Blog

  1. July 4, 2013

    Pair Up time!

    By: Nitzan Cohen Arazy

    Our traditional Founders Pair-Up event is kicking off!

    To all of you who are looking for a co-founder, now you have the opportunity to find the perfect one!

    The Junction

    “How?” you ask? Simple. We invite you over to a top secret location (we will send an invite)  in TLV  (week of July 14th, most likely), and let you pitch your idea for 90 whole seconds. No Powerpoints allowed.

    If you are a super talented developer/product ninja/ marketing wizard/ business star, how cool would it be to be pitched by 30 people, all wanting for you to join them? You just need to pick & choose.

    So, who should register?

     *   Entrepreneurs with an idea: register on “I’ve started a venture and am looking for a co-founder
    We believe you should always assume that if you have a good idea, there are 10 other groups that are working on it right now so worrying about NDAs is futile. Provide a good description.

     *   Entrepreneurs looking to join a startup: register on “I’m an entrepreneur at heart and I’m looking for an idea to join
    Everyone posting should be mentally ready to join the startup life. This ain’t simple. Partial profiles will not be evaluated.

    The pitch event will have ~ 30 ideas pitched to a crowd of 40 available entrepreneurs.
    We will review the list and send invitations for both pitchers and listeners a week before the event.

    Please! Wait for an official invitation, don’t just drop by (hint, hint).

     

  2. May 3, 2013

    A PhD in Starting Up, Part 2/2

    By: Oded Ben David

    This is part 2 of my story. If you missed part 1, go read it and get right back…

    We pick up the story at the beginning of my 6 years PhD. The first four years were professionally bad. I have set out with clear notions as to what I would do and how I would do it, but from there on it all went south. Materials that were supposed to be easy to get turned out to take many months to get (since we were on a budget). Assumptions we had about the physical system and how it behaved crumbled in my hands. Technical issues crept up to bite us in places we didn’t expect. Technologies we thought would solve all our problems turned out to be oversold by the providers, and ended up near useless. I worked nights, I worked weekends, I sometimes slumped into inaction. But mostly I stubbornly pushed to keep trying. Another idea, another angle, another test, to get something working. The bottom line was we couldn’t get something worth publishing (let alone justify a PhD). And all the while I was making much less than I would have “outside”. My advisor is always fair and generous to his students, but the pay as a grad student is not as high as good Physics graduates with a MSc. can make. And half of it is a scholarship, that doesn’t give you social benefits. And I got married, and started on a family.

    What kept me going through those difficult times? Mostly the people. My advisor, the lab team of students, and most importantly my friends, family and my then girlfriend and now wife. People having faith in me. being supportive, helping out where they could. My advisor kept paying me my scholarship, and always let me feel he has full trust in my abilities, that he believes in me and in what we are trying to do. And if you think that’s trivial, then you don’t know people, and you are not aware of the state the Israeli academy is in. I was fortunate. But it wasn’t blind luck. I told you already how and why I chose to stay with that team – it really was all about the people.

    Then after four long years of hard work we started getting results that made some sense, were consistent, told a story. We had a break. And it was a good one. The results were interesting to the relevant community and we were able to publish them into one of the top two scientific journals. That fifth year turned out to be a great one. All the work finally payed out. I finally figured out what was the basic assumption we had that was wrong, and it was something so commonly accepted, literally textbook material, that disproving it was both controversial and potentially important. I guess you could say it was disruptive in it’s own little pond of a scientific field, if you are fond of such words. If you ever learnt any physics at all, at high-school or perhaps even before, there’s a good chance that you have learnt it too. Ask me about it if you want to know. Or Google up my research papers, I guess. We published two more papers in that year. One in the other top journal, and one in a top physics journal. I knew I had my PhD then. And that I didn’t fail my advisor, who invested in me both his time and mentorship as well as his research funds, which he works hard to get. Those papers, in their little way, contributed their part, along with the amazing works the rest of my advisor’s lab team published in the past several years, to help my advisor win one of the best research funds around, giving him the funding to finance the lab’s research over the course of five years.

