Twitteretter

The history of science is full of great stories of human endeavour and ingenuity. One of my favourites is the story of the discovery of Neptune, the eight planet of our Solar System. If you don’t know the story, you should read it. The position of Neptune was independently deduced by JC Adams in England and U Leverrier in France by observing anomalies in the precession of Uranus and, based on them, deducing the position where Neptune should be. Incredible use of meticulous observation and complex mathematics, confirmed by Galle by pointing the Fraunhofer telescope in Berlin to the point where the maths predicted a new planet should be. The story makes you realise how much humans can accomplish with time and determination. The observations must have been truly painstaking with the technology of the day, and the calculations hugely complex. An amazing achievement 

The most famous and valuable art work in the World is probably Leonardo da Vinci's Mona Lisa. This is difficult to understand, when considering it coldly. It is technically excellent, but so are many others. However, there is no point in considering art coldly, that its not its purpose or meaning. It appeals to the heart, more than to reason. Mona Lisa, in fact, appeals to both. It is, without doubt, one of my favourites. Because it represents Leonardo, intellectual giant of his time, truly unique man in his curiosity, his endeavour, his uncompromising pursuit of excellence. A man I admire. It is also beautiful and, very importantly, the only painted smile of its age. Nobody had painted a smile before it. It is the first smile in art. The power of the smile, domesticated by the first time by an artist. The symbolism of this fact is so significant that it justifies any value one could ever put on Mona Lisa. It is unique, ground breaking, completely original and rebelliously happy  ...

Whilst smart investment capital wakes up to the opportunities in countries like Spain, a big question is what local politicians can do to accelerate business growth. Current policies are misguided, as they are based on the belief that they need to create skills and entrepreneurship, providing endless coaching and tech transfer training and initiatives, backed up by insufficient capital. Once local politicians understand that the biggest challenge is access to seed and early round capital, this would  change their strategy for fostering entrepreneurship. The assignment is to get traditionally earned capital to invest in new technology, which at present, with some exceptions, it is not doing. How do we get a property or textile tycoon to invest in speculative biotech? Simple. We get their tax advisor to tell them to. They may not understand technology, but they understand taxation. Change the taxation enough, and you will change the dynamics of tech investment in your country, at a ...

The challenge I referred to in my previous post represents and excellent opportunity for the cunning mid or small size investor. A Spanish tech start up, based on the same idea as a US tech start up, and with a team of the same quality, will be valued 20 to 30 times cheaper than its US alter ego. This is a simple consequence of the law of supply and demand, with seed and early round capital being in short supply in Spain. This means that your investment dollars will buy you 20 to 30 times more equity in Spain, and therefore, if the business succeeds, you will make many times more money. Importantly also, moderate success will still reward you heavily, which it would not in the US, due to inflated seed and early round valuations. I think the smart money will soon start to spread to Spain and similarly under invested markets. Talent and entrepreneurship are global, tech seed capital, not yet. 

Why does US have a much greater number of tech start ups than Spain? Some commonly cited reasons are skills and entrepreneurial spirit. This is the myth of Silicon Valley. It no longer holds true. Spain has many high quality, highly educated individuals, and many have entrepreneurial spirit. After years of international ‘entrepreneuring’, I have concluded that the biggest difference is access to capital. US is full of family offices, angel investors and venture capitalists who will fund tech start ups. In Spain, there are very few. And funding is critical to both the success and dimension of any new business. A great Spanish idea with a hugely entrepreneurial founder will most likely not reach the mass needed to succeed globally due to lack of finance. This, I think, is because US is full of people who have made fortunes in technology. They understand tech and that investing in tech is highly profitable. In Spain, money has been made differently, and that understanding is lacking

Attending the @SMEInstrument event, I have been fascinated by the variety of really cool ideas and innovations which are being turned into businesses by people in every corner of Europe. I hear that this program has funded projects from 2,500 technology start ups. This is quite something, when you think about it. It will create many jobs, but also, it will give Europe a lot of commercially exploitable IP. Some of these start ups will grow big and really thrive, potentially creating and buying other businesses. I also have to hope that the entrepreneurs that found them, if they succeed, will go on to fund other start ups, since it is natural for people who have made their money in technology to invest in technology (this is one of the fundamental basis of the success of areas like Silicon Valley, or Cambridge, MA). This is an investment not only in technology and entrepreneurship, but also in young people. And the energy is amazing. It is great to be part of it 

I attended a very good talk by @jurgen_ingels at a #H2020SME #SMEInstrument event today. Many points I agree with. One was that today, average is no longer good enough. We are competing globally and only the best will survive. We really need to focus on our talents, on what we are really good at. Do not put energy on improving where you are weak, but on working on your strengths, to become exceptional at something. Our schools today do not do this. They work towards the average and spend most time talking to students about their failures and patching their weaknesses, lifting to average, and not on what they are good at and building on it. This change of focus would have the added benefit that the experience would be more motivating and inspiring for students. It may, however, result in individuals with not rounded enough knowledge about other things, and this is a risk. Although, of course, technology can take care of the knowledge and information side of things (more on that later)...