Ask HN: How do I find an angel investor for my startup?
3 comments
As Tony Montana ( Scarface) said:
In this country, you gotta make the money first. Then when you get the money, you get the power. Then when you get the power, then you get the women.
In a start up context ,it means that first get some traction -- customer registrations or signups or revenues then you get your brand recognition -- people will start talking about you or your product then you get your investors.
This is what I am doing with my bootstrap.
(and much apologies for quoting a violent mobster)
In this country, you gotta make the money first. Then when you get the money, you get the power. Then when you get the power, then you get the women.
In a start up context ,it means that first get some traction -- customer registrations or signups or revenues then you get your brand recognition -- people will start talking about you or your product then you get your investors.
This is what I am doing with my bootstrap.
(and much apologies for quoting a violent mobster)
Everyone can have great ideas but its all about execution and the team. Through my experience when speaking with Angel investors and other people with money, they want to see some traction. They want users and to prove that it works and that people will use your baby. You will need to build a revenue model on projections based off your current traction. Hope this helps.
Ok. I hoped it would be as easy as showing the investor a "good" product :)
It totally depends on the investor. Some investors might see your passion and have tons of money and throw you a bone. Others want the facts and proof. My advice is to cover yourself so you don't seem naive or incompetent.
Can you describe / show your product?
Sure, it's a Windows application meant to automate installation of software on multiple workstations on your network, remotely and silently.
So it's basically like a package manager for Windows, but instead of working for your local Windows machine, it works for all the Windows computers on your network.
Think of agencies with lots of workstations that need to keep software up-to-date on each and every machine... this would normally require an IT guy going through each and every computer and manually start the installer... uDeployer does all this automatically.
More info here: http://udeployer.com/
So I guess the idea has possibilites, but would like to get connected into this entire world of investment.
So it's basically like a package manager for Windows, but instead of working for your local Windows machine, it works for all the Windows computers on your network.
Think of agencies with lots of workstations that need to keep software up-to-date on each and every machine... this would normally require an IT guy going through each and every computer and manually start the installer... uDeployer does all this automatically.
More info here: http://udeployer.com/
So I guess the idea has possibilites, but would like to get connected into this entire world of investment.
Big agencies with many Windows workstations already use Microsoft SMS or System Center (I believe that's what its called now) to deploy software over the network. How do you differentiate?
I offer latest, up-to-date, stable, 3rd party packages.
With SMS or System Center you have to create the packages yourself and/or have a system in place to fetch the latest packages.
With SMS or System Center you have to create the packages yourself and/or have a system in place to fetch the latest packages.
customers with large numbers of machines dont necessarily care about having latest software. They care about stability. They don't just upgrade willy-nilly.
Upgrading 7-zip [first entry on your screenshot] isn't compulsory. If you do upgrade, you take a risk that there will be no adverse effect.
Upgrading 7-zip [first entry on your screenshot] isn't compulsory. If you do upgrade, you take a risk that there will be no adverse effect.
Actually I tend to differ with that statement. Latest software is always more secure and less buggy. I would personally prefer having my workstations with all the latest software.
Veyron is right. While newer software may be less buggy, it isn't always. New features may break old features, or break other pieces of software.
Older software is usually vetted and proven functional in the particular corporate environment where it's deployed, doesn't conflict with other software, etc. My friends in corporate world have told me how it takes X many months for upgrades to be rolled out because they must be tested in sandboxes first to make sure nothing explodes unexpectedly.
This apparently applies to all software, from OS updates down to individual program updates.
Older software is usually vetted and proven functional in the particular corporate environment where it's deployed, doesn't conflict with other software, etc. My friends in corporate world have told me how it takes X many months for upgrades to be rolled out because they must be tested in sandboxes first to make sure nothing explodes unexpectedly.
This apparently applies to all software, from OS updates down to individual program updates.
Ok well, but you're not going to keep the version around forever... you will update at some point in time, and uDeployer can serve you when you need to.
"Latest software is always more secure and less buggy" <-- ooh that's a dangerous statement. When new features are added, sometimes bugs creep up.
I agree with Veyron. It's also a stumbling block in the sales process (my day job). Often the decision makers aren't really technical and are very afraid of bugs and crashes and changing anything. It's not impossible to get around the objection, but you should expect it.
No offense, but how old are you and are you not a native US citizen?
I am curious because your comments, and the way they are worded make it sound like you are not from the US and you are young.
I am curious because your comments, and the way they are worded make it sound like you are not from the US and you are young.
Can Y Combinator help me with this?