Have some fun while learning chemistry:
[youtube]http://youtu.be/J0iQhn5dYqE[/youtube]5 thoughts on “Elementeo”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Have some fun while learning chemistry:
[youtube]http://youtu.be/J0iQhn5dYqE[/youtube]You must be logged in to post a comment.
Yes, I would invest in this venture! It is evident in this pitch that Anshul has worked hard in creating a viable product. He shows a lot of enthusiasm and energetically responds to questions. He identifies a lack of “fun” in the chemistry classroom and presents a card based game that seeks to remedy the issue. Through his description and use of the catch phrase “Create, Combat and Conquer”, Anshul demonstrates his own passion for his product. Anshul also identifies a specific amount of money to get off the ground and when expected returns are and a time period for those returns. He also indicates his goal of becoming one of the top educational games on the market. Anshul has a fairly polished product ready to share with the public, which increases interest. Items lacking in his pitch are an overview of competition and potential pitfalls, as well as partners in his venture. All things considered, this is a well though out product and pitch.
Yes, I would invest in this venture, with a caveat that the CEO identified can provide evidence that he is supported by a strong (and adult) management team. Yes, I realize that this is not a simple YES or No answer. However, business often has caveats and those funding the venture can most certainly name their criteria. I like the enthusiasm of this young CEO as well as his ‘closer touch’ to the potential market.
This decision is base the following elements being present (or not):
Pain Point: Yes: Chemistry is not interesting to many.
Solution: Yes: Chemistry card game that teaches chemistry in a fun and interesting way.
Differentiation: Yes: “Inject fun into education”
Marketing: Partial: Global market identified by specifics not identified in short elevator pitch.
Championship: No: No information provided.
The Ask: Yes: Clear ask of 100,000
The Return: Partial: Goal of expected revenue (1 million) + to get into the top 10 games on Amazon stated however direct investor return was not given.
CEO and Credibility: Partial: CEOs name, age and location provided.
Management Team: No: No information provided.
Venture Concept: Yes: The idea appears both original and feasible. Considering the current gaming culture that includes both online and card games, this idea may appeal to its target audience. There is an equal likelihood of it appealing to the adult generation who may potentially gift this game.
Marketability: No: The pitch didn’t include metrics on the size of the potential market.
Venture Plan: Yes: Market readiness was inferred as the CEO showed a prototype of the game. While a goal was clearly stated, I would have concern regarding the age and experience of this young CEO.
Gut feeling: Non quantifiable but vital: There is passion with this young CEO for his very solid idea. Due to his location (Silicone Valley) one can speculate that there may be additional unofficial and unpaid management (family + family friend support and talent) that could be critical.
I am very interested in this product and would invest in this venture. Anshul is very enthusiastic about the game and it appears to be simple enough for students to play and learn about chemistry. As the creator Anshul was eager to answer and respond to questions. He identified a need and came up with a very viable product that will help students.
No, I would not invest in this venture.
When I analyze it against the deconstruction criteria, the CEO’s credibility and experience can be questioned, but I’d like to leave that to last, to avoid suggestions of ageism.
I don’t believe the opportunity space exists, especially in the size which the CEO is hoping for. General board game sales of the most popular board games are 1 to 2 million per year. The space occupied by this game is so specific, that demographically I would imagine just age considerations would drop this to 20% of that number. Factoring in gender and subject considerations, I think we might get it to 2% of that optimistically; which would be approximately 40,000 units as his absolutely best case scenario.
I believe the primary problems exist in the opportunity space and the venture concept. This concept is not original, as on the surface it seems to borrow elements from Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh cards, which I see younger students playing with. This last point is crucial. Most students have abandoned the fantasy and make believe required for these games by Grade 6. However, chemical elements aren’t yet introduced in Grade 6 curriculum. There is a disconnect between the material being delivered and the manner of delivery.
As well, the use of armies and combats may disinterest some female participants, furthering the exclusion already created by gender stereotypes of female participation in science. This will effectively halve your possible market.
There is no competitive edge, other than the game concept.
Coming back to the CEO, there is much experience to be gained. I’ve struggled with wording this kindly, but there is an immaturity which believes that others will share his enthusiasm for this game. As well, I believe there are visions of glamorous entrepreneurialism rather than the true grit necessary for success. The $100,000 for the development of this game is entirely unnecessary. Where would it be spent?
The game is already created. A professional run of possibly 32000 cards would cost about $2000. Turnaround time on an existing print order can be a week. Once he sells his first 200 sets, he can re-invest and continue. Where does he plan on spending the other $98000? Marketing? While possible, again I don’t believe the opportunity space would justify this. Will he just buy more inventory? Wasteful and an unnecessary loss of liquidity.
I commend the CEO for his efforts. However, it is a micro scale operation looking for larger scale funding. As well, as I mentioned in another post, as teachers taking on the roles of EVAs, we have the bonus question of asking, “Would I use it?” Unfortunately I don’t see this game being understood in the lower grades where it would be enjoyed, or enjoyed in the older grades where it would be understood. And I would be unable to invest in it.
John
I apologize for the lateness of my posts this week; I’ve been dealing with a bit of illness.
No, I wouldn’t invest in this venture as it stands, even though the gaming concept is brilliant. The problem I see is that gamers are no longer looking for card-games but want to be online.
I’d be far more interested if this were an interactive gaming app on the cloud that any science teacher could link to.