I just spent the past two days tracking down a Pedo from Kentucky grooming my kid who met online. This is the 10th time I’ve had to talk to her, restrict access, and chase away men. I don’t know what these girls problems are, but it must be too easy for them to get attention now. Or something.

What’s App, Kik, Snapchat, Instagram…these are all Pedo hotbeds for teen girls.

Please for fucks sake- fund someone else (besides young men building these companies) who can solve this problem.

The funniest thing I’ve seen lately- VCs trying to become entrepreneurs.

The best ideas they could come up with was to shuffle entrepreneurs into buying licenses to their curriculum and trying to use personality tests on entrepreneurs. So this entire premise is based on a VC who fails as an entrepreneur, trying to tell you the right way to start a business by passing their educational curriculum.

I’ll get to watch them fail because we already eliminated these ideas (very small sub portions of the vision) within the first year, that takes these guys 30 years just to come up with.

Categories
Uncategorized

Co-Living Concepts

I think there is a very interesting disconnect in how the tech community deciphers data and trends.

On one hand you could say co-living is a trend and startups go crazy. But the real story behind the scenes is no one actually likes co-living or being stuck at home till they’re 30; people just feel forced to do something because housing cost is so high and they’re sacked with student debt.

Perfect example. It’s one of those situations as a company, you get to make a choice between following a trend or solving a real problem.

Move Slow & Explain Things

Usually though I’m just explaining things to myself, because everyone else runs away with a headache.  

So I’m currently thinking of a solution.  Weighing pros/cons, calculating various outcomes.

Actually, I’ve already thought this through hundreds of times, and so was already using the right financial solution for that phase.  I really didn’t want to wind up in a situation where I was using convertible debt or equity just to pay my living expenses.  Which is pretty much just where early stage investments go.

Consultants do enough of that- they will create plans, they know will harm the long-term viability of a company, in order to create cashflow or investment to put themselves on a startup’s payroll.  Before you’re even on your own payroll.  Often times the amount of capital is equivalent to their contracts.  And it’s usually bad capital at that.  That probably doesn’t happen in SV, but people get desperate in most other places.  It’s pretty unfortunate because people have to eat, you know because they are humans.

So anyway- Alternatively, I thought too extensively about sectioning off various parts of plans just to cashflow, and that was actually my original plans for PTS back in 2011ish.  The reason why I acquired it actually, because my real company that housed my bigger plans needed me to survive in the interim.  But it wasted my time so much.  And I wound up using it to mostly to run my experiments for my long term objectives anyway; instead of focusing on short term plans & cashflow.  Often I found as well there wasn’t a good flow between short term and long term when you’re building from the ground up.  For example: If you made a certain move to get some excess liquidity on the short end, it would loose 10-20x it’s value on the long end.  One or the other had to be sacrificed.  Or say, years 2-3 would produce x but then at year 10 you’d die because of x in year 2.

So I’ve excluded that as an option.  And my best option (Option A) is now gone.

There isn’t any middle ground for me though because overtrading from growth only takes about 3 days to kill me.  So middle ground is where I loose money and vision because I’m forced to control growth so I do not exceed resources.  The solution to overtrading is to limit business activity while the company clears a path for scale and acquires the right capitalization.

No middle ground means I really don’t need anyone’s services.  That would be more of a linear growth path.

I even had to deregister the companies to limit business activity, because the IRS and state departments kept harassing me because they thought I was cashflowing & just not reporting it.  So here I was trying to limit expenses, so I could push through discovery and acquire the right capitalization, and they kept costing me attorneys and CPA fees to cause me to need cash flow.  For nothing.

It’s almost like there is a giant conspiracy of people that try to get you to waste money and kill your company.

There is light though at the end of the tunnel: Then I finally found the right long term solution, so that’s why I went to sleep.  It was a significant milestone in my long term development.  Huge relief.  You’ll also never know how difficult it was to find a Silicon Valley VC, that would go against Silicon Valley.  Or even would at least question it.

One would think “oh land of non-confirmists”, but no.  It’s more like they’re all conforming to a perception of non-conformity.

So anyway, I’ve been doing that for a long time.

And that is how you end up creating a very valuable 9 year old company outside of Silicon Valley, without fucking it up or overdiluting yourself.  That no one knows about.

My previous option is now gone, so this means I am looking for another short-term solution that won’t risk my long term plans.  Really in lieu of Option A, there are no other good options until I scale.  

Any other decision is going to bite me in the ass, so it’s just a question of how much of my ass does it bite off.  Well I’d like to keep as much of my ass as possible, because I only have one ass.

Since I have to get back out here, let me make some clarifications about what I’m doing.

