Hi,

Coming late made me think of presnting it differently for a change, hope it’s not that distracting for you 🙂

Here it’s ;

ETEC522 – Pitch Pool Ammar Al-Attiyat as an EVA

Regards,

Ammar

Here is a link to a summit held by Standford regarding Venture Capital and education.

Here is a link to the summit home site and a few of the associated companies.

VC Investment Summit 2009

Questar Assessment

George Lucas’ site

Eduventures

Ingenia

I found that that Materi’s pitch was well paced. You could follow it easily, especially with the inclusion of slides. However, Materi did not display much passion when she spoke and in my opinion, this reduced the impact of the pitch.

Materi’s credentials are solid and her speaking at several conferences such as CSTD attest to her knowledge in this area. While she notes that the core team of designers and consultants have Masters or have appointments at Universities, we don’t know much else about the core team. No mention is made of the credentials requirements for the contract hires. While we can hope they hold the same level of credentials, this is not addressed. The size of the core team and the number of contracts needed for this venture is also not clearly addressed and this raises concerns as to whether this has been considered.

The business model does not really address how Ingenia will address the cultural, language and political/social environment of Vietnam. While they have partnered with a local Vietnamese software firm, will they be relying on them to conduct the majority of the business dealings? Materi also makes note of a project with the Ministry of Fisheries in Vietnam as an illustration of Ingenia’s experience in Vietnam, but no mention is made on the scope of the project or success. Testimonials from this project along with others would have been nice. The addition of a few quotes would have added credibility to the pitch. I am not sure if Ingenia have a technical edge; Materi mentions a Japanese Consortium already operating in Vietnam. I did not hear anything in the pitch to make me believe Ingenia offers anything unique or technologically innovative; rather it sounds more like they are resting their success on tapping into a territory which has not had much exposure to e-learning.   

The goal is to establish Ingenia as a major e-learning service provided in Vietnam. This goal is quite board with not much focus on specifics. I would have liked to know what is considered a major service provider (what percentage of the population would constitute as major? How many contracts would this equate to?). There is also no reference to timeline in this pitch. What are the major milestones of the project and what dates are attached to these?

UBC IT Services

Dodds is very confident in his delivery. He is well versed in the mission and vision and speaks to them with ease. Dodds does not speak specifically to the credentials of the management team, however in mentioning that 5 Vice Presidents sit on the executive steering committee this adds further credibility and indicates that there is a level of accountability.

The business model to partner with client groups and to work at a strategic level makes logical sense and emphasizes how IT services and assist them and to work collaboratively. Dodds emphasize on keeping the strategy current and evolving indicates that they are not resistant to change. A competitive advantage is the reputation of UBC and collaboration. By being in tune with their clients and by seeking out best practices through town halls and peers/competitors UBC IT services is ensuring they have their finger on the pulse of the future.  In the closing, Dodds mentions the need for a vision of the future state for 2, 3 and 5 years; as such I would have liked to have heard what the 2, 3 and 5 year future state of UBC IT Services is during this pitch.

Here are a few things I found while surfing:

The Entrepreneurial Foundation of Saskatchewan has some information on what is necessary to be investment-ready:

http://www.efsk.ca/services/investment-ready.html

This column has some good tips on pitches, including the 10/20/30 rule: 10 slides, 20 minutes including questions, 30 point font.

http://www.businessweek.com/smallbiz/content/oct2007/sb20071019_563293.htm

This is my evaluation of the Royal Roads pitch. The open courseware initiative at MIT is successful, and the creation of  the open courseware consortium both points towards the concept of open courseware as being successful. The pitch for RRU is asking for money without a cash return – not in itself a problem since I believe investing in education is a smart move, but for the reasons outlined below I feel this pitch is weak.

Recombo 2005

CEO Credibility:

I think that Brad McPhee’s ability articulate how he and his company have morphed with market forces  shows that he and his team are paying attention to the market and are knowledgeable of the field within which they work.  McPhee is also able to clearly articulate how his product and services work and  how those functions help his clients and make his company solid.

Management Team –

I would be somewhat concerned with the management team.  The need to expand the company from 12 to 22 is a serious concern.  I think McPhee is aware of these challenges and alludes to them as he emphasizes the need to maintain the company culture.  McPhee identifies the challenges, but simply identifying them does not necessarily mean that they can be easily overcome.

Business Model –

A key component is that the company is adaptable. Recombo has a focus on their product and they have a clear goal of a 100 million dollar business.  They have lighthouse customer a publishing firm Mindreader and plan to use them as an avenue through which they can access Mindreaders clients. Mindreader has agreed to provide access as Recombo provides financial incentives to Mindreader when business is created through this channel. Recombo is primarily trying to prove their product and services in order to demonstrate success.  I think building a solid reputation while working through known avenues will be a great way to move the company to the next step.

