When I read about inventions and ideas, I see that many of the responses say to “execute” in order to gain the attention of VCs. What are s

In a small small nutshell:

  1. Refine your business model, sketch up a minimum viable product (MVP).
  2. Build and offer the MVP, test and record market response. If it does not gain significant traction, change your model/product, until it does or let it be.
  3. If it gains significant traction, talk to the investors. Tell them that you need money to scale and execute the product fully.

If you need more advice on how to go from idea to business model to MVP, just ask.

See the answer on Quora:

When I read about inventions and ideas, I see that many of the responses say to “execute” in order to gain the attention of VCs.  What are some tips for this execution process?

Advertisements

Will Google make Maps available as a standalone app for iOS 6?

I think that strategically, it would make a lot of sense for Google to release a standalone App.

Apple’s efforts to ban their opponent from their closed system have gotten more and more rigorous, but as we see with Chrome for iOS, the Search Giant is shooting back. Google is sure – just like Apple – that they have the superior product, and that is why they see the release of Google Chrome for iOS as a key link to their own infrastructure. The same goes for Google Maps, even though the conversion rate is not as high as with a browser, because users can get a very good user experience out of using a maps app without signing in for personalized features. But still, it makes sense, because in such an app, Google could integrate, say, Google+ and other services (now that they aren’t being told by Apple how that app has to look anymore) to convert more and more users to their services.

So yes, of course they should make a standalone Maps app for iOS 6. Will they? Hard to say. I’d bet on yes. At least a simple one.

//Edit: As reported a coule of days ago, the licensing contract between Apple and Google regarding the YouTube app for iOS has also expired, resulting in Google developing a standalone version of its popular video service for iOS (source: http://www.engadget.com/2012/08/…).

See the answer on Quora:

Will Google make Maps available as a standalone app for iOS 6?

Do patents offer any kind of protection for innovation in delivery or a process?

Almost none.

Even if your stuff is patented that won't stop someone in a remote country that the US has no legal access to copying it right away. Plus: you have to maintain surveillance on people stealing your ideas.

Three things that help, are:

– complexity (e.g. technological complexity)
– speed (e.g. scaling/growth speed for market penetration)
– good lawyers (that watch the market and immediately shut the door on copycats if possible)

See the answer on Quora:

Do patents offer any kind of protection for innovation in delivery or a process?

Should a startup compete in a certain industry by getting more traffic/users or open an API for all competitors to use its products?

It's actually not about doing one or the other but about deciding on each strategic element separately, and there are no general reasons against doing both. Also, doing the latter can lead to the former. And, concluding: you do not have to open an API for all your competitors to use it. Depending on the actual circumstances, that could be a dangerous decision.

See the answer on Quora:

Should a startup compete in a certain industry by getting more traffic/users or open an API for all competitors to use its products?

Should HTC rebrand itself?

Ask yourself one question: What does HP mean to consumers?

The answer is: a lot. The brand is heavily associated with lots of connotations. This is because of the companies' large brand heritage. So is HTC.

Remember: a couple of years ago (or a couple more) most people didn't even know HTC. Then they knew them as innovators. Now they know them as that business brand that's not sexy anymore and fails to stay up to par with the other companies because of its update-averse system UI. But the brand still has a lot of heritage as an innovator. They are 'one of the great' companies in the mobile computing business.

The first false assumption here is that, for a brand which already exists for some time now and has created a decent brand awareness with its stakeholders, a rebranding always helps.

Rebranding a company costs millions of dollars, and – to a business in decline like HTCs –  can also be a massive threat. Brand recognition, brand sympathy – all those are connected, deeply linked to your brand name.

When most people think about a name change they tend to think most about what they would like better about a new name, about what chances a new name opens for a company. They tend to think less about the connections lost. If HTC were a young company just now entering the consumer market, I would also suggest to them to get a name that fits better (by the way: 'age-tee-cee' is not the worst acronym you can have).

Ask yourself this: would it make sense for HP to rename? If not, why? They also have a struggling hardware business and are desperately seeking for new orientation and a new vision for their company.

So, the real question we should ask ourselves, is: 'Should HTC rebrand itself today, under the given circumstances?'

Yes, HTC would benefit from having a different name.

No, HTC would not benefit from a rebranding now and under the given circumstances it faces today.

Rebranding does not always make sense. Here's one of the many nice little articles about failures in rebranding.

http://www.businessinsider.com/r…

If HTC have a good advisor, he'll tell them what they need is a new R&D strategy and what they don't need is a new brand, even if that advisor makes less money by doing so.

See the answer on Quora:

Should HTC rebrand itself?