Loading...
Answers
MenuWhat are the hottest technological innovation today that are investment-worthy?
This question has no further details.
Answers
Investors on the East Coast and West Coast are polar opposites. It's a generalization, since there is variation within those regions as well, but here are a few generalizations to help you play to your audience.
BAY AREA: Big ideas (with some foundation under them) win, the kind of ideas that can produce 1000x+ returns. If the space is going to be owned by whichever company gets to market with a good product first and/or the value will be in billions if they own a huge market (think SnapChat).
PHILLY/NYC/ETC: Great for biotech. For SaaS and other tech, focus less on "hottest" innovations and more on how to displace industry leaders in big markets (like SalesForce) with something that is simpler and solves a major pain point in a way that the industry leaders do not.
IMPORTANT: Regardless of which region you plan to raise funds in, ignore what's "hot" and focus on where you have unique insight and experience. If you are an engineer, try Internet of Things or a startup catering to some engineer-heavy industry you're familiar with. If you're a doctor, don't try to start a social network for teens - start one for patients and their family/friends (another hot space), or something else highly related to your experience. If you have credibility in your space, your odds of success are MUCH higher, and therefore investors will be more eager to invest in you.
If you want help identifying the right investors and creating a pitch deck that doesn't get thrown in the trash, schedule a call and I'll sign an NDA if we end up getting deep in the idea together.
While new technologies are obviously important, it is more important, IMHO, to figure out how to apply technologies to solve real world problems. Look at any of the hottest companies, snapchat, Uber, Airbnb, etc. If you get to the core of their strategies, they simply leveraged technology to solve a problem. Occasionally someone will create a new technology that on its own merits is a winner. But even those companies are solving a real world problem. Sometimes the problem is one that is subtle and people didn't even realize they had until a solution came along.
I would also look hard at the enterprise space. Many entrepreneurs are hesitant to enter this space because they believe its lame, they don't want to deal with corporations, or they don't understand the problems. But don't let those factors stop you. Many people have built very successful companies focusing on boring industries.
The other benefit to considering enterprise space is that because of the perceived negativity surrounding enterprise solutions, you'll have less competition. One other benefit is that many corporations today are hungry for solutions and turn out to be good investor partners. I have many years building solutions in the enterprise space and can talk to you in more detail about this topic.
"The internet of things" is a very hot investment space. It is a good idea because it is a revolution of hardware, so that means that the technological developments will have real world applications and a lasting consumer base.
Social networks, apps and games can all be fleeting but once people make investments in infrastructure they are usually long term.
I am spending a lot of my time with data providers that help companies manage their supply chain data and determine how to drive impact at the source of purchasing. This includes traceability elements plus tracking. For big companies this is a massive undertaking, especially as they are making more commitments to improve social, environmental and economic development. What I love about what I am seeing is the collaboration around improving qualities of life at origin etc. What types of technologies are you looking into?
The must lucrative investments will be in AI applications, like biotech and robotics. TSLA and NVDA still stand out.
Soundhound AI, Recursive AI and runners up.
Related Questions
-
Should you split equity equally with a tech cofounder if you have an MVP, some traction but you know that you're going to need a CTO when it takes off
If you and this person, *know* they won't be the CTO, then absolutely not. If there's an understanding that the engineer you are working with is going to "cap out" soon beyond the MVP, why would you ruin your cap table? This *should* help you get a reasonable amount of equity. http://foundrs.com/ The most crucial question is where this current contributor is likely going to be out of their element. Are they only front-end and have no back-end ability? If so, you really should raise (from a friend or family member) or borrow the money necessary to pay this person a reasonable cash rate. If on the other hand, they can take a successful MVP and build a reasonable back-end but will cap out on scaling it past 100,000 users, or for example, you're an enterprise company and you know you'll require a technical person to be part of closing early sales, then it's ok to give up meaningful equity. But another key question is: Are you ok to let this person define your company's engineering culture? If this person isn't capable of or comfortable managing your tech team in the early-days, this person should have no more than 10% equity. Of course, your shares and theirs (whatever you decide) should be subject to a vesting agreement (minimum 3 years and preferably 4). It's easy to give away equity when it's worth very little but as I've said here before on Clarity, imagine your company today being worth $100,000,000. Can you imagine this person contributing $20,000,000 worth of value to achieve that outcome? $30m? $50m? Here's the thing though. If this person can grow into a CTO, and wants the chance, and there's no warning signs that it will be a tough slog for them to get there, and they're a passionate believer in what's been built to date, then it's entirely reasonable to bet (with equity) that they can get there. I know a lot of CTO's of great Series A and beyond companies with amazing traction that started off as lacking a lot of the criteria of a great CTO candidate. This is an area I've helped coach a lot of startup CEOs through and have experience in myself. Happy to talk through in a call to understand the specifics of your scenario and provide more detailed advice.Tom WilliamsTW
-
Among platforms for startup funding, AngelList is the 800 pound gorilla. Does it make sense to use simultaneously other platforms like Gust, etc?
Short answer: Of course! Many angel groups require you to submit through Gust because it offers a consistency and makes reviewing applications easier. But not all use Gust same as not all use AngelList... I haven't met an angel who frowns upon using multiple platforms. I would encourage you to leverage your twitter and Facebook or Instagram to meet angels and get in their radar (don't hassle or stalk) just try to get exposed a bit to them by being part of the same meetup group, follow the same blog, membership... Subscribe to their own blog.. And when you submit funding request considerations do please send a follow up email or a call or basket of fruits if you have contact them before.Humberto Valle Texas Real Estate Investor, Wholesaler, & Airbnb SuperhostHV
-
Which country offers the best outsourcing value for tech entrepreneurs?
I've used outsourced services several times successfully. I don't think using geographic location is necessary a good indicator for outsourcing value. In my experience it depends on the type of service you are seeking. For example, I've used crowdsourcing services for logo and web designs and discovered creativity has no geographic boundaries. Neither is the skill level necessarily the only indicator for the best creative. Some designs have been submissions from design student or freelancers with no formal training. As for technical work, I seek service based on the following criteria: - technical competency and skills - communication skills - Process skills (to manage overall risk of project) - references from existing clients. Country is secondary to the above list.Indra DosanjhID
-
What companies have successfully implemented both B2B and B2C products or services? Which should I start with for the non-profit sector?
I would suggest the first question to ask is "what problem do I solve?" And of those people I solve problems for "who do I create the most value for?" In the non-profit world you need to add "How does my business help the non-profit run better and/or help the group the non-profit focuses on?" For example, if you've created a platform that drives donations, your company "has created a platform that helps you reach fundraising goals faster." What you don't want to do is market and sell to B2B and B2C audiences simultaneously. They have different ways of buying - a B2B audience needs to have their benefits quantified (using your thing makes me x amount more) - and it's extremely hard for a startup to be able to do both well. Better to start with one, execute really well and move into the other. Feel free to give me a call and we can dig into who your most valuable audience is.Aaron VidasAV
-
What does it mean to 'grandfather you in' in the tech world?
It stands for allowing someone to continue doing or use something that is normally no longer permitted (due to changing regulations, internal rules etc.)Otilia OtlacanOO
the startups.com platform
Copyright © 2025 Startups.com. All rights reserved.