    Funny thing, though, the stuff we ended up publishing wasn’t really what my research proposal said I would do. Since the assumptions behind that proposal failed us, we had to change course as we went along. We were still in the same area, even used the same physical system, experimental system and even the same tools we have built for the original research, but we have used them in ways we didn’t think of beforehand, and to go to places we didn’t think of going into.

    So why have I left this behind me, to go and start up a company? Other than jumping on the chance to work with my long-time friend and now partner? I wanted to create. And I wanted to create something that people use. To be able to see how my work helps people in their lives. I do believe that academic research on a whole has a wide an everlasting influence on people’s lives, but this is an abstract belief. I looked for a different kind of satisfaction – of building something from scratch, but something “normal” people could see, and experience. Right now, not in a decade or three. Another reason is that through my years of grad school I came to realize that the academic life is not that different, actually. You are always racing for results. The success rates are very low (success being securing a tenured professor position), and even then you need to always work hard to secure future funding. You have to do work that would get published and stay relevant, or the funding stops and the students disappear. It’s true that with tenure you could just do whatever you want and to hell with the world. But, the people that get through that race for a published results are usually not the kind of people that are happy to just sit idly around. They are driven, creative and are constantly looking to break new ground. It’s a personal character, not a situational need. Sounds familiar?

    My time is up, and my word count is way too high and I respect your intelligence. So I won’t walk you through each and every analogy I see. Focus, pivot, funding, team, perseverance, MVP, testing, relocation, results driven, roller-coaster, low pay, long hours, family, failure, hope, serial starting up, budget, team again. It’s all in there. And more. I’ll leave you with one warning, or rather a disclaimer. Like any analogy, it’s only partial, and drawing it too thin is risky. Still, I hope you have a different view of what a PhD can be like, and how exploring a new territory can be alike, even in such seemingly disparate fields of life.

  3. May 2, 2013

    A PhD in Starting Up, Part 1/2

    By: Oded Ben David

    My name is Oded and I’m a Physics PhD. No, you don’t have to all stand up and say “we love you Oded”, it’s not really as bad as it may sound. When I tell this to people who know me only as a co-founder of iridize.com, they are usually surprised. “what’s a Physics PhD got to do with building an internet business?” is one response I get a lot. “It must have been a big adjustment for you switching from the academic to the entrepreneur life” is another. I’d like to tell you a bit of my personal PhD story, and I hope by the end you would agree with me that these two worlds are not as far apart as it seems.

    I have been programming since I were nine or so. I started with Basic and then fell down into using stronger stuff. Pascal first, then C. By the time I got to my military service I’ve been programming for almost a decade, and I guess that it was quite natural that I was enlisted to keep developing in the army as well. By the end of my three years, I felt I have a different passion to pursue. So instead of studying computer science for my BSc., as I have always assumed I would, I took Physics. The way I looked at it was “I kinda know quite a bit about That world already, let’s see what new stuff I could pick up over There…”. I liked Physics in highschool, and figuring out how stuff works is basically what brought me into programming in the first place. How much more exciting to understand how the world, even the Universe, work? Hacking the real world? Super cool.

    I’ll skip straight to graduation, when I had to decide whether to go for a Masters degree or get out into the “real world”. By then I was sold on the idea of being a researcher, a university professor. As an undergraduate it seemed to me that researchers can pretty much research anything they’d like. You choose some unsolved mystery or uncharted area of human knowledge and use your smarts to figure it out. The goal was noble (not necessarily a Nobel, of course) and the bottom line was about excellence. How unlike the Industry, where from where I looked it seemed that the bottom line was, well, the bottom line, and that was it? It was an easy choice.

    Of course, I knew back then that the road for getting a tenure track position in a university is arduous and risky. There were, and still are, few positions opening up each year for Physicists, and many more excellent doctors graduating than positions open. Even worse, holding a PhD. is not even enough to apply as  you usually have to do a few years pf “post-doc” research, and that almost exclusively abroad. But little did I think back then about the implications of relocating a family (didn’t have one then), or of the statistically low chances for achieving my ultimate goal. I was a good student, I was willing to work hard, I was optimistic. Most important – I was passionate about doing it.

