Shyam's Slide Share Presentations

VIRTUAL LIBRARY "KNOWLEDGE - KORRIDOR"

This article/post is from a third party website. The views expressed are that of the author. We at Capacity Building & Development may not necessarily subscribe to it completely. The relevance & applicability of the content is limited to certain geographic zones.It is not universal.

TO VIEW MORE CONTENT ON THIS SUBJECT AND OTHER TOPICS, Please visit KNOWLEDGE-KORRIDOR our Virtual Library

Monday, April 30, 2012

Investing in University Spin-Offs 05-01


 
 Vinit Nijhwan,






Managing Director, Boston University Office of Technology Development
U.S. public and private research universities are by far the best in the world at educating young people and conducting basic and applied research. Harvard College was founded in 1636 and was followed by many other universities up and down the east coast. However, the first university to emphasize research along with education was Johns Hopkins, founded in 1876 with a $7 million gift from railroad baron Johns Hopkins. Johns Hopkins’ model was partially adapted from German research universities. Following Johns Hopkins many U.S. industrialists became benefactors of private and public research universities: Rockefeller to the University of Chicago in 1892; Carnegie Institute in 1902, etc.

The Federal government established the National Academy of Sciences in 1863 and the Morrill Act was signed in 1862 provided federal land to states to establish public universities. The first “land-grant” college was Kansas State University which started in 1863 (where my father went for his engineering degree in the late 1940s). Michigan State University, Pennsylvania State University, Rutgers, University of Wisconsin followed closely behind. The Federal government also passed the G.I. bill after WWII that allowed hundreds of thousands military personnel to get university education. Federal institutions like the National Science Foundation (NSF) and National Institute of Health (NIH) were also created right after WWII, launching the 60-year technology led economic boom the U.S. has enjoyed. Between 1940 and 1950, the contribution of the federal government to university incomes increased from $39 million to $524 million. The direction of university research shifted away from research intended for local industry application to more basic scientific research, with applications to national goals in defense and health care.

The economic impact of U.S. research universities in commercializing their research has been immense:
* Since 1939, Stanford faculty and students have founded more than 2,454 companies, such as Hewlett-Packard, Cisco, Sun Microsystems, Google, Yahoo, contributing to the economic dynamism of Silicon Valley.

* In 2009 MIT publishedEntrepreneurial Impact: The Role of MIT. In 2009 there were 25,800 active companies founded by MIT alumni that employ about 3.3 million people and generate annual world revenues of $2 trillion, producing the equivalent of the 11th-largest economy in the world.
* According to AUTM (Association of University Technology Managers) just in 2009: 658 new commercial products introduced; 5,328 total license and options executed; 596 new companies formed; 3,423 spinoff companies still operating as of the end of 2009.    


Managing Director, Boston University Office of Technology Development
U.S. public and private research universities are by far the best in the world at educating young people and conducting basic and applied research. Harvard College was founded in 1636 and was followed by many other universities up and down the east coast. However, the first university to emphasize research along with education was Johns Hopkins, founded in 1876 with a $7 million gift from railroad baron Johns Hopkins. Johns Hopkins’ model was partially adapted from German research universities. Following Johns Hopkins many U.S. industrialists became benefactors of private and public research universities: Rockefeller to the University of Chicago in 1892; Carnegie Institute in 1902, etc.

The Federal government established the National Academy of Sciences in 1863 and the Morrill Act was signed in 1862 provided federal land to states to establish public universities. The first “land-grant” college was Kansas State University which started in 1863 (where my father went for his engineering degree in the late 1940s). Michigan State University, Pennsylvania State University, Rutgers, University of Wisconsin followed closely behind. The Federal government also passed the G.I. bill after WWII that allowed hundreds of thousands military personnel to get university education. Federal institutions like the National Science Foundation (NSF) and National Institute of Health (NIH) were also created right after WWII, launching the 60-year technology led economic boom the U.S. has enjoyed. Between 1940 and 1950, the contribution of the federal government to university incomes increased from $39 million to $524 million. The direction of university research shifted away from research intended for local industry application to more basic scientific research, with applications to national goals in defense and health care.

The economic impact of U.S. research universities in commercializing their research has been immense:
* Since 1939, Stanford faculty and students have founded more than 2,454 companies, such as Hewlett-Packard, Cisco, Sun Microsystems, Google, Yahoo, contributing to the economic dynamism of Silicon Valley.

