Category Archives: Big Data

Victorian Tech Startup Week – Pitch Night

Posted on by
Reply

As part of the recent Victorian Tech Startup Week, Silicon Beach Melbourne and YBF Melbourne hosted the city’s first in-person pitch night for over a year (thanks to the 3 lock-downs we have had in that time). Compered by Karen Finch of Legally Yours, and supported by OVHcloud, the esteemed judges for the evening were Farley Blackman (YBF), Yian Ling Tan (OVHcloud) and David Hauser (Silicon Beach).

The usual Silicon Beach rules applied – Round One featured 90-second pitches from each founder (and no slide decks), from which the judges shortlisted 3 startups for Round Two. The Round One presentations in order of appearance were (as usual, website links are embedded in the names):

TwistedXeros.com

Using “emotional phase shifting to accelerate personal growth and transformation through Insight, Manifestation and Neuroscience”, the impetus for this startup came about from the founder’s own experience. Designed to help overcome certain mental health issues associated with anxiety, the founder claims his technique can help practitioners overcome events such as panic attacks within 6 seconds (as opposed to 600 seconds with traditional CBT methods). Had been accepted into the Founders’ Institute, then COVID came along.

The Leaf Protein Co.

There is a growing demand for plant-based foods, both as a source of sustainable protein, and in response to the increased prevalence of food-based allergies (e.g., gluten and soy). Add concerns about GMOs, unsustainable agriculture and climate change, the founder is looking to develop a scalable process for extracting specific types of leaf protein, including arid-climate plants and Australian natives such as saltbush to counter soil salination. Currently seeking funding to pay for a CSIRO pilot to scale the protein extraction.

E-Toy Library

Essentially a toy-lending app, that provides an end-to-end process (source, distribute, cleanse, circulate) via a subscription model. In trials, already secured 50 customers and over 100 subscribers. Estimates there is a $2.4bn toy market in Australia – but it wasn’t clear how much of this market the founders aim to capture.

Kido Paint

This app aims to bring childrens’ drawings to life, using AI/ML to scan a photo of the drawing, and convert it into an animated 3-D digital file that can be rendered within the app using augmented reality.

Thorium Data

Using the oft-heard tag line “data is the new oil”, this B2B solution is designed to help companies organise, manage and extract more value from their data. It does this by resolving issues of data inconsistency, privacy, risk and governance. It also derives and assigns numerical factors to to individual datasets to assess the “value” of this data, and uses indices to benchmark that value.

QuestionID

This product feels like a cross between a wiki for academic research papers, and an open text search tool to find answers within the wiki database. I know from experience that repositories of published research reports (especially refereed and peer reviewed papers) are highly structured and tagged, with the emphasis being on classification, authorship and citation. Often, you sort of need to know in advance the rough answer to the question you want to pose. Significant resources are already allocated to maintaining and commercialising these existing databases, so I’m not sure how QuestionID will deal with IP and other rights associated with these reference resources.

HiveKeepers

HiveKeepers is designed to support beekeepers by helping them to establish and maintain healthier hives, and enhance their own livelihoods at a time when the industry is facing numerous challenges. At its core is a smart phone app that monitors IoT sensors (temperature, weather, weight, motion, sound, etc.) attached to the hive itself. Over time, the data will enable predictive analytics. With the launch of its MVP, HiveKeepers has already attarcted 700 customers globally.

Round Two

The three finalists selected from Round One were KidoPaint, LeafProtein and HiveKeepers. Each founder made a longer pitch, and then answered questions from the judges:

Kido Paint – The Q&A discussion centred on the commercial model (B2B/C, gift cards, in-app vouchers), the file conversion process (turnaround time can be 24- 48 hours), options for scaling, and getting the right price pint for user prices. So it’s not an instant result (which may disappoint some impatient younger users), and the 3-D rendering and animation is somewhat limited to the imagination of the AI/ML algorithms used in the conversion process.

LeafProtein – There was a further discussion on the approach to producing sustainable and allergen free plant proteins. For example, the attraction of pereskia is two-fold – a higher protein ratio, and an arid climate plant. Also, the aim is to counter mono-culture and GMO crops. A D2C brand has been launched (using small-scale production processes), while the CSIRO project is to designed to scale protein extraction, as well as develop an emulsifier for use in the food industry.

HiveKeepers – The founder talked more about the need to address climatic and environmental impact on hives. Having benefited from support from the La Trobe University and SVG Thrive AgriFood accelerator programs, this startup is seeking funding for product development – current price point is $105 USD per smart hive per annum. While the industry is seeing a 2% growth in new hives, it is also suffering significant hive losses due to parasites and diseases.

The overall winner on the night was LeafProtein.

