egusa

many thanks, i will fix this today.

author here. the reason we used michael arrington, ariana huffington and matt marshall is because they are the founders of the respective publications (not because of their current involvement).

for the featured in, you are right (it actually goes back to when we were expecting publicize to be featured in a tnw article as our design was being implemented and this was pushed back). because we've only been included & written guest articles, we will change this to as seen in.

update: we've fixed this to "as seen in".

author here. thank you, i will fix this today.

author here. i'm conrad egusa, i'm available to answer questions and really appreciate the feedback.

podcast speaker here: the problem with releasing content ahead of a finished product is that when you first contact the media about the launch announcement, this is your startup's introduction to the market. a journalist will google search your company to see if there has been any prior coverage. if, for example, a small blog covers your company, and 3 weeks later you reach out to TechCrunch, a journalist there will see the earlier coverage and may pass on covering the announcement (as the "launch" of the company was earlier covered). i am 100% for content marketing, but prior to the launch this is something a company should be more careful about. i hope the above makes sense.

it's really good to see Fred Wilson writing about the important of profits, but i'm a little surprised as it seems like his firm USV focuses on investing in network effects businesses (ex: etsy), which to me almost always focus on growth over profit (which is probably the right choice for these types of startups, at least in the beginning).

if you're looking for another data point, when I raised funding for my 1st startup in the valley I believe the lawyer (this was from a top-tier firm), offered to defer the first $60,000 in fees (until we raised funding) and they asked for a 1% equity stake. It seemed like this was the policy for most of the firms I spoke with.

The best thing you can do is travel, and also aim to learn a new language (it'll open up your eyes to how much else is out there). Particularly today, where most cities have co-working spaces with strong communities & community platforms like StartupDigest.com are active around the world with weekly events, it's easier today to travel & work for a few weeks than ever before. Whenever I find myself in a predictable routine as well, I like to attend conferences; I find the energy there is always helpful.

A solution like you mentioned would help (I believe there are some things similar in LATAM today, but there needs to be more).

The thought with the Interest Investment is there exists a large market of investors in LATAM (and emerging markets), however they avoid startups because of a lack of traditional yearly returns, it's more unpredictable, there are unfamiliar terms, etc. Many people have tried to solve this problem by educating investors (to create new angel investors), but the success of this has been questionable. I felt this new idea could bridge this very large gap.

About the 15% stake, you are right that it's not a very liquid market at all. The thought was, if a person invested in a cash-flow profitable startup with good growth rates, there is some value in that asset (this type of investment wouldn't work for an unprofitable startup or a company with zero cash flow). There is a smaller market for private companies, but an investor should put money into an entrepreneur with a good reputation who stays true to his or her word (just like they would with convertible debt).

author here: the Interest Investment is for specific startups that are cash-flow positive (and deemed by an investor to be very likely to re-pay & that would be a valuable asset regardless). I spend most of the year in Colombia, and the challenge I've seen in LATAM is that there many profitable startups that don't necessarily fit the VC model (Ex: they likely won't become $100M companies, but they will be profitable). However, many of these companies do need capital to grow quickly & yet they don't have the credit to do so via traditional banks. The idea for is that investors interested in being involved with the tech scene can invest and receive more predictable returns (that they are used to, most emerging market investors aren't familiar at all with tech investments) and cash-flow startups can find a new avenue to grow.

One thing I think the state of California does very well (where De Anza is located), is the transition from community college to world-leading universities (Ex: UC Berkeley, etc.) is very good (I think much better than other states). I knew many students who attended a community college for 2 years, and then went to UCLA or Berkeley (the college admissions seem very open to this), and they ended up saving money and doing very well after.

I know Yelp gets a lot of criticism (and some of it deservedly), but I always respected how they did their best to provide an honest platform for reviews. Compared to other competitor sites (Ex: CitySearch, which basically allowed & many times encouraged businesses to post their own fake reviews on their own companies), I think Yelp is very ahead of the pack.

It's great to see earlier YC Partners going back into the program again, it really speaks to how strong YC is. Best of luck Harj!

This is always a challenge for new ventures. I'd recommend really focusing on your value proposition (whether it be development, social media, etc.), and then trying to offer prospective clients an offer that is difficult to refuse (Ex: A 1 month money-back guarantee). Over time you'll build a reputation and clients will begin referring friends to you.