    My Master’s degree was pretty much smooth sailing. Except that time when I inadvertently contributed part of the tip of one of my fingers to science (a gruesome story that). Masters research is usually limited in scope, the goals are clear and the metrics for success are also clear. You basically have some hypothesis, and you have a fixed to to prove or disprove it. And you have a professor mentoring you, helping you define that hypothesis and figuring out ways to test it. It was fun. I got to build a cool experimental system, write the code to control it and analyze the data, and the pleasure of collaborating with great guys who did the theory, right one floor up from our lab. And our hypothesis checked up. We had great results and we published them in a good paper. Then we tested another assumption we had about our physical system, that was supposed to be the basis for my PhD (there wasn’t any question in my mind about doing a PhD at that point). Unfortunately, that assumption was disproved by the experiments. So that line of research for shut down.

    I found myself at a point where I had to find another idea to chase. Another project to start. Why? Because that’s what I wanted to do, and the last one couldn’t scale into a PhD. Wouldn’t get me to my goal. That left me with a choice to make – stay with my advisor and his lab team, or look for something exciting elsewhere. I chose to stick with the team and work out a new project with my advisor. Why? Because by then I have already realized something fundamental (for me). People you can trust, respect and work well with are the most important asset you can have when breaking new ground. You can barely trust in anything else, so you better have that strong foundation you can rely on.

    Thus ends part one of my story, if you would like to hear how that PhD research panned out for me, come back for more on tomorrow’s post.

  4. April 28, 2013

    5 things you should know about a term sheet

    By: Nitzan Cohen Arazy

    הכותב הוא עו”ד סטיבן ברק רוזן, עו”ד במחלקת החברות/ ההיי-טק במשרד APM & Co. עו”ד רוזן מלווה חברות פרטיות וציבוריות בעסקאות מסחריות מקומיות ובינלאומיות, וכן קרנות השקעה פרטיות והון סיכון וחממות טכנולוגיות בביצוע עסקאות השקעה בישראל ובחו”ל.

    לאחר שהושלמה ההשקעה והחברה הקצתה מניות חדשות למשקיעים, יכולות להתעורר שאלות רבות בנוגע לזכויות של החברה, היזמים והמשקיעים ביחס להקצאת מניות חדשות (למשל למשקיעים חדשים שמעוניינים להיכנס לחברה), ליכולת של בעלי מניות קיימים למכור את המניות שלהם באופן כללי (למשל יזמים שרוצים לעשות מיני-אקזיט ולמכור חלק מהמניות שלהם תמורת מזומן). הזכויות והתנאים המתוארים בפוסט הנוכחי מתמודדים עם המצבים הללו.

    apm blog

    זכות המצרנות או באנגלית Pre-Emptive Right – זכות המצרנות מחייבת את החברה, בבואה להקצות מניות חדשות, להציע מניות אלו קודם לבעלי המניות הקיימים של החברה (או לחלקם). לרוב לא מדובר בזכות לקנות את המניות באיזשהי הנחה או בתנאים טובים יותר – אלא רק את זכות הראשונים. הרעיון בזכות המצרנות הוא לאפשר לבעלי המניות הקיימים לקנות את המניות החדשות כל עוד הם מעוניינים בכך.

    בין הזכאים, חלוקת המניות החדשות נעשית בדרך כלל לפי אחוזי החזקותיהם בחברה (זאת אומרת שמי שמחזיק 5% בהון המניות הכולל של החברה, יהיה רשאי לקנות 5% מהמניות המוצעות בהקצאה החדשה). חשוב לזכור שכדי לממש את זכות המצרנות צריך להשקיע כסף, מכאן שברוב המקרים יזמים לא מנצלים את זכות המצרנות (אם יש להם) בהעדר כספים פנויים לצורך שימור אחוז החזקותיהם.

    זכות הצעה / סירוב ראשונה (First Offer/ Refusal Right) – זכות הצעה / סירוב ראשונה מאפשרת לבעלי הזכות “זכות ראשונים” לקנות מניות שבעל מניות אחר מעוניין למכור. גם כאן, הרעיון הוא שבעל הזכות יוכל למנוע כניסה של צדדים שלישיים לחברה, כל עוד בעלי המניות הקיימים מעוניינים לקנות את המניות. הזכות לא באה לתת עדיפות בתנאים הכלכליים לבעלי המניות הקיימים בקניית המניות – אלא את האפשרות לקנות את המניות באותם התנאים שצד שלישי היה יכול לקנות אותם. בזכות ההצעה הראשונה, המוכר צריך קודם להציע את המניות לבעלי הזכות בתנאים מסוימים, ואם אלה אינם מעוניינים לקנות בתנאים המוצעים – רשאי המוכר למכור את המניות לצד שלישי בתנאים שאינם עדיפים על תנאים אלו.

