

HackFwd - iuguy
http://hackfwd.com/

======
stefanobernardi
Disclaimer: I'm a referrer for HackFwd.

I think it's pretty different. \- It doesn't have a public application
process. You can only be referred by someone in the network. \- It doesn't
require you to move anywhere. You can work from your home country/city. \- It
doesn't have a formal 3 month program with mentorship and dinners. It's a 1+
year stunt, with a quarterly weekend retreat where you get to present your
achievements and get tons of feedback and mentorship. \- It doesn't give you
$15-20k for 6%, but instead matches your annual salary with caps at 90k, 140k
and 190 if you are a 1, 2 or 3 person team respectively. HackFwd always gets
27% equity, and you are required to give away 3% to advisors/referrers.

It's a new approach to investing, and very very new having launched just 6
months ago.

~~~
andreyf
_I think it's pretty different. - It doesn't have a public application
process._

Why is this a good thing?

 _It doesn't give you $15-20k for 6%, but instead matches your annual salary
with caps at 90k, 140k and 190 if you are a 1, 2 or 3 person team
respectively._

In NYC, I'd expect three competent software engineers to be making ~400k.
That's a 50% salary cut (it's livable, but certainly leaves room for
competition). In other parts of the world, this would obviously be
different... maybe you should adjust it for cost of living?

 _HackFwd always gets 27% equity, and you are required to give away 3% to
advisors/referrers._

So your valuation of an idea ranges from ~$330k to ~$700k, based only on the
number of founders? If the % equity is constant, doesn't that encourage an
applicant to always come up with three founders, even if one of them ends up
dropping out and not taking any equity?

~~~
stefanobernardi
1) I am stating facts. I said it's different. 2) Europe is not NYC and a 40k
salary for a software engineer seems to be fair. Your comment makes no sense
at all. They are not funding companies in the States, and are adjusting the
salaries based on eu countries. 3) That's quite a mindset you have. And the
answer is no. Because if I go alone I get 70% and they still fund me, if I go
with another founder I get 35% and if I go with two cofounders I get 23%. Plus
would you go through all the hassle you just imagined for 50k more and then
let everyone see what kind of person you are? Bah.

~~~
andreyf
I'm sorry, I didn't mean to be accusatory. Best of luck :)

------
kayoone
I am the founder of a HackFwd backed Company, but we just started this month.
Of course its not cheap for founders with a good prototype, but the landscape
in Europe is very different from the US. You dont have a lot of Angel
Investing in Europe and VCs often only start at 500K EURs...so they are really
filling a gap here, which is pre-seed/seed funding. Besides the money you get
to know some of europes best and most successfull entrepreneurs who might make
finding a Series A funding much easier as if you were on your own. You could
also view it as a very special 1 year program in entrepreneurship because they
teach you alot of things. We are really happy and look forward to the ride!

Our project wouldnt be able to take off with the money Y-Comb provides because
its just too complex for that, heck we even invested twice that amount of our
own money before getting HackFwd funding. If you have a pretty simple product
and can show its potential with 20k$ and score a Series A, then YComb is
probably a better fit but moving to the US from Europe for 20k$ wasnt an
option for us anyway.

If you get accepted you will also be a referrer for the program, that way they
want to built a big network of passionate founders/entrepreneurs in the
future. Sharing knowledge is a big part of that and founders can say "Thank
you" to anyone in the HackFwd network with the 3% equity reserved for that.
You can also view most of their great talks at the quarterly events at
<http://www.passionmeetsmomentum.com>

