|
About Chris MarescaI am a business and technology strategist with 15 years experience in developing and introducing new business models and technologies to the marketplace, occasionally creating the ecosystem in the process. I work with business leaders and investors on acquisitions, adoption, community, cultural, technology, market and business strategies to build effective, high-return outcomes. My clients include 30 Global 1000 companies, 60+ startup companies, three national governments and several widely known foundations. |
Chris Maresca has not submitted any stories.
Brought to you by Floor64
About Techdirt | Contact Us | Advertise On Techdirt | Submit a Story | Twitter | Facebook
RSS
Twitter
Re: Contact Doug Kaye (as Chris Maresca)
From the Wikipedia article above:
"Doug Kaye, who had been publishing MP3 recordings of his interviews at IT Conversations since June, created an RSS feed with enclosures.[17] IT Conversations, now part of the nonprofit Conversations Network, remains the oldest still-running podcast."
Contact Doug Kaye (as Chris Maresca)
One of my old bosses, Doug Kaye, was an early pioneer in podcasting back in 1999-2001. They should definitely talk to him.
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/doug-kaye/0/24/a53
Re: English as a video game language (as Chris Maresca)
I would say that that comment could only come from someone that has NEVER learned another language. Static video of any kind is a fantastic way of improving/learning a language and interactive video is even better.
I know someone who has a perfect command of English and, more importantly, American idioms, almost solely through watching television... They are too old to have extensively played video games, but had they been younger, I have no doubt it would have played a huge part in their learning.
Re: (as Chris Maresca)
Er, I lived in Europe for almost 20 years. Bottled water was FAR more popular in Europe and existed way before it ever appeared in the US. I was always surprised at the lack of bottled water in the US in the 1970's and 1980's. Just look up brands like Spa, Vittle, Evian and, as someone else mentioned, Perrier. They've been around for a century or more.
I would actually go so far as to say that bottled water, the kind that is portable, not in 3 gallon jugs, was almost invited in Europe it's such a common staple. In fact, to this day if you go a restaurant, they will ask you if you want a bottle of water, something I've never even encountered in the US.
Re: I'll tell you whom (as Chris Maresca)
+! for good content. Among the many gems that are being lost:
- how to deal with SmartStart on Compaq servers
- how to fix your broken Nakamichi Soundspace 3
- Datsun workshop 240Z brake conversion howto
- casting plastics howto
- how to fix your broken dash on a '66 Alfa Romeo Giulia
- flooded battery specs
- homemade cnc router howto
- Jensen FF info page
- detailed parts drawings from several AWD vehicles
And that's just what I had bookmarked. I've saved all of it to PDF...
Re: Re: Re: It's about user freedom, not developer control (as Chris Maresca)
Well, that's not my point. Let me make my point abundantly clear, since you failed to parse the complete statement:
-- Because the GPL enforces locking in all sorts sneaking ways, that creates a lot of commercial opportunity. --
Talks about unintended consequences.... And, believe you me, every corporate counsel in the US (and abroad) knows this very, very well.
Re: Re: Re: It's about user freedom, not developer control (as Chris Maresca)
Well, that's not my point. Let me make my point abundantly clear, since you failed to parse the complete statement:
-- Because the GPL enforces locking in all sorts sneaking ways, that creates a lot of commercial opportunity. --
Talks about unintended consequences.... And, believe you me, every corporate counsel in the US (and abroad) knows this very, very well.
Re: It's about user freedom, not developer control (as Chris Maresca)
'open core' is a marketing term. People have being wrapping open source into commercial products for 30 years (cf. SunOS, Sendmail and GRASS, just to name a few). Nothing that Apple is doing is new, it's just an extension of what other large systems companies have been doing since the 70s (when software was free with your expensive hardware).
And the GPL forces 'lock in' in all sorts of sneaking ways, with GPLv3 taking things even further (cf. patent granting provisions).
Finally, I'd point out that open source exist on a continuum that starts with public domain and ends with the Affero GPL license. From complete freedom to heavy restrictions, and, ironically, from no commercialization potential to very good commercial drivers...
This is not a new argument (as Chris Maresca)
It's not a new argument in the open source world. This whole discussion about open vs restrictive has been around for at least 10 years. One of the huge ironies is that restrictive licenses like the GPL create really good commercial models...
However, I would say that choosing the MIT license is one of the WORST things you could possibly do. It's a terrible license as it does nothing to protect developers from liability and it's wording/terms/provisions are dated. The Apache license would have been a MUCH better choice.
Anyway, I could probably write a book on this subject having spent much of the last 10 years working on making open source viable in commercial environments....
Chris.
Insulting to Neanderthals.... (as Chris Maresca)
... they were much smarter than Sullivan...
Re: ownership (as Chris Maresca)
Maybe. But VCs rarely ever bring good leadership, it's much more common for them to fund great teams.
