Antler Demo Day – Rewired

As with the recent Startupbootcamp Virtual Demo Day, the Antler incubator program also ran its Demo Day Rewired as a live webcast. Both online events were an opportunity to see what their respective startup teams could achieve in less than 3 months, and a chance to interact in real-time with the founders themselves. The main difference was that Antler decided to stream the event live (rather than broadcast pre-recorded presentations) which worked surprisingly well in the circumstances – and not just the technology; it must have been really challenging to pitch to an empty room, with no ability to “read” the audience.

Like Startupbootcamp, the majority of teams were only formed at the start of this cohort, and to do this during the current pandemic lock-down must have been especially challenging.

Of the 12 teams to present, half were SaaS solutions, two were curated marketplaces, two were related to carbon offsets, while the remaining pitches offered a support platform for people suffering addiction, and an investment solution aimed at Millennials.

All of the SaaS teams, deal in some way with managing other SaaS applications, as follows:

Intalayer – streamlining software development and product management tools

motiveOS – streamlining CRM, accounting and billing systems to track sales commissions

meetric – streamlining productivity and collaboration tools

Elenta – streamlining workplace L&D services

CloudOlive and Hudled – streamlining the procurement, provisioning and management of SaaS stacks themselves

Given the similar nature of these concepts, there was some commonality in their approach to problem identification, solution design, and market sizing. A number of the audience questions also asked why existing incumbents in each of the specific verticals wouldn’t simply come up with their own solution (even if it was simply to offer 3rd party plug-ins, which leading SaaS platforms such as Xero and Salesforce already do)?

Both Pathzero and Trace aim to make it easier/cheaper to go carbon neutral (via carbon credits and offsets) for SMEs and consumers respectively. Both solutions are essentially curated services, to help customers access, evaluate and verify carbon offsets and make informed decisions about going carbon neutral. Other traditional solutions involve repackaging wholesale schemes (often expensive to administer, since they are not designed for small businesses and retail consumers), or they lack transparent reporting and certification. Blockchain (as a form of immutable distributed ledger) and tokenisation (to streamline the origination, structuring and distribution of carbon offset assets) are also concepts that are being explored.

In the curated marketplaces, Mys Tyler is a platform for women’s fashion, and RightPaw is designed to help dog breeders connect with prospective dog owners. The former may find an opening now that Amazon has decided to decommission the Echo Look (an AI-supported camera offering fashion advice) although Amazon claims most of the features have been incorporated into the main Amazon Shopping app. While the latter made the point that during Covid19 lock-down in April, online pet scams increased 5-fold.

Combining clinical research, community networking and self-help solutions, Aurelius is designing an online support system for people who suffer from addiction, or living with family and friend who do. It’s quite an ambitious goal, given the value will be in providing highly personalized, proven and achievable outcomes for their users, but the team are not, and do not claim to be, medically qualified professionals. It was not clear from the pitch how the service will be funded.

Finally, Yolo ex is designed to be an investment platform aimed at Millennials. On the one hand, it was suggested that younger people don’t have access to investment products and services suited to their needs, since current solutions are geared towards older investors. On the other, Millennials are said to be more likely to research and do their own analysis on investment choices and opportunities. Part of me thinks that if it was that easy, superannuation brands and financial planners would find it easy to engage with this demographic (remember those colourful ads for Kinetic Super, before it ended up merging with Sun Super?). Another part of me is encouraged by what I have seen after more than four years working in the Blockchain and crypto space – the adoption of Bitcoin and other  digital assets by younger people demonstrates that they looking for alternatives to what the major banks and traditional wealth management providers offer them. And not all of them are looking to make a quick buck via RobinHood and Hertz….

Next week: Music during lock-down

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Haring vs Basquiat

Following last week’s “compare & contrast” entry, another similar exercise this week, between artists Keith Haring and Jean-Michel Basquiat, the subject of the NGV’s summer blockbuster exhibition.

Keith Haring, Jean-Michel Basquiat, Other artists: “Untitled (Symphony No. 1)” c. 1980-83 [image sourced from NGV website]

Given their friendship, collaborations and mutual connections to the New York scene of the 1980s, it was only natural that the NGV went for this double-header retrospective. Since they both gained early recognition for their street art and graffiti-based work, and their images crossed over into the worlds of music, fashion and clubbing, they had a lot in common. They were as likely to be featured in style magazines such as The Face as they were to be found in the arts section (or society pages) of the New York Times.

Both died relatively young, and it’s as if they somehow knew they each had limited time, such is the intense pace at which they worked, as evidenced by their prolific output. If there is one element that really links them is their inner drive – they had to produce art, there was no choice for them, and they threw everything into it.

They each developed their own distinctive visual styles, much imitated and appropriated throughout popular culture, graphic design, video and advertising. Haring is known for his dog motif and cartoon-like figures, Basquiat for his iconic crown and text-based work. They also placed great emphasis on issues of identity, gender, sexuality and broader sociopolitical themes.

Where they perhaps differ is that Haring relied on more simplistic imagery (albeit loaded with meaning and context), using mainly primary colours, flat perspective (no shading or depth), and strong repetition. On the other hand, Basquiat’s paintings reveal confident mark-making, bold colour choices (not always successful), and an implied love of semiotics (even more so than Haring’s almost ubiquitous iconography).

Of course, we’ll never know how their respective work would have developed over the past 30 years – maybe what we now see is all there was ever going to be? As a consequence, there is perhaps a sense that they plowed a relatively narrow field, that they did not develop artistically once they became gallery artists. I’m not suggesting their work is shallow or one-dimensional (even though it can simply be viewed and appreciated “on the surface”), but it would have been interesting to see where their work took them.

