ETEC 522 – May 2012

David Vogt 7:36 am on May 6, 2012

0 votes

Log in to leave a Comment  

• 

  karonw 7:54 pm on May 22, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply

  No, I will not invest in this venture. The selling point of Myngle is that it will allow students to take lessons anywhere and anytime so it is like a multi-language online school. However, the elevator pitch lacks clarification it mentions that Myngle can be used globally but it does not provide a realistic market size or target audience in the pitch itself. It states that it is more competitive compared to other ventures because it brings the traditional language to an online platform yet it lacks clarification as to how it outbeats the other language learning ventures that’s out there as many of them can be accessed globally and can teach traditional language online as well. In my perspective the innovative advantages presented in the pitch were too general and do not really have a winning point.

  The pitch was a very brief summary about the product including personal connections; I felt that minimal information was really provided.

  The presenter lacked some excitement and enthusiasm which did not successfully capture my interest nor attention.

  The elevator pitch was done by the founder of Myngle which I believe did have some credibility.

  Reference:

  Myngle elevator pitch – 2008 accenture innovation awards( myngle 1.0 ) (2008). [Video podcast]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpCIcy4W0ec&feature=player_embedded

• 

  ping 11:14 am on May 24, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply

  No, I will not invest in this venture. The pitch was performed by the founder of Mingle, who introduced herself as an qualified language education businesswoman, but she mentioned nothing about her team, neither instructors to design and deliver the online language lessons, nor managers help her to run the venture. As we know those people are crucial for the success of an educational venture. Her venture concept was unclear, with little information about the online platform and no information about courses. I’ve got no idea of how this venture is different and competitive compared to existing online language schools. Their marketability is not credible too with unclear target customers, unstated market size, no share or revenue estimation. She did point out the pain point that people need to learn languages for communication, but there was not persuasive solution to solve the pain. There was not venture plan, no roadmap to show where the venture would go, and no word about the Ask and Return of an investor. In a word, I will not put my money in a venture only run on a dream.

  Yes Karon, I also think the presenter was not enthusiastic enough. It seems she’s not very optimistic or confident about the venture’s prospects herself.

  • 

    janetb 3:18 pm on May 24, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply

    Hi,

    I agreed with both your and Karon’s critique – a personal approach to a pitch but not enough hard information. I had said that the presenter was “enthusiastic and sincere” but after reading your critiques, I think I agree with you. I do think she seemed sincere and somewhat enthusiastic about making a difference in the world, but not particularly enthusiastic about the venture.

  • 

    karonw 9:17 pm on May 24, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply

    Hi Ping,

    I felt that the presenter tried to use the personal connection to grab the audience’s attention but really too little information was provided. I find that this venture pitch to be relatively short as well, 8-10 mins would be the ideal timeframe perhaps the pitch should have been a couple mins longer and cover the additional information that it is missing.

    Karon

• 

  janetb 3:12 pm on May 24, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply

  NO, I would not invest in this venture. Overall, I felt that this pitch lacked information and left me wondering exactly what Mingle is, but without the hook or inspiration to make me want to find out.

  I gathered that Mingle is an online language program that came about because the creator wanted to “make a difference…loved languages…and knew enough about eCommerce”. While wanting to make a difference in the world is certainly laudable, there was nothing in that opening statement that made me feel like the creator had the knowledge or background to make this venture work. I would have preferred more concrete information about the presenter’s skill with languages and her training or background in eCommerce. The phrase “knew enough about eCommerce” left me skeptical and uncomfortable from the start of the pitch. Does that mean she knows just enough? Or knows enough to get by, but is not really proficient?

  The presenter did an adequate job of explaining why learning a different language is a valuable goal. She stated that languages help us understand other cultures and that learning another language might help people find employment in some countries where employment opportunities are limited. However, she failed to indicate any of the reasons that Mingle might be better than existing online language programs, or how it might fill a niche that the others do not. She did indicate that the program could bring language education to the general public, but did not explain how that public would be reached.

  The presenter seemed very enthusiastic and sincere, but the pitch left me with the impression that there was little concrete knowledge to back up that enthusiasm. I support the idea of someone wanting to make a difference in the world, but it is not enough for me to stake money on the venture.

  • 

    karonw 9:19 pm on May 24, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply

    Hi Janet,

    Great critique! I felt the same, it seems like this venture is only providing us the basic information about Mingle but not really in depth as to why it is more competitive compared to the rest of the other online software out there.

    Karon

  • 

    ping 10:47 am on May 25, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply

    Hi Janet and Karon,

    I totally agree with you that the pitch provides no in-depth information, and the presenter is trying to draw in audiences by her enthusiasm but not for the venture. I find the EVA criteria are very helpful for us to see through the coverage of a pitch and find its true value for investment.

    Ping

• 

  maybacon 7:32 pm on May 26, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply

  No, I would not invest in this venture. While Ms. Tognetti appears congenial and professional as a presenter, she did not explain what the product was in enough detail for me to know what I might be investing in. She describes Mingle as something that would allows students to take lessons anywhere or at any time – but how? Is Mingle an on-line service? A global language program? I did not know. In terms of marketability, the product sounds somewhat similar to asynchronous distance education, but without a clearer understanding of what the product is, it is not possible to assess its marketability. Finally, the pitch did not really delineate the direction of the venture, making it hard for me to calculate the benefits and risks involved.

  • 

    Kenton Hemsing 10:02 pm on May 26, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply

    I agree completely with you on these points. She doesn’t provide much, if any, information about what the service is they provide and how they plan to achieve their goals. Or even, what is their goals.

• 

  Kenton Hemsing 10:00 pm on May 26, 2012 Permalink | Log in to Reply

  Based on the elevator pitch supplied, I would not invest in Myngle. But not based my personal research of the company, I am more intrigued and interested and would possibly invest. The elevator pitch does little to provide the necessary information about the company and how I, as an investor in the company, would be able to make money, or even how the business works.

  Language learning is a globally wide education market, but the CEO, even though passionate, failed to make me confident in investing in the company.
  • Pain Point: Language learning can be difficult on one’s own, which is where Myngle helps out, even if you are wanting to learn a language that there are no courses for in your own area, you can use Myngle to learn.
  • Solution: The organization allows learners to connect with real native speaking teachers from around the world in an effort to learn the language.
  • Differentiation: Many people would be interested in using a language learning system that connected them with real people to help them learn a language, a personal tutor is the best way to gain knowledge of a language.
  • There is no mention of how an investor would be able to make money on their investment in the company,
  1. CEO & Team:
  • CEO Credibility: The CEO is passionate, but provides little information about how the company was started and what her role will be onward, and why this venture is important to her.

  2. Venture Concept:
  • Venture Concept: The concept is good, but the presentation of the CEO lacks information and further information of what the company doe and how it plans to accomplish its goals.

  3. Marketability:
  • Opportunity Space: Language learning has a very large number of possible customers, however, with the presentation of the CEO this information is lacking about the company.
  • Competitive Edge: The service is an excellent one, but this was not conveyed in the initial elevator pitch. The product provides individual tutors and lessons to learners with real people and native speakers, however, this information was not mentioned in the pitch.

  4. Venture Plan:
  • Market Readiness: Again, the product is good but the pitch is not. There is no mention as to how this product will be met in the marketplace or how it has already been doing in the market.
  • Exit Strategy: There really is no mention of the future goals of the company and any idea of how the company will look in 2, 5, or even 10 years.
  • Investor Affinity: For me, this would be a possible investment but the pitch would not get the organization through the door to discuss further. This is a good example of how a product could be excellent, but the pitch fails get the proper attention from investors.