~~~
pclark
what is your startup?

~~~
kayoone
its Reign of Steel

------
atirip
There's at least 2 things one should consider:

\- it's tranched deal - they get 27% up front(!) and invest, in 4 tranches.
Some think that's A Very Bad Thing for the founders:
[http://cdixon.org/2009/08/15/the-problem-with-tranched-vc-
in...](http://cdixon.org/2009/08/15/the-problem-with-tranched-vc-investments/)
and [http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/08/milestone-based-
investing.ht...](http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/08/milestone-based-
investing.html)

\- after Series A funding the founders are usually guaranteed to be minority
stakeholders. Think about that twice.

But, at least they are open about that.

------
danielsiders
A friend of mine just signed on as one of their referrers. It seems like a
cushy big VC. They fly the referrers out to expensive resorts a few times a
year and in exchange the referrers give HF a heads up on all the cool people
and projects they know about. The goal seems to be providing a framework for
people who wouldn't otherwise do a startup. I can't leave my family, I need a
salary, I'm just afraid, I'm not motivated enough.

Whereas YC and the US scene is all about entrepreneurship, Europe (in general
--there are lots of great startups there but it's no SF Bay) has more trouble
getting hackers to take the plunge. HF seems to take the approach that they'll
take a huge equity stake in the idea rather than a specific company and then
pay you for a year to develop it. It's not clear that you'd have to do a real
startup, they might just get someone else to do that once you've built
substantial IP. I think the goal is to basically bring all the people who
MIGHT produce something of value into one place, pay them like employees, and
be a European Google in the sense that they'll try lots of projects and the
ones that succeed will pay for the others.

It's not a program I'd ever be interested in, but I'm not European or afraid
of risks, and I applied to YC. It may work really well in that culture, should
be interesting to check back in a year or so to see how they're doing

~~~
kayoone
i wouldnt generalize it like that. It doesnt really matter to them if you have
a startup already or still a job and a prototype. The important part is that
you have already built something to show and are passionate about it. They
also form regular companies and they dont tell you how to spend your money or
anything like that. They have very good financial advisers that develop a
budget with you upfront and then its the job of the CEO of that startup to
make it work. The companies are real startups, they just help you alot setting
everything up, but in a very transparent way.

And in regards to "they fund people who MIGHT produce something that is
successfull"...isnt that how any VC or Investing company works ? Even YC works
like that, its just that their risk and money involvement is much smaller.

~~~
danielsiders
My primary objection is that they seem to be focused on acquisition of nascent
talent and ideas in an attempt to corner the market on potential startup
developers without a clear plan about what to do with them. The amount of
money and perks going out to everyone involved both lessens the pressure to
succeed and suggests a focus on acquisition instead of development. Of course
everyone's there to make money and successful ventures support others but it
seems like advisors are filling the roles of VC partners without appropriate
remuneration and founders are being treated like employees. I don't like the
value relationships all around, it doesn't seem like they help build
successful companies, just cherry pick ideas and products in exchange for a
salary. That doesn't seem good for the European tech economy or those who
would otherwise become real founders on their own. It seems like they're
trying to do an even earlier stage acquisition than companies like google have
moved into, but without offering the future google does. Again, it might work
there, but it's not something I'd want to be a part of or what I'd like to see
long term in Europe. If it's a stopgap measure to keep talent there and in a
few years a stronger community exists to help startups develop, then that's
great.

~~~
kayoone
i dont really know where you got that aquisition idea from, but thats not what
they want to do. The core message is that they want to help Hackers build a
business, without them needing to worry too much about setting up the business
and giving them good advice over the course of a year. Problems/Changes etc
are discussed in quarterly meetings, foudners get high quality feedback and
can work on their product. The goal is still getting another round of
financing if the concept proves to be successfull but with that amount of
money some startups will even have the chance to walk on their own without
further funding.

I dont see whats wrong with that, and i also dont see much difference with
Angel investing for example. In fact many successfull angel investors work
together with their early stage startups to make them succeed, thats exactly
what HackFwd does, just on a bigger scale. If you need more funding, they will
prepare you for that, if not, fine.

Potential startups still have to have a good prototype, have to deliver a good
pitch and ultimately get accepted which is how it works for any other
investment vehicle basically. It is much harder to get early stage funding in
Europe, so the existence of companies like HackFwd is a great thing for the
tech economy imo.