Finally, we are still very close to the era in which they were active, and in that regard their true legacy will be in the influence they cast on late 20th century art and beyond.

Next week: Hicks vs Papapetrou

 

Startup Vic’s Secret Pitch Night

For its August meetup event, Startup Vic presented The Secret Pitch. Designed to highlight inequality in investment decisions, it combined voice-modulation software, and was a bit like The Voice meets Blind Date. Hosted at the Victorian Innovation Hub with support from Rampersand, LaunchVic, Stone & Chalk and Weploy, the Judges were selected from Rampersand, Light Warrior Ventures, AWS, Impact Investment Group and Venture Capital Exchange. By sitting with their backs to the presenters, and having to rely on only the slides and the disguised voices, the Judges had a limited idea of the identity of the presenters.

The pitches in order they presented (websites embedded on the titles):

FRDM

Described as “your closet in the cloud”, and dedicated to “making fast fashion sustainable”, FRDM is subscription-based service for “shared” clothing – customers borrow and return each item after use. Apparently, we are  buying more clothing but using it less.  The circular model is set up to break down and recycle garments over a three year lifecycle. it’s an emerging, but competitive space – competitors include Glam Corner, Le Tote, and Unlimited. Asked about their approach to circulation and cleaning, the founders assume three “wears”  with a 30% margin per customer but admit that they are still lacking some logistics experience. The goal of having items delivered on time, in the right place and in an acceptable condition is still being developed. Firmly aimed at women aged  22-28 years old, I suggest FRDM think about a their name, as my search revealed at least two similar URLs – https://frdm.co and http://frdm.io.

Assignment Hero

I have covered this startup before. It’s positioned as a collaboration platform for tertiary students. When it comes to team project work, there appears to be a disconnect between prescribed apps (Dropbox, Facebook Groups, Evernote, Google Docs, etc.) and the activity notifications and alerts they generate – in short, too much “noise” which overwhelms the students, which gets in the way of them completing their tasks.

Offering a dashboard, the platform is natively integrated with Google Docs. Users can track individual contributions to each document (based on time spent, and using track changes). To me that system is very easy to game – what’s to stop users simply editing for the sake of boosting their rating? How does it deal with plagiarism and copyright abuse? How does the app evaluate the quality, depth or rigour of contributions? Who owns the content that is uploaded to the platform?

Claiming to be signing up 42 new users every day, with repeat users, the founders offer a B2C model – providing access to suggested solutions via on-demand student services and products, and charging a 30% commission on each sale. Student sign-up is free, but the platform can recommends products to users. There is also an SaaS offering for universities, established via paid trials. But the B2B model is a long sales cycle, with the goal being annual licensing fees. Asked how about the viability of the Google relationship, the founders explained they tried using their own document editor, but customer  preference is for Google (and Microsoft) products.

Asked about how Assignment Hero compares to other collaboration tools such as Atlassian’s JIRA, Trello, Confluence, Slack, etc. the founders suggested that these are aimed more at enterprises, and that their own UX/UI is sexier than existing education tools such as Blackboard. As with all such platforms, the key is to enable users to manage the project, not manage the project management software….

Book An Artist

This two-sided market place is designed to help clients to find or connect with an artist. According to the founders, finding the right one is hard. Instagram’s search function is not location based, and the platform is dominated by big names.

With 80 artists on board, Book An Artist charges a 10% commission, and has completed around 40 transactions with an average ticket size of $2,200. Traction has been achieved via referrals, influence programs, SEO and Google Ads. Initially focused on commissions for murals and graffiti works, the founders plan to expand into sign writing, textiles, illustrations, mosaics, installations and calligraphy. With a presence in the UK, Australia and New Zealand, the founders are seeking $500k in funding. Currently using external agencies and contractors to handle administration, the funding will largely be allocated to marketing to drive engagement.

Although the commissions appear to be at a higher price point compared to other creative market places, what prevents platforms such as  Fivr,  99Designs or Canva moving into this space? Also, how does Find An Artist handle things like copyright, IP licensing, attribution or planning permission for external works?

Aggie Global

This is a food sourcing platform, connecting small farmers to large markets. Because of current market structures and procurement processes, businesses often can’t “see” what produce is available to them locally. Based on the founders’ experience in Fiji, where the local economy ends up having to import food to feed tourists, they have run an actual in-market pilot program, but are still building the e-commerce platform.

The results of the pilot achieved a 6x increase in both farmers’ income and hotel cost savings. Tourism is the 1st or 2nd largest industry in 20/48 developing countries. Importing food to satisfy tourist demand is therefore an issue.

For farmers, the service offers a freemium model, while businesses pay a 5% transaction fee and an annual subscription. Currently researching other markets, managing the supply chAIn for quality control, provenance, organic certification etc. is critical. The MVP aims to get farmers keeping proper records via face to face training, and gaining recognition for existing farming practices.

Asked about the cost of data connectivity and access for farmers in remote locations, the founders explained that data is stored offline and uploaded periodically. They are also investigating the use of AI/ML for predictive supply and demand. They also need to manage timely delivery as well as tracking environmental and climate data.

Part of the solution lies in making sure there is appropriate produce for the market, while matching local cuisine to tourist expectations. Too often, local chefs try to emulate western menus, so they need to help develop alternatives and foster innovation.

Maybe the Startup Vic organisers were saving the best til last, as Aggie Global took out the People’s Choice and was declared the Overall Winner by the judges.

Next week: Recent Notes from Europe