the-accelerator.blogspot.com Open in urlscan Pro
2a00:1450:4001:80e::2001  Public Scan

Form analysis
1 forms found in the DOM

POST http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailverify

<form action="http://www.feedburner.com/fb/a/emailverify" style="border:1px solid #ccc;padding:3px;text-align:center;" target="popupwindow" method="post"
  onsubmit="window.open('http://www.feedburner.com', 'popupwindow', 'scrollbars=yes,width=550,height=520');return true">
  <p>Enter your email address:</p>
  <p><input style="width:140px" name="email" type="text"></p><input value="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~e?ffid=475632" name="url" type="hidden"><input value="The Accelerator Group (TAG)" name="title" type="hidden"><input value="en_US" name="loc"
    type="hidden"><input value="Subscribe" type="submit">
  <p>Delivered by <a href="http://www.feedburner.com" target="_blank">FeedBurner</a></p>
</form>

Text Content

THE ACCELERATOR GROUP (TAG)

Working with entrepreneurs and world-class venture capital firms to create and
build fast growing Internet services, eCommerce and Digital Media businesses.




PORTFOLIO








THURSDAY, DECEMBER 24, 2015


STARTUPS' BIGGEST MISTAKE - AVOID IT. PLEASE.


Startups’ biggest mistake


There are many mistakes that can and are made in the challenging pursuit of
building a great company.

Here is a list – not exhaustive of course. I’d love to see yours

-       Choosing the wrong co-founder?
-       Marketing before product has been validated?
-       Choosing the wrong technology stack?
-       Addressing a market which is far too small to build a substantial
business?
-       Incorrect pricing model?
-       Deferring monetisation for too long?
-       Monetising too soon?
-       Appointing the wrong CTO?
-       Not appointing a CTO?


All these are significant potential pitfalls, certainly. But none is
irreversible – provided you have raised enough money.


Without question the most common mistake we’ve observed in funding well over 100
startups is not raising sufficient capital.


About 20 years ago, my wife and I were fortunate to have the opportunity of
building our own award winning home. It was an ambitious project and we were
determined to create something exceptional. A good friend of ours, a property
developer with years of experience came around to see how we were getting on –
about half way into the life of the project.
His summary, after walking around, nodding sagely: “there’s nothing here that
can’t be solved with time and money!”


Without money, you’ll run out of time – and if you take to long, you’ll run out
of money.


Unfortunately the process of raising funds is neither enjoyable nor particularly
instructive. There is a tendency of angel investors to want to invest as little
as possible and to encourage reaching breakeven as early as possible.
Neither of these is a good way to go for an ambitious founding team.


I’m not recommending a high spending approach – on the contrary achieving a lot
with very little is one of the clear indicators of future success.
But the Series A crunch is a very real phenomenon and even in the hottest
markets, will always be a feature of the funding landscape.


Ideally the Seed round should aim to fund the business to a brilliant Series A –
ie one with a top tier investor, a Series A that takes weeks – rather than
months – to raise. The speed and ease of the raise is directly related to how
much progress the business has made and how well prepared you are for the
process.


So, how much should be raised at Seed? The answer is: enough to ensure that the
necessary Series A milestones can be reached – comfortably.
Allowance should be made for the ‘speed bumps’, the ‘pitfalls’, the ‘pivots’
etc.
And never assume revenues in these calculations – unless they are 100% assured.
Even then, the ability to focus entirely on building a product that will delight
customers without distractions is very liberating.


We’d generally say that 18-24 months of runway is what is needed. Expecting – or
hoping – to dash for a Series A, after 6 or 9 months , will often result in a
frustratingly long, painful A round process. This is typically followed by
difficult conversations with inside investors to lengthen the runway, raise a
bridge or similar.


Eighteen months goes by pretty quickly and there is so much to do. The last
thing you want is to be spending hours with potential investors on raising money
– what a waste of time that is! I’d rather spend hours recruiting the best team
– any day.













Posted by Unknown at 5:28 pm No comments:

Labels: startup, Venture capital
Location: London, UK


MONDAY, DECEMBER 14, 2015


"APPROACHING THE 'UBER MOMENT' IN FINANCIAL SERVICES" - ANTONY JENKINS


Approaching the 'Uber Moment' in Financial Services: How Technology Will
Radically Disrupt the Sector


This is a guest post by Antony Jenkins, ex Group CEO of Barclays Bank.
Antony has had a glittering career to date as one of the world's pre-eminent
bankers.


