Loading...
Answers
MenuWhat do you guys think of the idea of a A social networking website dedicated to help individuals going through a hard time
Answers
I built Canada's first (and one of the world's first) crowdfunding websites that attracted over 115,000 members without any paid customer acquisition and distributed over $3m to charities so I can certainly attest to the fact that sites that focus on creating positive outcomes are attractive to many people.
There are however, several challenges to executing your idea well. Some of them are:
Can it be truly helpful? Just like this site (Clarity), the challenge is for the answers to be genuinely helpful to the person in need. Giving bad advice or allowing negative commentary could be incredibly damaging to the psyche and overall well-being of your community. The potential cost associated with vetting the people able to provide help could be a significant barrier.
Anonymity: I have built several applications that allow for anonymous messaging and have learned that people are reluctant to trust the promise of anonymity, so there are product challenges to getting the people to post sensitive information. These can be overcome but they are not without significant challenges.
Peer Support is challenging: Providing users an open-ended mechanism who are going through something the ability to offer suggestions to others *sounds* like a good idea, but again, can be very damaging. Extensive moderation would likely be required.
The best (i.e. potentially most helpful) service I've seen so far is a text-messaging based service for teens in crisis. Here's an article to it: http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/health-headlines/crisis-hotline-operators-reaching-out-to-teens-1-text-at-a-time-1.1217225
I think if you're going to build something, it should be mobile and figure out a way to sustain the business or service that supports paid staff or at the very least trained and vetted staff to be primarily responsible for helping individuals in need.
Happy to talk this through with you if you are (or when you become) serious about pursuing this idea.
The challenge with these kind of issues is that they are not ones people like to share. A social network requires profiles to be public & discoverable or people can't network.
I do think a site that people can privately create a profile, and reach out to curated experts, doctors, etc would be a great resource, but that being said - their are a few sites doing this in the health space (ex: http://healthtap.com).
Build a social support network will be tough, and the hard things to solve will be the social part (ex: do you require profiles to use real identities? are these profile indexed by google?, etc).
Hope that helps a bit.
I think the idea is fantastic, but you haven't addressed if you are solving a problem. Specifically, is this a problem isn't already being solved elsewhere? Is there a group of people for whom the existing solutions are inadequate?
The solution you are describing could work, but I think you need to understand what gap you are filling before you test specific parts of the solution.
Please check out another startup that is targeting the same problem:
Y Combinator Startup 7 Cups Of Tea Connects People In Need Of Emotional Support With Trained Listeners
http://techcrunch.com/2013/08/05/y-combinator-startup-7-cups-of-tea-connects-people-in-need-of-emotional-support-with-trained-listeners/
Related Questions
-
how to start earning on clarity.fm
Most of the earnings come from the people you are in contact with. The platform is not that big at the moment but it can be earned. My recommendation is to create content on your private page web, facebook, instagram ... and leave a clarity link through your work. If you need extra help call me for 15 minutes.DB
-
How much equity should I ask as a CMO in a startup?