    זכות הצטרפות בעת מכירת מניות (Co Sale Rights; ידוע גם כ-Tag Along) – זכות זו מאפשרת לבעל הזכות למכור חלק ממניותיו ביחד עם בעל מניות אחר שמוכר את כל או חלק ממניותיו. זכות זו גורמת למצב שמי שטרח למצוא קונה וניהל איתו המו”מ, עכשיו נדרש לאפשר לאחרים למכור ביחד איתו (ובכך למכור פחות מניות משלו).

    לעיתים, זכות זו ניתנת רק למשקיעים או לבעלי מניות המחזיקים אחוזים מסוימים ומעלה – כאשר מימושה יהיה כלפי כל בעלי המניות המוכרים או רק כלפי חלקם (לרוב – רק עובדים או יזמים). הרעיון העומד מאחוריה הוא להבטיח לבעלי הזכות את היכולת לממש את ההשקעה שלהם וליהנות מעסקאות שבעלי מניות אחרים משיגים למכירת מניותיהם בחברה.

    מכירה כפויה של מניות (Bring Along) – מנגנון זה מאפשר לקבוצת בעלי מניות (בדרך כלל, לרוב מיוחס) לכפות על שאר בעלי המניות למכור, ביחד עם בעלי המניות הכופים, את מניותיהם לצד שלישי. הכלי נועד לשימוש במסגרת מכירת החברה ועל מנת למנוע מבעלי מניות המיעוט למנוע את מכירת החברה.

    איסור מכירת מניות (No Sale) – איסור מכירת מניות נועד בדרך כלל לדאוג לכך שהיזמים לא ימכרו את מניותיהם בחברה (או ימכרו את מניותיהם במשורה), לתקופת מה מתוך ראיה שאם ימכרו את מניותיהם, או ימכרו יותר מכמות מוגבלת – יתפרש הדבר כחוסר אמון היזמים בחברה ובטכנולוגיה שלה. פעמים רבות, אך לא תמיד, גם כאשר מתאפשרת מכירת מניות על-ידי היזמים במשורה, זכות זו עלולה להיות כפופה לזכות ההצטרפות עליה דיברנו לעיל.

    האמור לעיל אינו מהווה יעוץ משפטי או תחליף לייעוץ משפטי והוא בבחינת מידע כללי בלבד. כל המסתמך על האמור לעיל, מבלי לקבל חוות דעת משפטית על בסיס כל העובדות הרלוונטיות, עושה זאת על אחריותו בלבד.

    פורסם באתר ניוזגיק

     http://www.newsgeek.co.il/5-things-you-should-know-about-term-sheets/

     

  5. April 21, 2013

    Why I want to share

    By: yoav pilosof

    Recently I saw an inspiring video. I’m not talking about a YouTube clip of a dog riding a skateboard which is always fun to tweet forward, but one that requires further observation and really makes you think.

    2 years back, I started working on a venture with my partner (till this day). It’s a 600 word post, so I won’t elaborate much on the product, but overall we started developing a utility application for iPhone and Facebook.
    We had a detailed vision, a ‘Perfect’ plan and we spent endless hours in order to build the most efficient user interface we could think of. We thought that if we’ll provide maximum benefit with minimum effort, people would find our product useful and maybe even like it. Rational and promising as it sounds, the product didn’t hit the target.

    It’s needless to blame the design because we hired a talented designer, made countless iteration with him and the result was quite amazing (Today we are leading his portfolio). I also don’t think marketing was the issue. One can always do a better job and for sure we had to allocate more time and financial resources too (even if we didn’t have any), but being 2 resourceful entrepreneurs we managed to get significant coverage in meaningful blogs and newspapers, so it can be said that we’ve succeeded to be in the spotlights for a while.