[Wikipedia: Antony Jenkins began his career in finance at Barclays as a graduate
in 1983, but subsequently moved to Citigroup and rose to head the company's
branded credit card business. In 2006, he returned to Barclays to take over the
company's Barclaycard division. In 2009, Jenkins was promoted to chief executive
of the retail and business banking group and asked to join the executive
committee.[1][4]
Jenkins was appointed as the group chief executive of Barclays on 30 August
2012.[5] In February 2014, Jenkins announced he would be declining his bonus for
2013 following a series of scandals.[6] On 8 July 2015 it was announced that he
had been sacked by Barclays after a dispute with the board over the size of the
investment bank and the pace of cost cutting]
We've been fortunate to spend time with Antony talking about the future of
Fintech and specifically about some of the more exciting developments. Antony's
view is that we are the very beginnings of a revolution some of which is taking
place right here in London.


The post below is a speech which Antony delivered at Chatham House, London on
24. Nov. 2015. Extracts received wide coverage in the UK press - here it is
published unabridged.


It is an honour to be here tonight at Chatham House, an institution dedicated to
building a sustainable, peaceful and just world.



I have worked in financial services for over 30 years, in many different
businesses and places around the world, and have been privileged to observe
first hand the impact of technology on financial services.


When I began my career fax machines and electronic typewriters were the order of
the day. Portable computers weighed 20 pounds and were called “luggables.” And
mobile phones were the size of bricks.


Email arrived in the late 80s and it was provided to senior executives who of
course had their PAs print them out so the boss could hand write a response.
Which was then typed into an email by the long-suffering PA.


And I remember in the mid 90s building a business for corporate customers to
electronically display certain financial documents. The business case hinged on
whether the economics would support two so-called T1 lines, which are lines to
carry data and phone conversations. Today those lines would only cost somewhere
between $200 and $1200 per month, a fraction of the price back then.


But I also experienced how new technologies started to make consumers’ lives
easier. I remember how in the mid 2000s, contact-less payment systems started to
transform the way we all travel on the tube and bus.
And during my time at Barclays, we launched Pingit, a market leading system to
send and receive money via mobile phones.



All these experiences have made me a passionate believer in the transformative
power of technology. It is an unstoppable force which often has a hugely
positive impact on the way we live, work, consume and learn.


Many wonder how these new technologies will transform the financial services
industry, a sector which is already being reshaped by current and prospective
macro economic weakness as well as regulatory change. You might ask who the
winners and losers will be.10. It’s an important question, as an effective, fair
and transparent financial services sector is vital for economic growth and also
for a functioning and healthy society. That’s especially true as the industry
itself has not always delivered its side of the bargain.


I’m predicting that over the next 10 years we will see a number of very
significant disruptions in financial services -- let’s call them “Uber moments’’
-- driven by companies in the so-called Fin Tech sector, the world where
financial services and new technologies link together.


We will see massive pressure on incumbent banks which will struggle to implement
new technologies at the same pace as their new rivals. And that will make it
increasingly challenging for them to deliver the returns and profitability their
shareholders demand.


Ultimately, those forces will compel large banks to significantly automate their
businesses. I predict that the number of branches and people employed in the
financial services sector may decline by as much as 50 percent. Even in a less
harsh scenario, I expect a decline of at least 20 percent.




HOW NEW TECHNOLOGIES DISRUPT INDUSTRIES


So what exactly is an Uber moment?
I know that most of you will be familiar with Uber and some may even have
travelled with them here tonight.



Uber is typical of what I saw when I recently spent a week in Silicon Valley
meeting venture capitalists, technology companies and entrepreneurs in the Fin
Tech sector.
If you analyse how technology has already disrupted many industries – ranging
from publishing, telecoms and music to retail and even transport – you can
detect a similar pattern.

It starts with a small group of founders using new technologies such as mobile
phones and fast data networks to dramatically improve or "disrupt" a so-called
vertical, a market that is focused on a single niche.

In Uber’s case, it was as simple as providing a car and driver in San Francisco,
available via a touch on your smartphone.

And once a company dominates a vertical, the service gets rolled out across the
globe to the point where many of us have the Uber app installed on our mobiles
today.
This demonstrates how the digital revolution is making many aspects of life
easier. And services that used to be out of reach for many, can now be made
available to nearly all, globally.