Greater risk = greater equity. How likely is this to fail or just break even? If you aren't receiving salary yet are among 4-6 non-founders with equivalent sweat investment, all of whom are lower on the totem pole than the two founders, figure out: 1) Taking into account all likely outcomes, what is the most likely outcome in terms of exit? (ex: $10MM.) Keep in mind that 90%+ of all tech startups fail (Allmand Law study), and of those that succeed 88% of M&A deals are under $100MM. Startups that exit at $1B+ are so rare they are called "unicorns"... so don't count on that, no matter how exciting it feels right now. 2) Figure out what 1% equity would give you in terms of payout for the most likely exit. For example, a $10MM exit would give you $100k for every 1% you own. 3) Decide what the chance is that the startup will fail / go bankrupt / get stuck at a $1MM business with no exit in sight. (According to Allman Law's study, 10% stay in business - and far fewer than that actually exit). 4) Multiply the % chance of success by the likely outcome if successful. Now each 1% of equity is worth $10k. You could get lucky and have it be worth millions, or it could be worth nothing. (With the hypothetical numbers I'm giving here, including the odds, you are working for $10k per 1% equity received if the most likely exit is $10MM and the % chance of failure is 90%.) 5) Come up with a vesting path. Commit to one year, get X equity at the end. If you were salaried, the path would be more like 4 years, but since it's free you deserve instant equity as long as you follow through for a reasonable period of time. 6) Assuming you get agreement in writing from the founders, what amount of $ would you take in exchange for 12 months of free work? Now multiply that by 2 to factor in the fact that the payout would be far down the road, and that there is risk. 7) What percentage share of equity would you need in order to equal that payout on exit? 8) Multiply that number by 2-3x to account for likely dilution over time. 9) If the founders aren't willing to give you that much equity in writing, then it's time to move on! If they are, then decide whether you're willing to take the risk in exchange for potentially big rewards (and of course, potentially empty pockets). It's a fascinating topic with a lot of speculation involved, so if you want to discuss in depth, set up a call with me on Clarity. Hope that helps!RD
-
What is the average series A funding round at pre revenue valuation for a enterprise start up w/cutting edge tech on verge of our first client.
With all respect to Dan, I'm not seeing anything like that. You said "pre-revenue." If it's pre-revenue and enterprise, you don't have anything proven yet. You would have to have an insanely interesting story with a group of founders and execs on board with ridiculous competitive advantage built in. I have seen a few of those companies. It's more like $3m-$5m pre. Now, post-revenue is different. I've seen enterprise plays with $500k-$1m revenue/yr, still very early (because in the enterprise space that's not a lot of customers yet), getting $8m-$15m post in an A-round. I do agree there's no "average." Finally, you will hit the Series A Crunch issue, which is that for every company like yours with "cutting edge tech" as-yet-unproven, there's 10 which also have cutting edge tech except they have customers, revenue, etc.. So in this case, it's not a matter of valuation, but a matter of getting funded at all!JC
-
For every success story in Silicon Valley, how many are there that fail?
It all depends on what one decides to be a definition of a "success story." For some entrepreneurs, it might be getting acqui-hired, for some -- a $10M exit, for some -- a $200M exit, and for others -- an IPO. Based on the numbers I have anecdotally heard in conversations over the last decade or so, VCs fund about 1 in 350 ventures they see, and of all of these funded ventures, only about 1 in 10 become really successful (i.e. have a big exit or a successful IPO.) So you are looking at a 1 in 3500 chance of eventual venture success among all of the companies that try to get VC funding. (To put this number in perspective, US VCs invest in about 3000-3500 companies every year.) In addition, there might be a few others (say, maybe another 1-2 in every 10 companies that get VC investments) that get "decent" exits along the way, and hence could be categorized as somewhat successful depending on, again, how one chooses to define what qualifies as a "success story." Finally, there might also be companies that may never need or get around to seeking VC funding. One can, of course, find holes in the simplifying assumptions I have made here, but it doesn't really matter if that number instead is 1 in 1000 or 1 in 10000. The basic point being made here is just that the odds are heavily stacked against new ventures being successful. But that's also one of the distinguishing characteristics of entrepreneurs -- to go ahead and try to bring their idea to life despite the heavy odds. Sources of some of the numbers: http://www.nvca.org/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ven... https://www.pwcmoneytree.com/MTP... http://paulgraham.com/future.html Here are others' calculations of the odds that lead to a similar conclusion: 1.Dear Entrepreneurs: Here's How Bad Your Odds Of Success Are http://www.businessinsider.com/startup-odds-of-success-2013-5 2.Why 99.997% Of Entrepreneurs May Want To Postpone Or Avoid VC -- Even If You Can Get It http://www.forbes.com/sites/dileeprao/2013/07/29/why-99-997-of-entrepreneurs-may-want-to-postpone-or-avoid-vc-even-if-you-can-get-it/MB
-
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.)OO
the startups.com platform
Copyright © 2025 Startups.com. All rights reserved.