated decision to pivot on one central theme -- Gen Y women -- and took note of where they were spending time and what they were doing online. As a result, we built a business model that expands and adapts to the changing online landscape and generates revenue through multiple sources.

Basically, we followed Gen Y in a sense by mimicking their behavior and becoming multi-faceted -- in this case by building a business inclusive of e-commerce, community, video, gaming, local offers and more. We recognized early on that you couldn't pin this generation down, that diversity and personal expression is everything to them. We realized that if we built a one-dimensional business, we risked losing Gen Y's attention -- and, potentially, our shirts!

To be successful in today's ever-changing business world, follow a few of these lessons Gen Y has involuntarily delivered to us:

• Ask "What's next?": Gen Y is the first to discover and test new concepts and products. We know they don't like to follow the crowds. They are constantly innovating and aligning themselves with brands that do the same, expecting the core ideal to remain as innovation keeps pace with them. They are not the boomer generation that gets disgruntled when a brand evolves.
• Diversify: Rest assured that what was "in" today will become a hazy memory tomorrow. The best way to protect your business is to have multiple revenue streams, and quick. When one part of the business gets hit, the others should help safeguard against destruction. The landscape is changing so quickly that rapid, decisive diversification is your only protection.
• Keep a core focus: Gen Y has core values -- the environment, reliance on one other, social causes, family. What are your company's core values? Identify the one thing that ties your businesses together and becomes the driving force as you build new revenue streams. We pivot on the audience of Gen Y women and their digital behaviors. What is it that your company pivots on?
• Don't discriminate: Gen Y is one of the most open-minded, accepting generations. They have a deep respect for all of humanity and each other. They are veritable sponges and want to explore everything around them. Take a lesson from this and explore what may not initially seem a natural fit for your business.

When we built ours, we thought of ourselves as a global publisher and anticipated growing globally, not locally. Over the course of the last few years, we saw an explosion in the local marketplace. We recognized through mobile and other platforms that local exploration and region-specific special offers were generating a significant reaction from Gen Y. We wanted to position ourselves like the audience, so we bought a company called FreshGuide and are now emphasizing all local initiatives.

This isn't a case of the old dog learning new ways to roll over. Generation Y continues to adapt and embrace new forms of communicating, connecting and expressing themselves, which should be viewed as an example worth following rather than a threat. Though they exhibit consumer behavior that's tough to predict, it's something that can teach all businesses, and in the process, makes them poised to succeed.

COMMENTARY:    This article offers an excellent look into today's Generation Y, who are also referred to as Millennials.   If interested in learning more I recommend you read the following blog posts about Generation Y.  

November 21, 2010 - Your Business Will be Run by Gen-Y – Get Over It

November 5, 2010 -  GEN-Y VALUES, THE MID-TERM ELECTIONS PLUS EVERYTHING YOU WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THEM

November 5, 2010 - 72% of TODAY'S YOUNG ADULTS BELIEVE SOCIAL MEDIA IS A FORCE FOR CHANGE

October 13, 2010 - HOW LOCATION-BASED CHECK-IN TECHNOLOGY IS USED TO IDENTIFY 'HOT SPOTS' FOR GUYS AND GALS ON THE PROWL

October 11, 2010 - COFFEE CONSUMPTION AMONG MILLENNIALS STALLS AND WHAT MARKETERS ARE DOING ABOUT IT

October 8, 2010 - GEN-Y'S ARE ADDICTED TO FACEBOOK, ADDICTION WORST THAN COCAINE, WITHDRAWAL CAN BE LIKE TRYING TO QUIT SMOKING

October 1, 2010 - GENERATION-Y IS QUITE LITERALLY A "WIRED" GENERATION OF TECH SAVVY AND SOCIAL NERDS

September 24, 2010 - IN ORDER TO ENGAGE WITH TODAY'S GENERATION Y YOU MUST MAKE IT AN EVENT

Courtesy of an article dated November 22, 2010 appearing in MediaPost Publications Engage:GenY

FAA AWARDS SPACEX FIRST EVER COMMERCIAL LICENSE TO RE-ENTER FALCON 9 SPACECRAFT FROM ORBIT

Hawthorne, CA – Since the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Office of Commercial Space Transportation was created in 1984, it has issued licenses for more than 200 launches. 

On Monday, November 22nd, the FAA made SpaceX the first-ever commercial company to receive a license to re-enter a spacecraft from orbit.

Next month, SpaceX is planning to launch its Dragon spacecraft into low-Earth orbit atop a Falcon 9 rocket.  The Dragon capsule is expected to orbit the Earth at speeds greater than 17,000 miles per hour, reenter the Earth’s atmosphere, and land in the Pacific Ocean a few hours later. 

This will be the first attempt by a commercial company to recover a spacecraft reentering from low-Earth orbit.  It is a feat performed by only 6 nations or governmental agencies: the United States, Russia, China, Japan, India, and the European Space Agency.

It is also the first flight under NASA’s Commercial Orbital Transportation Services (COTS) program to develop commercial supply services to the International Space Station and encourage the growth of the commercial space industry.  After the Space Shuttle retires, SpaceX will make at least 12 flights to carry cargo to and from the International Space Station as part of a Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) contract for NASA.  The Falcon 9 rocket and Dragon spacecraft were designed to one day carry astronauts; both the COTS and CRS missions will yield valuable flight experience towards this goal. 

The license is valid for 1 year from the date of issue.

COMMENTARY:   SpaceX is developing a family of launch vehicles and spacecraft that will increase reliability and performance of space transportation, while ultimately reducing costs by a factor of ten.  With the Falcon 1 and Falcon 9 rockets, SpaceX has a diverse manifest of launches to deliver commercial satellites to orbit.  After the Space Shuttle retires, the Falcon 9 and SpaceX’s Dragon spacecraft will start carrying cargo, including live plants and animals, to and from the International Space Station for NASA.  Falcon 9 and Dragon were developed to one day carry astronauts.

Founded in 2002, SpaceX is a private company owned by management and employees, with minority investments from Founders Fund, Draper Fisher Jurvetson, and Valor Equity Partners.  The company has over 1,100 employees in California, Texas and Florida.  For more information, and to watch the video of the first Falcon 9 launch, visit the SpaceX website at SpaceX.com. 

I profiled SpaceX in a previous blog post dated August 27, 2010 if you are interested in learning more about America's first commercial space company. 

Courtesy of a SpaceX press release dated November 23, 2010