    So what is the reason?

    goldencircle

     

    This inspiring video is a lecture by Simon Sinek (link at end of post, you are almost in the middle) with more than 10 million views on Ted.com. Simon talks for 18 minutes about how leaders a

    nd organizations inspire people. His way of presenting is inspiring by itself, but that’s not the point.

    I won’t try to encapsulate a great lecture in a few sentences, but the main idea is that there are 3 essential questions for every organization:

    WHAT? HOW? and WHY?

    According to Simon, 100% of organizations in the world know WHAT they’re doing or providing. Most of the organizations also know HOW they do it. However, not many know WHY they do it, or at least there are only few that the answer to this key question is the main reason for their essence.

    The answer to the WHY question can’t be money. Money is usually a result of a successful business, but can’t fulfill as a main cause for existence. In most cases building a ‘Better product’ over the alternatives is also not enough, because given the technology available today one can think of dozens of interactive products that might be just ‘Better’. Also trying to build a “1 Stop Shop” for a particu

    lar service is often not attractive enough, given that we’re not in the supermarket industry.

    In the lecture Simon repeatedly says that “People don’t buy WHAT you do. People buy WHY you do it”.  In my opinion, the utility app that my partner and I developed, didn’t succ

     

    eed in becoming the next ‘Evernote’, because our main motivation was WHAT we were building compering to the alternatives, and not WHY we’re building it? Or WHY should anyone care?

    Some may observe the venture and say that the reason for not succeeding was ‘Lack of focus’. I say that focus is critical, but only if you first have a real target.

    Today I am working along with 2 partners on a mobile application game for football fans. Even though I’m optimistic, only time will tell whether we will succeed or not, but unlike the previous venture, today I am happy to say that we are first and foremost motivated by a real cause, or you can say – we know WHY we get up in the morning.

    As promised, a Link to the lecture.

    Enjoy…
    Yoav

  6. April 18, 2013

    Stephie Knopel & Lior Aran present- CoolHunting

    By: Nitzan Cohen Arazy

    “So what do you work in?” 

    Every time I hear that sentence I turn on the patience mode and start what is usually a very long journey of explaining CoolHunting. I know its part of the job, but i definitely enjoy the exceptions, and last thursday was one of them: while giving a lecture at the Junction I encounter a crowd and an ambient that rapidly embraced the mood of forward thinking, making interesting questions and giving collaborative inputs.
    For the ones that weren’t there, CoolHunting became in many places around the world, not only a way of detecting trends in their first expression in order to understand the future. Beyond its fashionable name lays a deep knowledge of what’s the pulse of an audience, the new forces that are reshaping a certain industry or culture and most important: A CREATIVE ACTIVE TOOL to ignite an idea that can be both long-lasting and scalable. Isn’t that what very entrepreneur and innovative mind is searching for?
    Should be. 
    The main difference is how do we get to that sweet-spot?
    While startup people usually trust their intuitions and many of the business based their decisions in research trying to understand the big mass, CoolHunting is far away from that: it focuses in the POWER OF FEW, Innovators and trendsetters around the world, which is 3% of the population. 
    Yes. We don’t care about volume. We care about future. 
    Understanding the power of this 3% is getting the fact that 1 out of every 33 is right now starting a new trend about something that can influence your business. Or kill it. Or make it even bigger. Its more difficult to find that one. But once you did, the impact is much bigger than talking to other hundreds that will only make you do “faster horses” as Ford liked to say. 
    There are millions of ideas hidden in every street around the world,  waiting to be sparked by innovative minds. They usually don’t find consensus and thats OK: Big ideas, usually trigger FRICTION in the beginning, until they find the right oxygen to come alive. I invite you all not to be scared by trends and forecasting of CoolHunting and on the contrary, embrace it as a tool to envision the future of your companies, organizations and why not, the world. At the end of the day CoolHunting is very much in sync with what a great mind said once: 
     “Never underestimate the power of a small group of people to change the world.  In fact, it is the only way it ever has.”  Margaret Mead
     

    SOME HINTS TO UNLOCK COOL:

    - Popular is not cool. Cool is the next big thing. 