Next week: From R&D to P&L

Open Banking and the Consumer Data Right

Posted on by
Reply

While most of Australia has been preoccupied by things such as Covid-19 lock-downs, border closures, which contestant got eliminated from Big Brother/Masterchef, and which federal politician went to an NRL game (and depending on which State you live in), the ACCC has implemented the first phase of the Consumer Data Right regime (aka Open Banking).

The TLDR on this new regulation, which has been several years in the making, can be distilled as follows:

Banks can no longer deny customers the right to share their own customer data with third parties.

So, in essence, if I am a customer of Bank A, and I want to transfer my business to Bank B, I have the right to request Bank A to share relevant information about my account to Bank B – Bank A can no longer hold on to or refuse to share that information.

Why does this matter? Well, a major obstacle to competition, customer choice and product innovation has been the past refusal by banks to allow customers to share their own account information with third party providers – i.e., it has been an impediment to  customer switching (and therefore anti-competitive), and a barrier to entry for new market entrants (and therefore a drag on innovation).

Of course, there are some caveats. Data can only be shared with an accredited data recipient, as a means to protect banking security and preserve data privacy. And at first, the CDR will only apply to debit and credit cards, transaction accounts and deposit accounts. But personal loans and mortgages will follow in a few months. (And the CDR is due to be extended to utilities, telcos and insurance in coming years – going further than even the similar UK Open Banking scheme.)

Although I welcome this new provision, it still feels very limited in application and scope. Even one of the Four Pillar banks couldn’t really articulate what it will actually mean for consumers. They also revealed something of a self-serving and defensive tone in a recent opinion piece:

“Based on experience in other markets, initial take up by consumers is likely to be low due to limited awareness and broader sensitivities around data use.”

Despite our fondness for bank-bashing (and the revelations from the recent Royal Commission), Australians are generally seen as being reluctant to switch providers. Either because it’s too hard (something that the CDR is designed to address), or customers are lazy/complacent. In fact, recent evidence suggests existing customers of the big four banks are even more likely to recommend them.

For FinTechs and challenger brands, the costs of complying with some aspects of the CDR are seen as too onerous, and as such, act as another impediment to competition and innovation. Therefore, we will likely see a number of “trusted” intermediaries who will receive customer data on behalf of third party providers – which will no doubt incur other (hidden?) costs for the consumer.

Full competition will come when consumers can simply instruct their existing bank to plug their data into a product or price comparison service, to identify the best offers out there for similar products. (Better still, why not mandate incumbents to notify their existing customers when they have a better or cheaper product available? A number of times I have queried the rate on an existing product, only to be offered a better deal when I suggested I might take my business elsewhere.)

Recently, my bank unilaterally decided to change the brand of my credit card. Instead of showing initiative by offering to transfer my existing subscriptions and direct debits to the new card, the bank simply told me to notify vendors and service providers myself. If I didn’t request the change of card, why am I being put to the inconvenience of updating all my standing orders?

For real innovation, we need banks and other providers to maintain a unified and single view of customer (not a profile organised by individual products or accounts). Moreover, we need a fully self-sovereign digital ID solution, that truly puts the customer in charge and in control of their own data – by enabling customers to decide who, what, when, why and for how long they share data with third parties. For example, why do I still need 100 points of identity with Bank B if I’m already a client of Bank A?

Finally, rather than simply trying to make money from managing our financial assets, banks and others have an opportunity to ensure we are managing our financial data in a more efficient and customer-centric way.

Next week: Counting the cost of Covid19

 

 

 

Cryptopia – The Movie

Posted on by
Reply

A quick plug for Torsten Hoffman‘s new documentary, Cryptopia: Bitcoin, Blockchains and the Future of the Internet. After a series of preview screenings around Australia and  New Zealand last last year, the film has its world premiere tonight in Melbourne.

Five years after producing Bitcoin: The End of Money As We Know it, the director has gone back and interviewed a number of key figures who appeared in the last film, to update their stories, and to dig deeper into the whole Blockchain, Bitcoin and crypto narrative.

I haven’t yet seen the latest film, but I first met Torsten when he was screening the previous documentary on the meetup circuit. He was kind enough to show me some early edits of Cryptopia, and I have to say the new content looks very promising.

Given the speed at which Blockchain and Bitcoin markets move (a week in crypto is often referred to as a year in any other asset class), it’s actually important that we stand back and take stock of where we are in this new paradigm for FinTech, decentralisation and distributed ledger technology.

Even if you can’t make it to the Melbourne premiere, look out for Cryptopia the movie as it tours globally.