THE FINANCE INDUSTRY’S UBER MOMENT


In other sectors, we have seen how fast-growing companies with an
entrepreneurial mindset led to the demise of once powerful brands such as Nokia
or Kodak.


Now, thinking about an Uber moment in Financial Services, we can see from the
example I have given what such a moment would look like.


Firstly, and most importantly, it must be disruptive. That is to say, it needs
to dramatically improve the customer experience. Some people say it must be at
least 10 times better. Or it can create a whole new customer experience that
didn't even exist before, as in the case of Facebook.


Secondly, technology must power the service and be at its core.


Thirdly, there must be a ubiquity to it. Uber is now in 300 cities in 58
countries



Finally, while there may be others doing the same thing, there is usually a
dominant leader.




HOW SILICON VALLEY’S VALUES WILL SHAPE THE FIN TECH REVOLUTION


Of course, much of this activity is based in Silicon Valley. The moment you
arrive in Silicon Valley, it’s impossible not to feel the incredible energy and
be impressed by the vibrant and mutually supporting ecosystem of investors,
venture capital, founders and academia.


In every coffee shop or restaurant it seems, there are 20-something founders
talking to 30-something investors about seed funding.


But while it appears to be casual and laid back, it is at the same time a
ruthless meritocracy where the best ideas win. It’s a unique place.


There is a massive wave of capital going into start-ups. One of the people I’ve
met even expressed a strong view that there was maybe even too much money around
at the moment, which could lead to poor businesses being started.


The efficiency and ruthlessness of Silicon Valley is mirrored in its clear
start-up model.
It goes like this: pick your niche. Figure out how to transform it through
technology. Prototype it. Scale it. Make it profitable. Finally, IPO it.




THE STATE OF PLAY IN FIN TECH


In Silicon Valley, I got a real sense of how the next wave of transformation is
targeted at more complex markets such as financial services, health-care and
education.


In the finance industry, we already have seen the emergence of peer-to-peer
lending sites such as Lending Club, Prosper and Ratesetter that allow
individuals or institutions to lend directly to others without involving a bank.
And exchange platforms such as Kantox allow customers to trade foreign exchange
directly. Start-ups such as TransferWise charge less than some traditional banks
to send money across borders.


In the payment sector, the activities of many start-ups are still extensions of
the traditional system, such as Square, an application that allows small
merchants to plug credit card readers into a smartphone.


The wealth-management industry is another sector waiting to be transformed, with
a whole range of start-ups such as Nutmeg and Wealthfront using algorithms to
help you manage your money.


However, I view much of this activity as Version 1.0 of the Fin Tech revolution.
Some would even argue there’s really not that much Tech so far in many Fin Tech
companies.


For example, some of the lenders in the U.S. make extensive use of that
twentieth century marketing channel, direct mail. Most payment activity rides on
top of the traditional banking systems and no one has yet cracked the code in
wealth management.


Most start-ups so far struggle with the challenges of winning customers in a
cost effective way and scaling their business to the next level.
The same is also true for this side of the Atlantic. While there is a burgeoning
start- up scene in the U.K., we’re still waiting for the really transformative
projects, the ideas that will revolutionise financial services.



But with the Tsunami of capital and talent working in this sector we cannot be
far away from truly disruptive breakthroughs, from the versions 2.0 and 3.0. of
the Fin Tech revolution.


KEY DRIVERS OF THE FIN TECH TRANSFORMATION


You can already see the big digital drivers that will disrupt the finance
sector.


In the future, new companies will deliver financial services at a fraction of
the cost. Truly digital banks will be able to spend most of their resources on
the development and deployment of technologies, and won’t need to sustain a
network of physical branches and offices.


The deluge of available data in today’s world will lead to much more
personalised financial products and services.


Just imagine for a moment how much information is actually hidden in a bank
statement. The data about how much we spend each month on groceries, rent,
school fees or mortgage payments reveals a lot about how we live our lives.


Smart digital companies will use this data to advise us on the best mortgage
deals or wealth management services tailored to our individual needs. And then
allow us to manage our finances with easy-to-use apps on our phones and tablets.


Also, the long-term demographic changes mean huge parts of the world are
becoming more affluent. Just look to Africa, where new services allow consumers
and businesses to use mobile phones to pay bills, make purchases or manage
savings.


Relatively few consumers in those markets have traditional bank accounts while
most now own a mobile phone.




HOW CUSTOMERS LEARN HOW TO EMBRACE NEW TECHNOLOGIES


Of course, we need the right regulatory framework to make sure that our data is
used with our permission.