Competitive Products –

I wish that McPhee had expanded upon the field in which he operates.  From the discussion I was not able to discern what competition Recombo faces.

Market Readiness –

They are ready for the market and are now taking time to build a company name and reputation.  By using a proven technology and spreading the word the company will be able to expand and enter a larger market with a proven technology and company.

Technical Innovation –

The recombo connector connects multiple interfaces and systems and eliminates the difficulties of having multiple platforms within a system.  The innovation itself is a great product, but as I am not aware of the market place in which it operates I do not know if they have the ability to maintain an edge over competitors.

Exit Strategy –

I think that the exit strategy is not clear.  Although they are looking the acquisition by a major player such as IBM, the target range and the price point is not yet decided.  I think that a set target needs to be established. Perhaps it is the 100 million dollar price.

Overall Investment Status –

I would invest money with Recombo.  But, I would first need to research the market place a little more before entering the arena.  McPhee could have elaborated a little more on the competition to build a well rounded view of the company in context.   I would also want an exit strategy to be specified.

Is Recombo still in business? It seems that the latest news is from 2008.

Recombo

Just a few thoughts.

Noah

Based on my rookie role as an EVA, I summarized my perceptions of Ingenia and Recombo2005:

As a side note (not sure if it is appropriate here or not) I found the differences in the Recombo presentations fascinating. The 2005 presentation was (in my opinion) more polished and engaging than the 2004 pitch, with the same CEO presenting.

I was web browsing for ideas and stumbled across this chapter of a book which I found helpful. As a business “rookie” I am not able (yet) to judge it for merit.

www.eoni.com/sbdc/BookChapters/chapt2.doc

Royal Roads Pitch

Much has been said about the RRU pitch by Burgess. Here are my thoughts and impressions. I apologize for any repeats. I used the basic bullets a few of you used:

• CEO Credibility – Does this person exude capability and convey confidence that they will achieve success against all obstacles?
  • The speaker provides a brief history, and a detailed presentation with many visuals however I do not feel a sense of credibility or confidence within the speaker. With a pitch I want to be sold. Within the first minute of a ten minute pitch I should be hooked. This presentation wanted me to skip forward. More credibility and a “hook” other than nice pictures would boost effectiveness in my opinion.

• Management Team – Have they assembled a stellar team along with the other human and material resources required for success
  • It was mentioned that there were qualified individuals and a team. Time was spent on this yet in the end , I still wasn’t “hooked”.

• Business Model – Is this feasible? – have they done their homework? – are their arguments and information accurate and compelling?
  • Burgess and her team have demonstrated that they have done their research and are well informed about the area. They have spent a great deal of time examining MIT.

• Competitive Products – What is a realistic market size, market share and selling price that these products or services can capture in a very competitive world?
  • With the online market and the ever-changing dynamics of technology it is difficult to confirm a market size and share.

• Market Readiness – How long and difficult is their critical path to success?
  • It will take time, and focus on building reputation and relationships in order to build and create market readiness/success. I would say up to 4-5 years. Unfortunately plenty can change in this time too politically, technologically, and also with staffing. The ability to adapt will be necessary.

• Technical Innovation – Do they have an edge, and can they keep it?
  • RRU has an existing positive reputation that can be used to support new initiatives . Together with retaining the project leaders and enthusiasm they may be able to maintain this as an edge.

• Exit Strategy – Do they really know what success looks like – is their destination clear.
  • I would argue that rather than looking for the “final” picture of “success” is not as important as the smaller indicators of success. Establishing staged indicators allows for ongoing reflection, improvement, and also a means to promote any success areas along the way.

• Overall Investment Status – Am I going to risk my investment capital on this proposition?
  • From just viewing this video a couple times I am going against the post of a few of you in the course and say no I would not risk a cent. It is well researched has potential and I agree with much of it, but I am not sold in a way that I would invest. In my opinion they need to work on the presentation of their pitch much more.

Wow. We’re moving forward fast so far here in 522! There have been many links, & post and it has been almost a race to follow. I do feel like I jumped into “bootcamp”.I’ll add to the wealth of info. This is a wiki that has helped me with putting some concepts into perspective. This is site dedicated to global business it was created by an MBA student who has collected notes, observations, and ideas about venture capitals.

GloboTrends wiki for Global Business

This article caught my attention, especially after listening to the Ingenia pitch. Canadian investors are looking at education in India as a potential market. At the end of the article they list some of the investments, one of which is eLearning. Maybe Ingenia should be looking at India as well…..

http://canada-indiabusiness.ca/2009/04/vcs-give-india-education-high-marks/