CloudAve

Comment on Crunch Gets It So Right, and at the Same Time So Wrong

dahowlett — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 02:54:58 -0700

@ben: you need to be a tad careful here. There's a difference between accreditation and endorsement. ICAEW doesn't endorse any applications but does provide an accreditation scheme. In this case Crunch is using the ICAEW logo - which it may well be entitled to do by virtue of it appearing in the ICAEW directory of firms. That's not an endorsement either but will be construed as something similar or at least perceived as such by members of the public. It does however bring into question the issue of governance which I have raised as a separate matter directly with ICAEW.

Comment on One-To-One and One-To-Many, Simultaneously

Ben Kepes — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 23:36:56 -0700

@arrocharGeek thanks for that - sorted now

Comment on One-To-One and One-To-Many, Simultaneously

arrocharGeek — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 23:13:50 -0700

FYI: the "vice" and "vice-versa" images are identical, so there is no image of the Zendesk creating a GetSatisfaction question.

Comment on SaaS Providers, Know Thy Business.

Paul Quickenden — Sun, 12 Jul 2009 15:24:24 -0700

Thanks for the comments & great feedback, this post really seems to have resonated! Some great points in the commentary too. SFDC and their Force.com offering is such a great play that I wonder if many people fully appreciate how much of a differentiator it will be. @Alex raises a really interesting point about differentiation. Clayton Christensen suggests that by being disruptive you have enough differentiation... i'm not clear if thats the case and would love to have a larger discussion about it

Comment on Friday Evening Timepass: Cloud Wars

Roger Jennings — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 13:07:00 -0700

3 minutes 36 seconds doesn't strike me as a timepass, but the clip does throw a bone to all the usual suspects (a.k.a. "cloud thought leaders.") --rj

Comment on Handful Of Monopoly Infrastructure Players - A Shortsighted Idea

Krish — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:25:55 -0700

Very well said Maluvia. The bazaar will eventually make the cathedral irrelevant and I am a strong believer in it.

Comment on Handful Of Monopoly Infrastructure Players - A Shortsighted Idea

maluvia — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 12:05:16 -0700

Your points are well made. I would have thought by now that with the history of IE vs Netscape and later IE vs Firefox, MS vs Yahoo, and later Google, Windows vs Mac vs Linux, etc., that it would be obvious by now that the world is too big to be run by an oligopoly of players. First, the inevitable price-fixing that occurs with that kind of monopolistic structure drives people to seek alternatives and stifles innovation. Second, people simply resent having their choices so limited - and again, seek out alternatives. Clearly, big corporate enterprises and governments are comfortable with, and will remain so, in their partnerships with a few 'big players' and don't mind the added cost, which they can easily absorb. They value the massive infrastructure, and putative security these providers can offer them. But it's a big, big world - growing bigger every day in terms of the participants as more and more end users who previously had little access come online and change the internet ecosystem. Not everyone's needs will be served by a few monopolistic cloud service providers. There will be competition and innovation which will level the playing field and ensure both continuing innovation, accessibility and affordability to the global marketplace. Perhaps a 'Cathedral' for the large enterprise and governmental end users, and a 'Bazaar' for everyone else. But I'm betting on the 'Bazaar' as the source of the creativity and innovation which will drive progress and define exactly what this Cloud ecosystem is and will become.

Comment on The Best VC Pitch Tip That I Stole

Mark Suster — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:48:07 -0700

I understand the comment and I know some people feel that way. It hasn't been my experience. When I get calls from other VCs who I like and respect I always ask why they're not investing but I know sometimes geography, topic, stage or whatever precludes people. I often get called by seed stage funds saying, "valuation too high for me, maybe OK for your fund." When I refer a deal it is often, "I really liked the entrepreneurs but this isn't going to be a big enough business for us. For your $20 million this might be the perfect fit". Smaller funds like companies that require less cash and may exit at smaller valuations than we would typically look for. Also, I often refer deals and say, "we may end up looking at this company but if we do we'd want a co-investor. right now we're waiting 3 months to see how their user adoption goes but we like them." There are many ways to make an intro work. I also intro NorCal people to my VC friends there. If it is too early stage and it SF it might make more sense for somebody else to seed. Thanks again for your thoughts. They are valid and something entrepreneurs should be aware of.

Comment on SaaS Providers, Know Thy Business.

Rick Lebherz — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 11:12:19 -0700

If your looking for integration solutions for SaaS and Platforms you should check out OpSource Connect and Boomi.

Comment on Is VC too Fat and Happy?

Mark Suster — Fri, 10 Jul 2009 10:54:25 -0700

Thanks, John. I appreciate your comments. I'm going to do a post on it later, but as you know when you fire for performance you do a few favors: 1. the employee has some lessons that they can reflect upon in their next job. They may not take the comments to heart, but most do. If you don't give feedback they can't learn. 2. As important you set the standard in the company that great people get promoted and poor performers leave. I have found that when I fire based on performance most people who stay come up and thank me. People generally know the other people who aren't pulling their own weight. Thanks again for your kind words.