Also, cyber-security will become an even bigger issue and a key element to win
customers’ trust. The coverage of the TalkTalk hack in October has shown how the
public can get rightly and highly concerned by hacking scares and talk of their
bank accounts being emptied by electronic thieves.


But the overwhelming majority will embrace those new services where there are
significant and compelling benefits over the status quo. But those services
cannot only be incrementally better -- they will need to be at least 10 times
better.


This is exactly the pattern we have seen with other digital services, be it
Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter, Uber or services that allow us to store our family
pictures in the cloud.


THE CHALLENGE FOR THE INCUMBENTS


Financial service companies face the same challenges as their counterparts in
other industries. Earlier this year, I visited a large retailer in North
America, and in a meeting with the CEO it become crystal clear how difficult it
is to come up with the right strategy.


For example, would you make an acquisition of brick and mortar stores when the
rise in online orders could slash the value of those assets? Or should you
abandon your traditional business, even if it’s profitable, to focus on the
digital business side?


You might actually believe that many in the banking sector have fully embraced
new technologies and are well prepared. You just need to read some of the recent
headlines in the financial press:




•    Banks desert high street for the digital superhighway.

•    European Banks Use Online Platforms to Find Borrowers.

•    Banks to allow account access using fingerprint tech.


But the impression that we get from these headlines is misleading.


Despite the appearance of change, the incumbents will need to undergo the
transformation seen in so many other parts of the economy. According to
McKinsey, the digital revolution is set to wipe out almost two-thirds of
earnings on some financial products.


For example, the consultancy estimates that profits from retail lending,
including offerings such as car loans and credit cards, could shrink by as much
as 60 percent in the next 10 years.


The boom in online banking is already forcing banks to change the way they
conduct business.


Last year, U.S. banks closed a record number of branches. And in the U.K., the
use of bank branches fell by 6 percent. As a result, the financial service
sector will employ fewer people.


Some of Europe’s biggest banks -- including Standard Chartered, Deutsche Bank
and Credit Suisse – have in recent weeks unveiled plans to cut more than 30,000
jobs, partly because stricter capital rules are eroding profitability. And the
forces of the digital revolution will put even more pressure on banks to slash
costs.
The unique set of skills needed to succeed in the digital world represents a
huge challenge for the incumbents. Many of them have been touring Silicon Valley
looking for inspiration for their management teams. But all seem to struggle
with the different culture and skills that are needed to be successful in the
new digital world.



There is obviously already a lot of technology used in financial services today,
much more than it used to be. I remember filing paper statements at the South
Kensington branch in my first job at Barclays. If you walk into that bank branch
in London today, you will see a plethora of technology, from ATMs and Cash and
Deposit Machines to iPads for digital banking


But incumbents must ask themselves how much of it has been truly "disruptive" or
transformational as opposed to merely substituting capital for labour.


Just take ATMs, or cash machines. While they made our lives much easier and
allowed us get cash abroad out of a domestic account -- a brilliant innovation
-- they didn’t transform the existing system and hierarchy of the banking world.
They only made it easier to use. And call centres and Internet banking may have
helped to improve customer service. But they are only used about twice a month
on average. These are not transformative services.


On the other hand, customers on average use their mobile banking applications up
to 30 times a month – indicating how smartphones have the potential to clearly
transform the customer experience.


But we have to keep in mind that not all technologies are a force for good. In
the institutional banking sector, new technologies facilitated the creation of
the complex derivatives that contributed to the financial crisis of 2008. That
was clearly disruptive, but not in a good way.


While it’s clear that incumbent banks are vulnerable to the disrupters, we
shouldn’t ignore that the incumbents also have some real advantages. They have
well-known powerful brands that many customers trust, a large number of
customers and a wealth of marketing expertise. They understand and can navigate
the regulatory landscape and have enormous financial resources to take on new
rivals.




FROM BARCLAYS TO SILICON VALLEY


You may have noticed that my time as CEO of Barclays recently came to an end.
But I’m very proud of what we achieved.


My team and I always saw digital innovation as a way to improve services for our
customers. And it helped us to simultaneously reduce costs, improve control, and
enhance customer experience.
I’m passionate about technology. To the point where I often tested the patience
of my colleagues around the user experience, down to how many digits we should
have in the log on code. I argued 4 was better than 5, a battle I ultimately
lost!