* In 2009 MIT publishedEntrepreneurial Impact: The Role of MIT. In 2009 there were 25,800 active companies founded by MIT alumni that employ about 3.3 million people and generate annual world revenues of $2 trillion, producing the equivalent of the 11th-largest economy in the world.
* According to AUTM (Association of University Technology Managers) just in 2009: 658 new commercial products introduced; 5,328 total license and options executed; 596 new companies formed; 3,423 spinoff companies still operating as of the end of 2009.

Next Page












Sunday, April 22, 2012

University of Florida eliminates computer Science Department 04-23




University of Florida Eliminates Computer Science Department, Increases Athletics budget

Courtesy :  Steven Salzberg Forbes
Wow, no one saw this coming.  The University of Florida announced this past week that it was dropping its computer science department, which will allow it to save about $1.7 million.  The school is eliminating all funding for teaching assistants in computer science, cutting the graduate and research programs entirely, and moving the tattered remnants into other departments.
Let’s get this straight: in the midst of a technology revolution, with a shortage of engineers and computer scientists, UF decides to cut computer science completely?

Math and computer science are hard. Why bother?
Students at UF have already organized protests, and have created a website dedicated to saving the CS department.  Several distinguished computer scientists have written to the president of UF to express their concerns, in very blunt terms.  Prof. Zvi Galil, Dean of Computing at Georgia Tech, is “amazed, shocked, and angered.”  Prof. S.N. Maheshwari, former Dean of Engineering at IIT Delhi, calls this move “outrageously wrong.”  Computer scientist Carl de Boor, a member of the National Academy of Sciences and winner of the 2003 National Medal of Science, asked the UF president “What were you thinking?”
(Note to the students, if you need more quotes for your site: I think this move is shockingly short-sighted.  The University of Florida is moving backwards while the rest of the world moves ahead.)
Meanwhile, the athletic budget for the current year is $99 million, an increase of more than $2 million from last year.  The increase alone would more than offset the savings supposedly gained by cutting computer science.
Now, I’m not saying that UF has chosen football over science.  (Imagine the outcry, though, if UF cut a major sport instead of a major science department.) Actually, the real villains here are the Florida state legislators, who have cut the budget for their flagship university by 30% over the past 6 years.
Meanwhile, just two days ago, Florida governor Rick Scott approved the creation of a brand-new public university, Florida Polytechnic University, to be located near the city of Tampa.  In an unintentionally ironic statement, Gov. Scott said

“At a time when the number of graduates of Florida’s universities in the STEM [science, technology, engineering, and mathematics] fields is not projected to meet workforce needs, the establishment of Florida Polytechnic University will help us move the needle in the right direction.”
Heads up, Gov. Scott: no one is going to believe that you’re supporting technical education when your flagship university is eliminating its Computer Science Department. Since cutting support for universities seems to be a major agenda item for you and the legislature, why stop at 30%?  With just a bit more cutting, you could get rid of those annoying universities entirely.  Let the rest of the country worry about higher education! Florida can focus on orange groves and golf courses. Oh, and football.
Shyam note: 
Two years back when I wrote my first article on STEM education in USA, I got my fair share of Bouquets & Brickbats from my American brothers.Nothing  much has changed except for the pitch of discussions by intelligentsia,the pitch continuous to grow without much effect.
The growth in pitch of the intelligentsia is directly proportionate to the deafness of the politicians, which also seems to huge and growing.
Please read my article on STEM Here 
Shyam's comment on Forbes
Is this move intended to get more students for the newly established Florida Polytechnic University???
How does STEM get an encouragement in USA by entirely scrapping a Science Departments.
It is good athletics gets an increase in budget. United States needs to show way for others in encouraging sports at student level.

Pinterest now 3rd most popular in USA 04-08 View Here


77% Of Consumers Would Buy From Your Company If Your CEO Was Tweeting [STUDY] View Here


Big Brands on Twitter Struggle 04-08 View Here





Please also read my other well read articles






























Saturday, April 21, 2012

Isn't this interesting??? 04-21





DON'T CHALLENGE MECHANICAL FOR IT.

General Motors REPLY TO BILL GATES
 

At a computer expo (COMDEX), Bill Gates reportedly compared the computer industry with the auto industry and stated,
 

"If GM had kept up with technology like the computer industry has, we would all be driving $25.00 cars that got 1,000 miles to the gallon." 