    - Coolhunting is only about the 5% of the population: innovators and trendsetters. To understand the mass you can use a normal research.

    - CoolHunting is not based on consensus today. It will get to that later. 

    - CoolHunting powers innovation. If there’s someone to detect it and apply it to an idea.

    - Don’t accept someone else’s macro trends. They are just not relevant for you.

    - Detecting trends is about seeing customers in their OWN ZONE. Not in a report.

    - Avoid reading trend reports. Not only cause your competitors can buy the same one. Also because trends are nothing on paper. Make them come to life through an active presentation or brainstorming.

    - CoolHunting is about detecting and cross thinking without asking the consumer. If you ask, you will get what people say that they think, or say that they do. Thats different from what they think, and what they do.

    - Use cool hunting as a tool to IGNITE long-lasting ideas. If you want to be millionaire overnight, you can try in a Casino.

    - The future is an awesome place. You better visit it before your competitor.

    @stephie_knopel is CoFounder with @lioraran of elaaastic: an innovation lab that turns trends into new ideas for brands, organizations and startups wanting to be a step ahead and create relevance in their industries.
     
  7. April 7, 2013

    Metrics and the matrix

    By: Elnor Rozenrot

    Most startup founders have been to 5 lean-startup talks, 7 agile discussions and are constantly told to test everything. It seems that you need to do A-B testing all the time to get it right.

    The problem is that you won’t get anywhere unless you have a clear hypothesis that you are trying to disprove. Oddly enough, even if you are running a test to invalidate a hypothesis, chances are you aren’t learning as much as you can from it.
    Only if you determine a clear performance goal you will be able to look at the data after the experiment has ran it’s course and clearly understand if your hypothesis still holds. All too often founders look at the results of an experiment and then decide whether it was a success without having clearly defined what they where trying to accomplish. Btw, it’s not a typo – you can only try to disprove a hypothesis. Like in science – you can’t prove a hypothesis right, you can only prove that it’s not wrong.
    Quick example – say your venture is based on a freemium model with 5% of your users paying you $10 a month for the service. Using the 5% as the target for an experiment helps you see clearly whether your business plan makes sense in the real world. This isn’t to say that if you don’t hit the 5% you should go and find a different job. it’s just great to know that your business model needs changing as early as possible. The inverse, running the experiment without tying the success/failure metrics to a clear business goal, allows you to fool yourself into thinking that everything is fine even when it’s not.

    So what does a matrix have to do with it?

    If you assume that your venture dramatically increases it’s chances of success with every learning experiment then the next step is to perform as many experiments as possible as quickly as possible. I won’t be getting into how-to tricks to expedite learnings without investing in development, but I will highly recommend building an experiment matrix.

    An experiment matrix can be an excel sheet where you;
    - list out your different assumptions
    - write down the best/fastest experiment you can think of to get data
    - determine the success criteria (quantitative goals make it really easy)
    - figure out how to expedite getting the results.

    experiment matrix

    I’ve used this tool countless times and, besides helping me focus on the important stuff, it also helped run parallel experiments to get to the promised land faster.

    Go forth and prosper:)

  8. March 19, 2013

    How an accelerator saved my life (or at least didn’t waste my time)

    By: or Meirov

    My distinguished colleague Shai Wininger – @shai_wininger  (from the awesome startup fiverr and actually the guy that once taught me that the most important thing to know is to “Fail Fast”) noted on his post that the right move for a young entrepreneur ,is to actually join a company, because accelerators make you think that startups are quick and easy.

    I beg to differ . Startups are hard, extremely hard. That’s why you MUST join an accelerator as fast as possible.

    UPDATE: As Shai pointed to me, he aims at the newcomers, and at this case – I totally agree with him, and encourage you to gain experience in great companies (one was already mentioned before). However, if you already worked in one and have a burning passion of a great idea – don’t just go for it! accelerate it !

    As an experienced (and lean startup honorable “failed”) entrepreneur, I learned my lessons hard. I bootstrapped a small company, and built a software in “the garage” for a year before showing it to the first user. Another six months passed until we finally found out that the business model was completely wrong, like most of our assumptions about the users and the problem (Anyone said something about the need to port the code to support windows 98? -which the target market was actually still using… )

    If I had gone to an accelerator then, I would have faced the truth much sooner, and a lot of time and money could have been saved.