I realised early that financial services need to embrace new technologies, and
not reject them. During my time at Barclays, we mentored new Fin Tech companies
through our Accelerator programme and we introduced the Digital Driving License,
a free service where people can teach themselves new skills.


Other initiatives included Code Playground, a program that helps children learn
coding, and our Digital Eagles - 28,000 specially trained colleagues who advise
clients on technology.


My aim was to make Barclays the most technology-savvy and automated bank in the
world and this was never about replacing colleagues with robots. My goal always
has been to deploy technology effectively to free up people to do what they do
best.


In doing this work and engaging with other CEOs around the world, it became
clear to me that the incumbents will have to address three significant issues.


Firstly, boards need to accept that we live in a discontinuous world and they
should ask executives to take significant but calculated risks by working on
initiatives that no one else is working on. Looking for simple linear
progression just won't cut it today.


Secondly, there should not be a technology strategy, there should only be a
strategy with technology at its core. There is a crucial difference.


And thirdly, executives need to lead differently. In my experience, leaders
become more risk adverse the more senior they become. In fact doing the same old
a bit better is infinitely more risky than being bold and seeking true
transformation.




THE FIN TECH TRANSFORMATION NEEDS TO BE BASED ON VALUES




But this leadership in the digital age needs to be based on a set of values. The
current controversy about Uber and the way it disrupts taxi markets across the
world highlights that values need to be at the heart of the debate.


In the 80s and 90s, the emphasis of the business community shifted - to create
as much shareholder value as possible.



Long-standing business practices that prioritise customer and colleagues and had
a positive impact on local communities and societies were suddenly cast
aside.83. But the key lesson from the financial crisis of 2008 is that business
and finance need to be based on values that balance the long and the short term


Banks were too aggressive, too self-serving and too focused on the short term.
The impact of these mistakes is still being felt and we have seen public trust
and confidence in the industry sink to an all time low.


But this is as much as commercial imperative as a moral one. For example, in my
experience the branches with the highest level of customer satisfaction had the
highest level of colleague engagement -- and were actually also the most
profitable.


My absolute conviction is that there can be no choice between doing well
financially and behaving responsibly in business.


In Silicon Valley I was struck by a similar ethos of innovation and business
creation, as they’re driven by building the best possible product to help
customers improve their lives. It may surprise you to know that no one I talked
to woke up in the morning wanting to be the next billionaire, but they all
wanted to change the world.


Many of the fast-growing technology companies have a sense of citizenship. They
see wealth creation as a by-product, not an end in itself.




CONCLUSION: A SERIES OF UBER MOMENTS


We have a great opportunity to build a more sustainable and just finance
industry that will enable consumers and businesses to experience banking in a
radically new and better way.


Considering the whole range of powerful forces that already support and feed
each other, I have no doubt that the financial industry will face a series of
Uber moments.


Firstly, the global financial services market is huge and provides large
profits. That guarantees that many smart people and lots of capital will try to
disrupt and transform it.


The huge influx of capital might create some interim bubbles but that won’t
change the final outcome.


Secondly, the cost of new technologies will continue to decline and new cloud
and storage systems will make it even easier for new players to enter the
financial services market and then aggressively scale their business.


Thirdly, there’s tremendous work being done in the Artificial Intelligence
space.
Those software applications allow robots, computers and smartphones to recognize
patterns and learn on their own, allowing them to make increasingly better
predictions about our behaviour and financial needs.


There are already virtual assistants such as Apple's Siri and Google Now, but
the future will bring us much more intelligent applications that will use
natural language to interact with human beings.


This is going to have huge implications for the nature of work and our lives.



Fourthly, the incumbents are already under considerable pressure from a
relatively weak macro economic environment and regulatory change causing poor
returns on equity.


Customer expectations and the need to respond to the disrupters will exacerbate
this return problem.


The incumbents risk ending up as mere capital-providing utilities that operates
in a highly regulated, less profitable and capital-intensive market segment, a
situation unlikely to be tolerated by shareholders.


However, in my view only a few will have the courage and decisiveness to win in
this new world.


In conclusion, as I stated at the start of my speech, I predict that over the
next 10 years we will see a number of “Uber moments” driven by Fin Tech
companies.


Initially I expect the first Uber moments will be in payments and lending, two
key areas for many incumbents. For the traditional banks and service providers,
already under pressure from lower growth and regulation, profits and returns
will be harder to come by.