In response to Bill's comments, General Motors issued a press release Stating:
 

"If GM had developed technology like microsoft, we would all be driving cars with the following characteristics (and I just love this part, esp 7th point and 10'th point):
 

1. For no reason whatsoever, your car would crash twice a day.
 

2. Every time they repainted the lines in the road, you would have to buy a new car.
 

3. Occasionally your car would die on the freeway for no reason. You would have to pull to the side of the road, close all of the windows, shut off the car, restart it, and reopen the windows before you could continue. For some reason you would simply accept this.
 

4. Occasionally, executing a maneuver such as a left turn would cause your car to shut down and refuse to restart, in which case you would have to reinstall the engine.
 

5. Macintosh would make a car that was powered by the sun, was reliable, five times as fast and twice as easy to drive - but would ! run on only five percent of the roads.
 

6. The oil, water temperature, and alternator warning lights would all be replaced by a single "This Car Has Performed an Illegal Operation" warning light.
 

7. The airbag system would ask "Are you sure?" before deploying.
 

8. Occasionally, for no reason whatsoever, your car would lock you out and refuse to let you in until you simultaneously lifted the door handle, turned the key and grabbed hold of the radio antenna. (Read CTR-ALT-DEL)
 

9. Every time a new car was introduced car buyers would have to learn how to drive all over again because none of the controls would operate in the same manner as the old car.

Thursday, April 19, 2012

What not to say in Business Plan 04-20



What Not To Say in a Business Plan


By Barry Moltz, Entrepreneur and Consultant



Sometimes I find that the company's founder is so far 'outside the box' that they 'stretch the envelope.' As an angel investor, I review more than 500 business plans each year. Unfortunately, many are so riddled with economy lingo, business jargon and clichés, that they do not communicate any real business value. In my opinion, terminology, such as disintermediation, sweet spot, ASP, best of breed, and win-win should be outlawed for the next 100 years. For building a real business, these terms are meaningless. Another challenge when reviewing business plans is that the introductory sentences sometimes stretch for an entire paragraph as the entrepreneur looks for that all-encompassing way to describe their business. 

Forget it! There isn't one. 

Many times I want to strangle the writer to simply tell me what they do in five words or less. Poor choice of words: This business makes mechanical gasoline fueled devices used for transportation more efficient by periodically sending them through an applied for patent machine to loosen the terra firma from these vehicles to make them more conducive at performing their task. Solid choice of words: We run a car wash. Another frequently used practice is to create a business plan using template software or by working from an existing plan. I do not recommend this practice and like to refer to William Sahlman in his Harvard Business case study "Some Thoughts on Business Plans." This case study has continuously inspired me to see beyond clichés and catch-phrases and better interpret misleading statements within business plans.

If the plan says: "Our numbers are conservative." 

I read: "I know I better show a growing profitable company. This is my best case scenario. Is it good enough?" Since all numbers are based on assumptions, projections in business plans are by their very nature a guess and are not conservative.

If the plan says: "We'll give you a 100 percent internal rate of return on your money." 

I read: "If everything goes perfectly right, the planets align, and we get lucky, you might get your money back. Actually, we have no idea if this idea will even work." No one can predict what an investor's return will be. Let them decide.

If the plan says: "We project a 10 percent margin." 

I read: "We kept the same assumptions that the business plan software template came with and did not change a thing. Should we make any changes?" Ensure you have developed your financial projections from the ground up.

If the plan says: "We only need a 5 percent market share to make our conservative projections." 

I read: "We were too lazy to figure out exactly how our business will ramp up." Know what it will cost to acquire customers. Gaining 5 percent market share is not an easy task in a large market.
If the plan says: "Customers really need our product." I read: " We haven't yet asked anyone to pay for it." or "All our current customers are our relatives" or "We paid for an expensive survey and the people we interviewed said they needed our product". The definition of a business is when people pay you money to solve their problems. This is the only way to prove people "need it".

If the plan says: "We have no competition".

 I read: Actually... I stop reading the plan. Always beware of entrepreneurs that claim they have no competitors. If they are right, it's a problem and if they are wrong, it is also a problem. Every business has competitors or else there is a current solution to this customer need. If there are no competitors for what the entrepreneur wants to do, there is a good chance there also is no business. So what should an entrepreneur do? Write the plan in plain and proper English. Please understand that the reader comes to the plan with no knowledge of your business. No fancy words, clichés or graphs will make them want to invest. Understand every part of your plan and be able to defend it. Use your own passion to describe your plan. Make your plan your own.