    Well, let’s take a minute and mark this place, and the given insight.

    Roojoom - Nature 4

    I went back to working as an employee (the first one in the startup – founder DNA is hard to change).
    Working for a company can teach you a lot about technology tricks, managerial methods and the value of politics. But none of that matters in a startup, where the real value of focus shines above all. Even as a medium company intrigues and meetings will take most of your time , and the creative guys out there will feel their souls being crushed by the minute. oops.

    The need for expression, creativity and the thrill of adventure overcomes all else, and again – a startup is born.

    This time we want to do it differently - That’s why in my new venture Roojoom - ”innovative knowledge experience over the web” ,my team is working as part of  The Junction accelerator wave 8. The truth hurts , the fun is high and we learn while running, faster and faster.

    Mirror

    Joining an accelerator helps you release your creativity and focus on the foundation of any startup : validating your idea.

    A good accelerator (and I can heartily recommend The Junction on this ground) will help you see your weaknesses and opportunities, will introduce you to a network of talented people willing to share, mentor and help in any way. Your fellow teams will reflect your idea and true situation and provide the immediate feedback which is crucial for your success.

    Like the CERN particle accelerator, the startup accelerators help the teams research and explore new dimensions. They recreate the “big bang” by helping to bring new companies and innovations into our world. Like particles – startup teams – and truth collide and new energy is created. Anti-matter is revealed, and companies fail. Time is saved! Hurray.
    People gained experience, lessons were learned, ideas were polished and we came an inch closer to the question of Life, The universe and Everything else. The question is actually: How many startups need to fail in order to create a big successful one?
    cern11

    Let the acceleration begin!
  9. March 11, 2013

    Partners

    By: Eyal Lewinsohn

    iridize founders in fourth grade

    iridize founders in fourth grade

    I have been making a lot of introductions lately. Mostly introducing iridize.com of course but very often a few personal questions come along. Lately, I caught myself pausing when asked “are you married?”; Now don’t get me wrong, I am a happily married man. But for the past two years, so I realized, I have been also married to my partner just the same.

    Oded and I have been best friends ever since the fourth grade. Our lives have been intertwined for over twenty years now. And just about two years ago, what started out just like any other phone conversation we ever had ended up in a marriage and the birth of iridize.

    In business, as in personal life, choosing your partner is probably the most important decision you will make. And just like in personal life, if your partner doesn’t trust you, doesn’t tell you that you’re wrong when you don’t make sense, doesn’t remind you of important stuff you have forgotten, doesn’t offer a different perspective then yours, or “slap” you when you’re being a jerk, doesn’t encourage you when you’re down; if he doesn’t do all that, well, he’s not that good of a partner.

    That’s the main thing we absolutely love about The Junction, where we have just started out as part of Wave 8 – It really is all about the people. When we had our application interview we were asked to tell a little about what iridize is, and what we hope it would become. But we were asked to tell much more about ourselves, our friendship and our lives. Because these are the things that stay, this is both the heart and the backbone of our venture.

    I cannot say what the future holds for iridize. But there’s one thing I know for sure. If Oded and I hadn’t done it together we wouldn’t have made it this far. And by making it this far, as friends and as a founding team, we know we have what we need to go on.

  10. February 24, 2013

    Launching your start-up, doing it at TechCrunch Disrupt, and nailing it, by Roee Adler

    By: Nitzan Cohen Arazy

    Hi all,

    In previous years I came to The Junction before every TechCrunch Disrupt competition to help Israeli entrepreneurs prepare for it. This year as I’m entangled with relocation and a growing family, sadly I wasn’t able to. But thanks to modern technology I invite you to watch my previous lecture on the subject.

    http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/21282387

    Beyond being great a preparation for applying to, getting accepted to, and hopefully winning Disrupt, it’s also (I believe) a great resource to understand the dynamics of a “launch” – this unique event when something you built meets a larger audience, based on actions you plan and execute.

    If you get accepted to Disrupt please feel free to contact me directly for advice. I’m at roee@soluto.com, and may the schwartz be with you!

    Roee Adler

Page 1 of 712345...Last »