Demo Days compared: Seattle TechStars VS San Francisco AngelPad(blog.shopobot.com)
blog.shopobot.com
Demo Days compared: Seattle TechStars VS San Francisco AngelPad
http://blog.shopobot.com/demo-days-compared-seattle-techstars-vs-san-f
5 comments
I was at the Techstar's demo day. I felt the length of the pitch was perfect. Long enough to have some depth, succinct enough to keep the audience interested. 2 minute pitch at AngelPad sounds really short. It would be hard for design centric companies like smorepages.com to convey interest under 2 minutes.
(founder of design centric kout.me here)
It was definitely interesting.
The exercise of condensing our entire pitch down to 120 seconds was worthwhile. We could very quickly explain what we do, where we're going, and how we'redoing. Elevator pitches were a snap.
The best aspect of it was that it gave us more time to speak to investors afterwards. Most stayed in the room and we had an opportunity to have amazing conversations (and collect business cards) from those that might be a better fit...rather than broadcast to everybody.
That said, having never been through a 7m presentation, I can't compare against that directly. Just providing my own perspective.
When we first heard of the two minute rule, we were in disbelief. But at the end, somehow it miraculously worked.
It was definitely interesting.
The exercise of condensing our entire pitch down to 120 seconds was worthwhile. We could very quickly explain what we do, where we're going, and how we'redoing. Elevator pitches were a snap.
The best aspect of it was that it gave us more time to speak to investors afterwards. Most stayed in the room and we had an opportunity to have amazing conversations (and collect business cards) from those that might be a better fit...rather than broadcast to everybody.
That said, having never been through a 7m presentation, I can't compare against that directly. Just providing my own perspective.
When we first heard of the two minute rule, we were in disbelief. But at the end, somehow it miraculously worked.
Seattle obviously has a lot of tech talent so I can see some great startups coming onto the scene there.
This got me thinking. Are there any thematic differences in the kinds of startups popping up there? For instance, we are seeing lots of fashion startups in NY as compared to SF. What about Seattle?
This got me thinking. Are there any thematic differences in the kinds of startups popping up there? For instance, we are seeing lots of fashion startups in NY as compared to SF. What about Seattle?
Great question. No fashion startups here this time.
Some were using their experience to enter tough spaces, like working with insurance companies or doing money transfers.
A few trying to help brands / marketers reach their audience better.
A couple trying to make it easier for non-designers to build a very targeted very slick web presence.
Also a team building an actual robot, and one trying to improve on dating sites.
.. any obvious theme jump out?
A lot of commerce/ad startups (Amazon influence?) and a lot of LeadGen stuff (AllStarDirectories influence and several key investors up here seem to like that style of business). Plenty of B2B.
There's a fair bit of gaming DNA here (Valve, BigFish, PopCap) but strangely few gaming startups (there are a few). Lots of mobile stuff (notably Swype).
I'd say it's pretty all-over-the-map.
There's a fair bit of gaming DNA here (Valve, BigFish, PopCap) but strangely few gaming startups (there are a few). Lots of mobile stuff (notably Swype).
I'd say it's pretty all-over-the-map.
I'd say that Seattle has plenty of gaming startups, they just don't seek VC money. The VC money for games is primarily (exclusively?) in social games which a lot of devs aren't interested in.
I was really surprised to hear time spent explaining that "Angel investing is a great opportunity!" In SF the investors know that it's a great business and are only worried about finding the right teams.
A question for founders in other cities: do you have to try to sell the idea of "being an investor in a startup", or do you just need to sell yourself?
A question for founders in other cities: do you have to try to sell the idea of "being an investor in a startup", or do you just need to sell yourself?
I'd never sell the idea of investing in a startup. It's an area that should be left to sophisticated investors. It's not like investing in a laundromat or an apartment building.
A 7m pitch for TechStars... 2m for AngelPad. What about YC?
Back in YC S'08 pitches were between 5-6m. Now with so many teams I believe they're around 2m.
They brought them down to 2m, and then back up to 2.5m for the most recent batch. I heard it mentioned that 2.5m was discovered to be the sweet spot.
AP had 12 teams demoing, and TS had 10. How many teams at YC?
Back in '08 there were around 21 teams, now I believe there are around 60 teams.
Scuttlebutt from the Seattle network says valuations are lousy there as compared to the bay area. Did you happen to notice anything either confirming or contradicting that?