  1. You don’t know what I’m doing. Pretty much everything that exists publicly is just my experiments. People give me recommendations and stuff- but they don’t even actually know what I’m doing. I mean people are just stupid like that- they can’t comprehend things that don’t exist yet.
  2. I’m not a VC, nor am I remotely close to one, nor am I “disrupting” them, or scaling them. If you looked at my entire plans, venture capital would be a miscroscopic subsection, mostly addressed on the impact side. Not the execution side. That’s not even disruption, that’s more like “mostly irrelevant slight effect on their industry that VCs could easily adapt to”.
  3. If you were in venture capital and felt a strong desire to fear something imploding as a result, I would be worried about Silicon Valley. If I had to pick something. But it’s not specifically singling out Silicon Valley, the concern would be more about whether your value isn’t actually value- but the result of being located within a network. That’s because one of my first major goals is to transition the economy from opportunistic, to conviction based. I would think that would affect angels more then VCs because most VCs already use conviction based models. Well maybe more about the VC because keeping in mind there is probably a lot of sleezy ones that iradicate themselves out anyway
  4. So I’m that sense- you’d totally be fucked. But I prefer to think of more of a natural correction. The GREAT news about that bad news is no one will actually notice, because people in that position don’t actually believe that’s why. They actually think that they’re valuable.
  5. Again mostly an irrelevant conversation because small issues in comparison to what I’m doing.
  6. I don’t have any issues with product market fit. That’s child’s play level compared to what I’m working on now. Easily bypassed this back in 2010-2011ish without even actually launching a product. If I were to get anywhere near executing the actual plans, I would simply die from overtrading because my experiments can easily push 4000-8000%.
  7. I’ve got at least 100 different product market fits I had to prove!!!
  8. Where do these questions come from? I think they read from a lean startup guide.
  9. I may add to this later. I’ll shop it around instead of a pitch deck. Probably be more effective. I’ll call it “100 Reasons Why YOu’ll never return your portfolio value” for shits and giggles

The anonymity was concerning me for a number of years, but I’ve done a large number of my own tests, to actually verify the identities by this point.  I’m about 98% confident in that regard.

I picked up on alot of the VC chatter about the dislike of deadlines, after I imposed one. I don’t appreciate that.  My situation is not ordinary by any stretch of means, if you can find one other entrepreneur in the world who has lasted this long in my position, with a vision of this size, be my guest.  Your quest will not be fruitful.

I also don’t appreciate intentionally being put under extreme duress so someone can time the gaining of an advantageous position.  I also didn’t appreciate having my child’s father intentionally fired to push him into depression, and push my desperation even farther.

Go ahead and play the game while you still can, because I’ll be overthrowing you very soon.

Now you can send a different one through, if he doesn’t respond.

I was reading Brad’s warning to VCs yesterday to be careful about valuation caps, because the caps are increasing in seed…for some companies.

The warning seems misplaced to me.  I would think you want good companies to delay raising seed capital, because it keeps them in discovery longer.  Based on my experiences, the warning should be directed towards startups skipping rounds, about investors who don’t understand what discovery is.  

Because the purpose of valuation caps is compensating investors for early risk.  What good will it do these companies to skip rounds, and stay in discovery…if investors still attempt to claim early risk is the same without prior capital injection?

Brad mentions a specific phrase from his quarterly update: “with nothing but an idea and a powerpoint”.  

Investors have to become familiar with what discovery looks like, and how to verify that the vision has progressed prior to Series C without operational metrics.  Entrepreneurs need to be prepared to provide evidence against investors.

So I’m going to call bullshit on that.  I doubt VCs backing those companies increased valuation caps with just an idea and a powerpoint.  More likely the person writing the quarterly update was unable to tell the difference.

Dale Car

Thernos and the Dale Car

These two specific companies are very high on technology risk, you notice both have the entire basis of the company revolve around making an impossible technology possible.  Much like SpaceX.

(the “impossible” component my company’s risk specifically is actually in the market risk, so my experiments are all focused outward.  So it’s different for every company).

Both of these companies were convicted of fraud, but neither got slapped hard because the court couldn’t prove it was intentional. It wasn’t, doesn’t fit the psychological profile.  And the Founder of the Dale Car kept trying to build the car afterwards.  Eventually created a different profitable (legit) business, and continued to do that.

I followed the path of both companies, deep research, and both technically were doing what they had to do.  I added up every single variable and risk that I could find on those companies, coming to the exact same steps those founders did.  Both got pretty distracted by fundraising, and slipped on the technology where the majority of their risk was. Because fundraising prior to, is doing what makes sense and not loosing money off your final outcome. Both then met an unfortunate fate almost immediately after when the technology didn’t match the capital raised. Result of divided focus.

In the case of the Dale car, he didn’t even have enough time to finish building the car with the capital that he had just raised, because a murder by an employee prompted an investigation into the car.

The conclusion I’m attempting to illustrate here is the disconnect.

I then also read alot of posts from investors, for example @semil was quoting Fred Wilson about how entrepreneurs need to be raising capital every single day for their company, it needs to be on their daily calendar.

Say what?  Hm, yes, let me just pencil in “spend my life arguing with you” (because no one actually argues with you, and so you never think you’re wrong) between making impossible possible. And yet if I do not, then how will anything become possible?

I’m still trying to comprehend how people who never experience adversity or get disagreed with, can legitimately function as gatekeepers to an economy.

So I have openings on my calendar this week for any VC that would like to be belittled, ridiculed, challenged, and accused so you will succeed like an entrepreneur.  I charge $150/hour, a very low fee because I’m broke from spending all my time combating your industry.

They intentionally distracted me for a few months with the low IQ pipsquick investor, who asked “can you build a 5x company, instead?  You can just sell it then wrap it into the bigger one”

What the fuck is going on.