And inevitably, customers will demand more automated and cheaper products and
services. Incumbents will struggle to respond, leading to a 20 to 50% reduction
in branches and people employed in the traditional sector of the industry over
the next decade.





Ladies and gentlemen, the Uber moment in financial services
approaches.............Thank you.

RELATED ARTICLES

 * Barclays Bank launches online business portal to be used with Hitachi
   biometric reader
 * Big Banks Cutting Tens Of Thousands Of Jobs; Huge Implications



Posted by Unknown at 10:01 am No comments:





SUNDAY, MAY 24, 2015


LETS TACKLE INEQUALITY NOW



A graph of the UK's National Minimum Wage over time. Information taken from The
Low Pay Commission - Historical Rates. Low Pay Commission. Retrieved on . (Photo
credit: Wikipedia)

I’m not an economist but it seems to me that we have a great opportunity, here
in the UK and across the developed world, to improve the lives of millions of
people by simply increasing the minimum wage and actively promoting the payment
of a “Living Wage”.


The Living Wage is an hourly rate of pay, calculated according to the basic cost
of living in the UK.
It provides an acceptable standard of living for employees and their families
and a benchmark for employers who are able to pay more than the National Minimum
Wage.
There are two Living Wage rates, the UK Living Wage and the London Living Wage.
New Living Wage rates are announced in November each year and published by The
Living Wage Foundation - amongst others.


The current minimum wage in the UK is £6.50/hour and the Living Wage (set
independently and annually) is £7.85/hour and £9.15/hour in London


I have worked in, evaluated and invested in many companies and right now, I feel
that the circumstances could not be better — nor the arguments so cogent — for
companies to pay a living wage and for the Government (and the Low Pay
Commission) to raise the National Minimum.


We can afford some inflationary pressures:
The spectre of deflation hangs over many economies, although the implications
are not fully understood, some rises in the cost of production and services can
certainly be passed on to consumers.
Much of the additional wages paid will be re-cycled through the economy by
consumer spending, fuelling much needed growth in demand.


With unemployment rates low and employment levels at their highest, there is
real competitive advantage to be gained by companies being seen as good payers
and attracting the best workers.
Paying a living wage (not just the minimum statutory) can have positive effects
on staff wellbeing and team morale.
It can mean increased productivity, reduced absenteeism, better retention and
improved quality of work.


Front line staff, like shop assistants for example,  are absolutely key to the
performance of the business. The recruitment training and retention of these
people comes at a huge cost and their motivation, how they feel about their jobs
is crucial to the delivery of the brands' promise.


Clearly putting the salaries of all low paid workers up will add to the cost
burden of such organisations and this is where the Government’s role in setting
minimum wages at a “Living Wage level” is needed to level the ‘playing field’
for companies competing with one another.
The counter argument runs that many companies will be forced to reduce their
work forces (or invest in increasing productivity?) — the alternative is of
course to raise prices.


With a Conservative government in power, a move to push for further increases in
the minimum wage could be seen not as ‘anti-business’ but simply the right thing
to do — there are too many in our society who despite having jobs, struggle to
get by from day to day.
Most of the readers of this post will be working for companies that already pay
a Living Wage — and a rise in the statutory minimum will make no impact. We can
however do a lot to influence others.


This is what we can do, today:
1. Ensure that we and our service subcontractors are paying a living wage (eg
cleaning companies)
2. Lobby Government to increase the minimum wage and to give a commitment to
keep its increases well above inflation, closing the gap on the Living Wage.
3. Use Social media to spread the message @livingwageuk, become accredited to
the Living Wage Foundation #LivingWage

RELATED ARTICLES

 * minimum wage
 * This country has the best minimum wage in the world
 * Low Pay Commission will ensure workers take home 'decent' wage
 * Ireland 'losing its edge with fourth highest OECD minimum wage'



Posted by Unknown at 8:05 pm No comments:





MONDAY, MARCH 30, 2015


UK ELECTION - ITS IMPORTANCE TO THE INNOVATION ECONOMY


It's that time again. Elections in the United Kingdom (or disUnited Kingdom if
you prefer).
It's the time when Politicians and the Media seem to be on the edge of hysteria,
the time when love/hate relationships become strained due to ill-judged
pronouncements and sorting out who believes in what is extremely difficult. 


I'd be preaching to the converted were I to stress the importance of all those
eligible casting their votes.  I consider myself privileged to being able to do
so as a UK citizen, having qualified some 36 years ago. Like many who were not
born here, I'm profoundly grateful for the opportunity to live in this open,
tolerant, free society and to be able to contribute in some way to it. 


