Loading ...ETNow did an interesting faceoff session with myself and Vishal Gondal at the Proto Pune edition. I quite liked the informal format - with Vishal at the other end, you can be assured of some laughter!
On a more serious note, the discussion does touch upon some of the evolution of VC space in India - with respect to people involved, localization of investment themes, and ever-growing need for an active angel environment.
Enjoyed it!!!
Especially liked the contrast between the communication styles… one the deep thinker while the other playing the quick-to-answer kid!!!
Alok,
What improvements you’d like to see in the quality (or even maturity levels) of startups that vie for attention in upcoming startup events?
Alok
Really enjoyed the chat session!
Cheers
—
@Sampad
Is Vishal serious? 50-100K% - that’s 25 to 50L - is all that startups need? I always thought people made million dollar plans at a bare minimum - we even got laughed at for suggesting that 50L would do it for a year for us. But good to know there is company. And perhaps the angel ecosystem will get better so the VCs don’t get badgered for micro-funding.
Deepak,
Vishal is right, 50L-75L is the sweet spot most really early stage entrepreneurs are looking for.
Just re-read my post, here is a qualification.
50-75L is the sweet spot most entrepreneurs *I have met who I consider to be early stage* are looking for.
Krish - In my view, the gaps and mix of startups in these events is not very different from what we see in normal course. Since there is some level of selection, hopefully the average quality of startups is better, but the qualitative issues remain the same. Most of these have to do with thinking the market through in detail, having the right team and go-to-market plan.
I also think that a key aspect of the selection exercise at startup events has to be to define what those events stand for. Currently, IMHO, there is too much focus on endorsing something that will become “successful” - a term often defined to mean “funded - and I think thats a folly. This leads to a temptation to second-guess investors, and select companies that might be closest to getting funded. What I would love to see is genuine success criteria (as businesses, even if they are not great institutional investment candidates) which are often driven by market opportunity and quality of the solution.
Alok,
Thanks. Hope the startup event runners take note of your observation (and of others like you) and tweak their selection criteria by inducting investors (at least let them run the early applicants thro the regulars and the event sponsors) so that they get some serious work to do at the event.