Except that in my experience... (as Chris Maresca)
... entrepreneurs are almost always better off never taking VC money. That's because, whatever the exit valuation, cramdown will occur everytime you miss a milestone or there is another funding event.
The net result is that a founder that took two rounds of VC funding over 5 years would have been better off not taking any funding and just bootstrapping it. Yes, the overall valuation of the company will be far lower, but the actual value to the founder will be higher, with a LOT less grief.
That said, there are a few exceptions to this if VC money can enable truly explosive growth (cf. YouTube), but that not generally the case.
There's also an Olympian ... (as Chris Maresca)
... gas station chain (AFAIK).
Seems pretty ridiculous and reminds of Nissan vs Nissan.
Chris.
Re: Yes it should (as Chris Maresca)
Problem is Speakeasy is NOT CHEAP. $40/month or so, which does included calls to 20 something countries.
I dropped Speakeasy two weeks ago (as Chris Maresca)
Their service, which I had been using for 7 years, is seriously overpriced. I moved to Sonic, which has 2x the speed for 1/4 of the cost...
Speakeasy's VOIP offering is really good, but it better be at more than $35/month. I calculated that if I used a pay-as-you-go service from CallCentric, it would be much cheaper, even while taking into account overseas calls.
It just seems that, given their price points, Speakeasy is just shooting itself in the foot. If competitors can operate at 1/4 of the price AND don't block access, well, you know what's going to happen.
Mike, I disagree.... (as Chris Maresca)
... the top down approach is useful, but one needs to understand HOW it's useful. In fact, I sometimes give a whole presentation about why the top down approach is useful because not understanding it is one reason startups don't get funding.
The simplest way to understand why a top down approach is useful is to put yourself in the shoes of a VC (yes, I know, not necessarily pretty...). If you are evaluating companies to invest in, then the total available market (TAM) is very important. Why? Because if you want 10x return on your investment, then the investment size will be dictated by the TAM. Say the TAM is $100 million. Then, in order to get $10 million out of it (as an investor) then you would expect the company to acquire 10% of the TAM, dictating a max investment of $1 million.
Not understanding this dynamic is why a lot of startups don't get funding. They ask for $10 million with a TAM of $100 million, for example. Or, they fail to convincingly explain how they will gain, say, 10% of the market.
Conversely, tactics (and it is just a tactic) like giving stuff away for free (or using open source licenses) can be a good way to get x% of the market, although you still have to work on the monetization model that will equal some % of the TAM.
I should mention that, in practice, investors will only give you a very small percent of these theoreticals as they know you will likely need more money down the line and your chances of not meeting your goals are quite high... And these are just crude examples.
Re: (as Chris Maresca)
If you are getting a visa as a startup CEO (and it happens currently by using other visa categories), then you are likely VC funded or have other funding.
Most VC-funded startup CEOs and other executives I know (and I've worked with around 70 startups) make well over $150k/year and often over $200k/year.
Paying for health insurance is not an issue.
On the other hand, sending $10-$20 million per startup somewhere else should be considered a huge issue. That's our money (yes, it's your money too, from large US institutional investors) going to places like China and India. I know one VC here in Silicon Valley who works at a firm with close to $3 billion under management that has been doing 7-10 China deals in the last 18 months.
That's money that's not being spent here, and that is a real problem. Unlike, say, your healthcare red herring.
If they regulate VCs... (as Chris Maresca)
... it will be a moot point. Cisco's Globalization initiative has already moved a lot of talent out of SV and everyday I am hearing people leaving for other countries. That said, the situation is not dire yet.
What is needed is more and easier visas for engineering/business talent and students, not less. And certainly no regulation of VCs. Because, right now, there are lot of people who came to the US to make a career in tech that are leaving and a growing number of Americans are following them.
Chris.
Re: Clearly the record company (as Chris Maresca)
+1 to that. I was once VP of Engineering at a music oriented startup and most of the 'stolen' tracks we got were from an official source of some kind.
It the worst kind of cynicism and sleaze to give people something then claim it was stolen. Typical.
I paid $1.09 for the SF Chronicle... (as Chris Maresca)
... and it was a ripoff. 1/2 the content is newswire stuff I read the night before and there is little to no actual original reporting. And what little there is concentrates on 'lifestyle' crap. Never mind the fact that the business section is the back page of another section.
As for the SFGate website, there's another useless thing. It's virtually impossible to find the ACTUAL weather in your neighborhood (wunderground is waaayyy better), events are impossible to navigate (oh yeah, and thanks for writing about how cool something was AFTER the fact), and when there are helicopters buzzing my neighborhood for hours I can never find out WHY.
Funny enough, one of the most popular parts of the SF Gate website is the article comments, an area where people love to participate despite atrocious technology.
In summary:
1. The paper version isn't worth more than 50 cents
2. The online version is worth even less
Unless they decide they are really going to be a local paper and build a better website, then it's hard to see why anyone would want to pay anything for it.