It seemed like that to me, even on our arrival in the UK in December 1976 - a
time of depression, 3 day weeks, strikes, the winter of discontent etc.


What a transformation we've been through! From the "sick man of Europe" to the
heart and soul of Enterprise and Entrepreneurship in Europe in just a
generation.  
During this time, I've led the building of 2 successful companies as
Entrepreneur, invested in more than 50 startups in the UK ...(and a fair few in
the US and Europe) and helped Saul in the formation of Seedcamp (Europe's
premier accelerator program) so I have 'lived' this transformation through its
ups and downs.


There is still much wrong, still too many under-educated, under-employed, too
many clinging on to past glories. Too many of our leading FTSE 100 companies
have yet to embrace or recognise the impact of the digital revolution and are
under-investing in transformation.
Nevertheless, the cultural shift towards Enterprise and all that it's capable of
delivering has been profound.
For this, some credit must be given to successive Governments who have helped
create the framework in which we now operate.


My own experience of involvement in "Tech City" has provided some insights into
how governments can enhance or hinder progress. 
When Tech City was conceived -or rather named- in November 2010, I was one of
the sceptics. After all, Silicon Roundabout had been named by software designer
Matt Biddulph, of Dopplr (later sold to Nokia) in the Moo shared workspace on
the Old Street Roundabout some years previously - in 2007. Those of us in the
startup tech scene had seen the cluster building rapidly for at least 5 years.
We'd been banging the drum for London as a global centre for Tech development
since the turn of the century.


It seemed to us "insiders" that the Government was jumping on a bandwagon, using
their large megaphone to drown out the other noise and claim the credit for
itself. All of which it did very effectively.

Tech City sat inside a framework of a larger ambition which seeks to make
Britain "the best place to start and build a business" - the fact that Europe's
brightest and best keep setting up here must mean we are on our way to achieving
this aim.


Tech City was simply a brand, a name to give a set of policies designed to
encourage enterprise,  get government out of the way and encourage a mutually
supportive community. Some of these policies have had a profound effect.
Tech City proved to be a forum in which No10 (and 11) could listen to people in
the industry from which many of the policies were derived.

Some examples of these policies include:
 * The EIS scheme has attracted many millions to the startup world by channeling
   tax incentives via angels directly to individual companies - far better use
   of funds than some government agency investing in companies who can't obtain
   funding elsewhere. 
 * The entrepreneurs visa continues to bring talented, enterprising people to
   these shores
 * Entrepreneurs tax relief. ....10% capital gains tax for founders
 * Encouragement of the LSE to create the "fast growth sector" 
 * Promoting successful entrepreneurs as role models
 * Facilitating regulations enabling new Fintech models such as Funding Circle,
   Transferwise, CrowdFunding platforms, P2P lending to be developed. 
 * Enabling - (or at least not blocking) sharing economy platforms. These
   platforms release entrepreneurial activity and utilise under-used assets

The UK has a lot going for it - with or without Tech City and the close interest
shown in it by David Cameron and George Osborn. Much would have been achieved
anyway thanks to:
 * The attractiveness of London as a city for young people
 * The UKs geographic position between East and West  ( which accounts for much
   of the City's pre-eminence too)
 * Having the world's business language, English
 * Having 3 of the world's top universities 
 * A strong creative industries base ....film, books, music, arts,
   advertising AND
 * Being part of the European Union 

Britain has to continue to embrace new technologies and new business models,
adapting regulation as rapidly as possible to accommodate them. We have to
continue to be outward looking and to compete globally for talent as well as
investing heavily in developing our own. 


The enormous challenge of the New Industrial Revolution which is bringing
greater prosperity but destroying many jobs in its wake can only be faced by a
rapid acceleration of our education programme and in this regard, the
introduction of computer coding into primary schools is a welcome step as is the
acceleration of independently governed free schools.


So, however you voted on May 7th, this is a plea to all political parties to
recognise the role that the tech sector plays in driving growth and prosperity
and the importance of building on the enterprise culture now so well established
in Britain. 


