This is awesome. The lack of common API in IoT can be quite frustrating. I see this similarly to Twilio abstracting away the nuances of every Telco and making it all API accessible. You would have guessed that IoT vendors would have figured this out, but alas, we are here.
Thank you for building this!
I agree. Perhaps using wireframes was not the best analogy. I studied computer science and spent quite a few years as a developer, both inheriting code bases, and building my own, so i do appreciate code thats built to scale! (though to be honest, mine rarely was...)
Particle.io
It used to be called Spark Devices. They successfully shipped the spark core, then Root Ventures led their series A (we were called Lion Wells back then)....i know, so many name changes!
Ok. I think I understand.
I'm gonna step right out there and show my bias. I absolutely HATE the iLok. I bought myself a laser cutter for my wedding (she got a ring, i got a 90watt), and it came with an iLok for the horrible software that the chinese company built. It just takes up a USB port i could otherwise use.
That being said, its a great tool for very big, old software companies that have to protect from pirating.
I think that you have an entirely different play at hand. Because you are building a platform, you dont care if people pirate. What you just want to be sure of is that people aren't sharing logins. Soooo....just make the logins tie to personal info. Back in the day, when I used to send sensitive PDFs, I would just make the password on the PDF the recipients last 4 of their SSN. I could basically guarantee they wouldnt send the PDF around. The equivalent in your situation is to use Oauth with something like LinkedIn or Google. For the users to share your account, they would need to create an fake LinkedIn or Google account...and if you system is all about lead generation, that becomes crippling.
Overall, i dont care about iLok vs another form of protection. For me, the most important thing you are thinking about is can you create an amazing amount of value for your customer. Can you get them hooked, and improve their (business) life. If you can, then you can put a dollar amount on that improvement. I used Bloomberg terminals many moons ago, and it was not the best software in the world, but the data was immensely valuable. So we paid.
I agree that its not a forgone conclusion that kickstarter traction == product market fit....but if your KS campaign is well executed, it could be.
Essentially, i see KS as much more of a community builder and low cost testing grounds for market development.
A really great KS campaign can tell a great story of audience discovery through advertising purchases. For example, when we launch Spark (now Particle), we thought it would be hardware hobbyists. After looking through the list of backers, we found out that it was actually professional engineers, looking for a good wifi solution for prototyping. Had we focused on shipping before talking with our audience, we would have put our energy into the wrong place.
With Prynt for example, we found a specific demographic (young female) was the best click thru we had...this changed our collateral and retail conversations.
Then there is the question of what qualifies as a "successful campaign"? If you sell your product at a loss (I can point to some examples) and sell over a million, i dont know if i consider that a success. Whereas, Particle has done multiple 600k plus campaigns. For a consumer product that might be OK, but for a developer kit, that represents a massive amount of LTV.
All in all, i would say that I dont invest entirely based on a kickstarter campaign (and most often commit before the campaign happens) but the more data the better, and the more action the team has done, the better to learn their behaviors.
As the founder of one of the hardware focused firms listed (ROOT/VENTURES -- http://root.vc) I couldn't be happier that the crew at bolt.io wrote this article.
I'm also a huge fan of HN, so if anyone has specific questions to ask about the VC approach to hardware, lets hear em.
Ok. I'm gonna try some stream of consciousness answering...
I always need to see someone having done some difficult technical development. As an engineer myself, it makes my job so much more fun (i do code/design review with every startup i invest in!). Seeing a team build a prototype shows another level of commitment. I've built hardware, so i know how much more time/effort/money it takes over a software wireframe...It also minimizes one of the risks of the startup. Can the team build what they say they can build? I see 3 primary risks of building a startup; technical, team, and market. My goal is to invest when as many of those are solved, but completely understanding that because i am a seed stage investor, will never see all 3 de-risked before i invest.
Some of my investments were during a kickstarter (Prynt and Particle fka Spark.io)
Others I invested pre-kickstarter (Shaper -- shapertools.com)
And others are not meant for crowdfunding (Plethora, Momentum Machines)
The question of an accelerator vs going direct to VC is a different story. I see accelerators helping a tremendous amount with first time hardware entrepreneurs...and since the hardware startup space is so new, thats almost everyone! However, there are experienced hardware founders, and I have definitely invested in teams that have not gone through accelerators (Plethora -- seasoned entrepreneurs, DFX Machina -- Senior ex-Apple founders)
Overall, its never to early to speak with a VC or accelerator. We are here to support the ecosystem. That means inspiring potential founders to go for it, and help educate those inspired to take the rights steps, and avoid the mistakes of others.
As a hardware investor (founder of Root Ventures, mentioned in the article), I'd be careful to differentiate between funds raised from investment vs kickstarter or crowdfunding. At the most basic level, $'s raised via kickstarter should sit on your balance sheet as a liability. There is an expectation that you will deliver product equaling the amount you raised. Of course there are margins baked into the product price, but VC money is truly there for business development. We have invested in several very successful companies who have had millions of dollars in successful campaigns on kickstarter. Each and every time, the KS money is earmarked for delivering the promised product (tooling, Mfg, shipping), while the VC money is used to build a company (recruiting, office space, salaries, travel).