Next week: Tarantino vs Ritchie

The State of PropTech

Posted on by
Reply

Among the many strands of X-Tech that we have come to hear about, PropTech is currently emerging as something of a hot topic, judging by a recent Meetup in Melbourne organised by MessageMedia. With the ambitious goal of exploring the “Past, Present and Future of PropTech in Australia”, it was clear that the field can mean very different things to different audiences.

Facilitated by Bec Martin, the panel comprised Shelli Trung, APAC lead for the Reach PropTech Incubator; Mark Armstrong, CEO of RateMyAgent; Alan Tsen, seed round investor with a focus on disruptive FinTech startups; and Nigel Dalton – ex-REA Group, who also gave a key note address.

Given the format and nature of the discussion, I won’t attribute specific comments to particular individuals. Instead, here are some of the panel’s observations (in no particular order), including some pitfalls for the industry, and key points that all market participants will need to consider.

  • In light of recent events, it was perhaps unsurprising to hear the view expressed that WeWork is “not very prop, not very tech”, as its business model and funding challenges became apparent. Generally, the view was that the co-working space fad has had its day (although Melbourne still manages to support numerous co-working spaces and models, not all like WeWork, since the local demand is there?).
  • We face significant local economic challenges (low inflation leading to minimal GDP growth and negative interest rates; declining wages/purchasing power in real terms; falling retail spending; over-extended household debt; and underemployment in the wider job market).
  • On the other hand, Australia still hasn’t had a recession since 1991, and house prices have just seen the biggest monthly increase since 2003, yet banks are imposing more stringent lending criteria.
  • Depending on which economic theories you favour, this either means easier access for first time buyers thanks to lower interest rates; or more rent arrears, increased mortgage stress and greater homelessness because of a lack of affordability and/or deteriorating lower cost housing options.
  • PropTech is not just two-sided online residential market places (although data analytics and digital marketing capabilities are integral to that particular segment).
  • PropTech should also embrace sustainability in terms of environmental efficiency and affordability. Social impact will likely mean adjusting home owner expectations in terms of dwelling size and carbon footprint. Equally, smart cities and more mixed use development is also being increasingly factored into urban planning and infrastructure design.
  • The increase in higher rise and higher density housing has also led to cost cutting in the choice of materials (flammable cladding), and deregulation and other factors have exacerbated structural defects where there is inadequate insurance protection for home owners.
  • What is happening where PropTech and FinTech intersect, such as the notion of fractional ownership? While this is something that is increasingly more likely (especially with Blockchain technology and tokenisation) if first time buyers have no other way to access the property market, what should be the appropriate licensing regime for these new financial products? What should be the credit risk criteria, lending models, prospectus design, funding structure and tax & accounting treatment? What if such developments include social and inter-generational housing? Or achieve the highest environmental standards/lowest greenhouse emissions?
  • For Australian PropTech startups wanting to go global, there were some warnings about the lack of cross-border tech transfer, and an absence of cultural awareness and curiosity by founders.
  • Meanwhile, on some measure, Facebook is probably the largest residential rental marketplace in the USA. What does that signify for future markets and property transactions?
  • Despite the success of real estate market places in Australia, the model does not easily transfer or scale in other countries. Equally, models from overseas might not work here. There was some scepticism about the so-called “iBuyer” model, and also the agency aggregation approach by firms like Compass (“you can’t buy relationships”). Plus, even local brands can go sour (e.g., Run Property and its subsequent merger with Little Residential to form LITTLE Real Estate).
  • IoT-enabled solutions are a growing theme, especially in aged care, and where AI learning patterns are being applied to energy efficiency, for example, or to improve facilities management (another PropTech segment ripe for disruption). This also links to the use of and intersection between On-line/Off-line data, such as CAD and 3D modelling, and “digital twins” (real-time databases of building design files) for mapping and monitoring physical structures. While in the UK, the concept of, and need for, Digital Twins has led to a raft of industry-wide initiatives and collaboration.
  • Despite Australia’s impressive work in creating standard data structures for residential property, there is still a lack of transparency when it comes to the results of private auctions (but isn’t that the idea – they are “private”?). According to the panel, similar data overseas is considered to be quite “dirty” (unstructured and non-standard).
  • The panel anticipated new PropTech opportunities for those companies offering “high touch/high end” services, and those providing “low touch / high tech” solutions.
  • One common data and infrastructure management challenge is dealing with legacy information systems, and sluggish internet speeds (despite, or because of, the NBN), meaning there will inevitably be some bifurcation in service and quality, depending on building design, purpose, age, location, value etc.
  • Finally, there were concerns that as security data and facial recognition technology becomes increasingly algo-based, it raises questions of privacy and misuse of personal and confidential data.

Next week: Pitch X – Launch Into A New Decade