Further reading:
The Scale-Up Report on UK Economic Growth - Sherry Coutu
The Startup Manifesto. How the next Government should support Digital Startups
in the UK

RELATED ARTICLES

 * UK Startups Call On Politicians To Improve Visas, Broadband, Skills,
   Regulation



Posted by Unknown at 7:20 am No comments:



Older Posts Home

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)


INSPECTLET



Robin Klein on Twitter Counter.com





AddThisShare | Facebook Twitter Print Email




SUBSCRIBE TO

Posts
Atom

Posts

All Comments
Atom

All Comments





LINKEDIN





EMAIL ALERT

Enter your email address:



Delivered by FeedBurner




KIVA





TAG PORTFOLIO

 * Abe's Market
 * Academia
 * Accelerator
 * Adzuna
 * Amee
 * Astley Clarke
 * Bill Guard
 * BoF Business of Fashion
 * Capitaine Train
 * Citymapper
 * DH Gate
 * Drivy
 * EDITD
 * Erply
 * Farmeron
 * Fizzback (Nice Systems)
 * Food52
 * FreeAgent
 * Glasses Direct
 * Graze
 * Improbable
 * Just Park
 * Kano
 * Linkdex
 * LoveFilm (Amazon)
 * Mashery (Intel)
 * Mind Candy
 * Moo
 * Moshi Monsters
 * My Builder
 * My Heritage
 * Netlog (Massive Media)
 * Nuji
 * OpenX
 * Optimor
 * Osper
 * Pact Coffee
 * RAD
 * RobinHood Markets
 * Roli
 * SecondHome
 * Secret Escapes
 * Seedcamp
 * Skimlinks
 * Slideshare (LinkedIn)
 * Songkick
 * Stardoll
 * Swoon
 * Transferwise
 * Tweetdeck (Twitter)
 * Twitterfeed (bit.ly)
 * UserVoice
 * Wonga
 * Yieldify
 * Zemanta
 * Zoopla
 * bit.ly




BLOG ARCHIVE

 * ▼  2015 (5)
   * ▼  December (2)
     * Startups' biggest mistake - Avoid it. Please.
     * "Approaching the 'Uber Moment' in Financial Servic...
   * ►  May (1)
   * ►  March (2)

 * ►  2014 (3)
   * ►  December (1)
   * ►  October (1)
   * ►  May (1)

 * ►  2013 (3)
   * ►  November (1)
   * ►  April (1)
   * ►  February (1)

 * ►  2012 (7)
   * ►  October (1)
   * ►  September (1)
   * ►  July (3)
   * ►  February (1)
   * ►  January (1)

 * ►  2011 (12)
   * ►  November (1)
   * ►  September (2)
   * ►  August (2)
   * ►  May (1)
   * ►  April (1)
   * ►  March (4)
   * ►  February (1)

 * ►  2010 (13)
   * ►  November (2)
   * ►  September (2)
   * ►  August (1)
   * ►  April (1)
   * ►  March (4)
   * ►  February (2)
   * ►  January (1)

 * ►  2009 (33)
   * ►  December (2)
   * ►  October (1)
   * ►  September (1)
   * ►  August (2)
   * ►  July (2)
   * ►  June (5)
   * ►  May (6)
   * ►  April (2)
   * ►  March (2)
   * ►  February (4)
   * ►  January (6)

 * ►  2008 (40)
   * ►  December (5)
   * ►  November (3)
   * ►  October (4)
   * ►  September (7)
   * ►  August (2)
   * ►  July (5)
   * ►  May (5)
   * ►  April (2)
   * ►  March (4)
   * ►  February (1)
   * ►  January (2)

 * ►  2007 (43)
   * ►  December (2)
   * ►  November (2)
   * ►  October (1)
   * ►  September (2)
   * ►  August (5)
   * ►  July (1)
   * ►  June (7)
   * ►  May (4)
   * ►  April (4)
   * ►  March (4)
   * ►  February (4)
   * ►  January (7)

 * ►  2006 (34)
   * ►  December (2)
   * ►  November (3)
   * ►  October (8)
   * ►  September (5)
   * ►  August (3)
   * ►  July (1)
   * ►  June (11)
   * ►  May (1)




LINKS

 * Local Globe




GOOGLE ANALYTICS







BIT.LY TAG





TRACKER





Simple theme. Powered by Blogger.




Diese Website verwendet Cookies von Google, um Dienste anzubieten und Zugriffe
zu analysieren. Deine IP-Adresse und dein User-Agent werden zusammen mit
Messwerten zur Leistung und Sicherheit für Google freigegeben. So können
Nutzungsstatistiken generiert, Missbrauchsfälle erkannt und behoben und die
Qualität des Dienstes gewährleistet werden.Weitere InformationenOk