The 11 things that matter in a business plan:
  • What problem exists that your business is trying to solve. Where is the pain?

  • What does it cost to solve that problem now? How deep and compelling is the pain?

  • What solutions does your business have that solve this problem?

  • What will the customer pay you to solve this problem? How solving this problem will make the company a lot of money.

  • What alliances can you leverage with other companies to help your company?

  • How big can this business get if given the right capital?

  • How much cash do you need to find a path to profitability?

  • How the skills of your management team, their domain knowledge, and track record of execution will make this happen.

  • What is the investors' exit strategy?
Please remember, the business plan is basically an "argument" where you need to state the problem and pain, then provide your solution with supporting data and analogies.

Barry Moltz

Barry Moltz has founded and run small businesses with a great deal of success and failure for more than 15 years.

After successfully selling his last operating business, Mr. Moltz has branched out into a number of entrepreneurship-related activities. He founded an angel investor group, an angel fund, and is a former advisory member of the board of the Angel Capital Education Foundation.

Mr. Moltz is a nationally recognized expert on entrepreneurship who has given hundreds of presentations to audiences ranging in size from 20 to 20,000. As a member of the Entrepreneurship Hall of Fame, he has also taught entrepreneurship as an adjunct professor at the Illinois Institute of Technology. He has appeared on many TV and radio programs such as The Big Idea with Donny Deutsch, MSNBC’s Your Business and NPR’s The Tavis Smiley Show. He hosts his own radio show, Business Insanity Talk Radio, and writes regularly for the American Express Open Forum, Forbes.com and Crain’s Chicago Enterprise City.

.
Material in this work is for general educational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinion on any specific facts or circumstances.

Shyam's take on this article,



Direct from the horse's mouth.Could this help people prepare more VC friendly Business Plan???

My thinking is that the Business Plan should not be made with VC in mind. The plan should be closer to your dreams and objectives.and align seamlessly with the aspirations of the target group of the populace.

Do not allow a a VC to dictate how your Business Plan should be and what it should contain.

Once your Business Plan drives performance, you will have the VC chasing you. Then you can write an article for VC on 11 things that matter before approaching a start-up.

Let not VC shackle your creativity and entrepreneurial spirit.If you need to choose between a Business Plan and VC. Shelve the VC.For, you know your project better than anyone even the VC.
Let not your plan be the one among the 500 that VC peruse every year,

Let the VC firm be the one among the ten that have approached you that year. fearlessly bargain with them. if some one has to comprise, it has to be a VC not you or dream. If can't get a VC, downsize your planned outlay,raise money through private funding, if it is not you, it will be your success that will bring the VC to doors sooner or later.

Treat VC and their ideas with respect.Most of the VC are owned by people who have extraordinary business acumen and success.

And when you succeed, try to be a VC that promotes creativity & entrepreneurship.
Be a Vinod Khosla.

Don't stop at writing about Business Plans. Work to transform innovative, creative, bubbling raw talent into successful entrepreneurs.

A VC work is not all about how many Business Plans they successfully rejected, it is all about how many ordinary looking ideas they have transformed in to deliverable projects.

My sincere thanks to Barry, whose article has motivated me to write this comment.

Shyam


Antique Vespa Scooter carved out of wood 04-20




Beautiful Hand-Made Wooden Vespa - Incredible!


The Vespa scooter has a classically appreciable shape. Portuguese craftsman Carlos Alberto managed to fashion one from laminated hardwood. 


The result is stunningly beautiful.


The little scooter is based on an original Vespa which had fallen into complete disrepair, but using long-tested woodcraft techniques a flowing new body was constructed for the runabout. The main spine of the bike is fashioned from steam bent and laminated veneers upon which very nicely carved body work hangs. Even the package tray and seat are made from wood. We would have probably gone with a traditional seat, but that's just cause we're a bunch of softies like that. Realistically though, we're betting this Vespa is now quite a few pounds heftier than when it started out, and the original was not known for its swiftness so despite it's beauty it's probably kind of a pig in the performance department. Then again, if something looks that good, we'll give the zero to sixty times a pass.


#vespa #scooter #coolstuff #woodworking #woodenwednesday