

Update on Portland Ten (Founder defends her approach) - toffer
http://bigpaperblog.com/2009/02/12/update-on-portland-ten/

======
joshuarr
I am their target audience. I appreciate the candor shown in Carolynn's
responses. And, I would likely benefit from the program. I have even
considered interviewing.

But I just can't get over the fact that they're having a contest and making
you pay for the prize.

~~~
olefoo
Yes, and it seems to be an issue with many of the programs in Oregon, charges
for presenting to 'investors'; references to 'winning' funding, etc.

It's one thing to charge attendance to a networking event; but to charge
companies for presenting to potential investors seems amateurish to me.

And everyone involved in the process needs to remember that funding is not the
end, it is merely a means towards the end. You don't 'win' funding, you
receive it; and you have to pay it back.

------
pdxten
Josh, thanks for your comment. That's a good comment that the interview
process has a contest-feel, and I'm not sure that will be the approach we take
in the future.

More than anything, we want to find candidates who are a good fit for the
challenge of working toward the $1M goal, have a project that has the
potential to be viable in the market, and who are a good match between the
other founders we are working with and Portland Ten staff/advisors.

Thanks again for your input--

Carolynn

~~~
joshuarr
Well, the contest approach(controversy?) seems to have garnered a healthy
amount of interest(scrutiny?) for the project. All of your clarifications and
justifications have been on point, but I'm still uneasy about the underlying
premise.

One thing is certain: whether or not I decide to get involved I will
definitely be following along. -Josh

------
jackowayed
Why does she keep saying stuff like that it's a _"a hybrid approach that
incorporates investment/incubation theory"_ when it doesn't invest at all?

~~~
joshuarr
I've been thinking about this one for awhile now. Here's the quote I think
we're talking about:

>That said, Portland Ten is a unique model which combines
incubation/investment theory, along with the extreme bootstrapping methods and
GTD approach I’ve been developing via Hundred Dollar Business.

While I'm not entirely sure what Carolynn means by incubation/investment
theory, I do understand that she is not implying direct investment. I do not
see any contradiction, but can understand why you'd be confused.

That said, I would be interested to learn what she means by taking an
investment theory approach..

~~~
pdxten
jackowayed, joshuarr-- thanks for the question.

what i mean by "investment theory" is that there are specific requirements
angels/VCs have when evaluating startups for fundability, that are indicators
of the entrepreneur's ability to execute a high-growth concept.

we are extracting those characteristics/indicators and building that into the
learning model for Portland Ten-- so that the entrepreneurs who work with us
understand those concepts & are trained to think on that level, in regards to
identifying and exploiting a scalable market opportunity.

essentially, rather than using the skills/information i've learned as related
to high tech funding to work on the investment side of the table by taking a
job as an analyst or working with a fund, i'd rather work with startups who
are too premature to get attention from investors, or who may ultimately not
be interested in taking funding, to pre-engineer the way they think about
running a company so that it operates on a high-growth level, but doesn't
require fitting into the venture capital model.

hope that helps. feel free to ask more questions or ping me directly via
www.pdxten.com.

-carolynn

------
fuzzmeister
Just a note - gray text with black links is very confusing to read.

~~~
joshuarr
People in glass houses... (We ARE at HN, where #ccc is king.)