------
Prezzer
Hi all, I'm the founder of the first UK company to be invited onto HackFWD and
speaking for myself and my two co-founders I can safely say we're absolutely
delighted to be on board. Since our first contact with David, the "Talent
Geek" we've been treated absolutely fantastically and have been humbled by the
level of support received. The join process was very straight forward, fast
and informal, which allowed us to remain entirely focussed on developing our
product without the worry of jumping through hoops X Factor style.

Reading the comments here and previous comments from other articles, it seems
that most people consider 27% equity to be too large a chunk to give away. Of
course everyone will have different opinions on this, but our reaction was
positive. We felt that the larger equity stake would encourage the investor to
really support our growth, rather than looking for a quick flip in a few
months time. We're working hard to build a really awesome product here with
long term goals and so the opportunity to have 12 months of support from some
of the most respected tech people this side of the Atlantic was a no brainer.

Had we not taken the investment and continued to bootstrap, our project may
never have gotten off the ground - juggling client work which always took
priority made it almost impossible to get any focus. Our logic implied that
73% of a multi million pound company supported by hugely experienced
technology and business strategists was a whole lot better than 100% of a half
baked idea and ongoing client hassle. Now, we're entirely focussed on building
something awesome and that feels great every day.

To be honest, I think that the people who come on here talking about the
money, aren't really true entrepreneurs anyway. I know I'm one, and I know for
sure that money is way down on my priority list. We just want to build
something awesome and HackFWD is giving us a wonderful opportunity to do that.

In my opinion, anyone with a great startup idea and a passion to match should
definitely start hunting down HackFWD referrers and I say that with absolute
sincerity.

~~~
atirip
Really? My experience with David, the "Talent Geek" was the exact opposite. I
recommend avoiding him when dealing with hackfwd.

------
ig1
Not really, HackFwd involves a much large investment/equity stake/time period.
It's closer to traditional angel than YC.

If you're looking for a European equivalent for YC checkout the following: The
Difference Engine, StatupBootcamp and Springboard.

~~~
pclark
Springboard and The Difference Engine are the same now :)

Seedcamp is another.

~~~
ig1
As far as I'm aware they're both different, Difference Engine founder Jon
Bradford is the MD of Springboard, but I believe they're both going to
continue independently of each other.

Unless anyones heard differently ?

~~~
pclark
Oh, maybe. I assumed he'd just do the Sprinboard one.

------
LarsHinrichs
Thanks all for this fruitful discussion, making this a top story on
hackernews. Europe is very different to the US, we wanted to create an secure
environment to help geeks to start their own companies. Compared to the US, in
europe investment in super early tech is very rare.

Please judge us by our output, we are committed to create with HackFwd a new
way of starting tech companies in europe.

Please check out our companies: <http://hackfwd.com/companies> or see who is
involved: <http://hackfwd.com/map> Or take a look at our investment contract:
<http://bit.ly/hfcontract>

------
Jun8
OK, maybe I'm biased against Europeans, I don't know the landscape, etc. etc.
But just compare and contrast their web page with YC's. YC's is succinct, to
the point and no-nonsense. It carries the air of someone who doesn't have to
prove anything.

A look at this website, though turns you off, with the wannabe photos and
titles like X Geek. And trying to get 27% by pushing around the tired notion
of "Europe is different" in _this_ age and time, where bootstrapping is so
common and many incubators like YC are multinational? That's insane. Wasn't
there a post from a YC applicant from Greece on HN just a couple of days ago?

I'm originally from Europe and looking at examples like this makes me really
pessimistic. Instead of hiding behind "it's different" excuses, the founders
should have made "We're gonna be 10x better than YC" their motto.

And one last thing: Just as all free Google services funnel users to their
search where they make money, YC has HN as the breeding ground of ideas and
startups. Everybody knows that this is what makes YC so successful. You
probably should try to start a similar environment.

~~~
mkramlich
Actually I'd be impressed if they were just 1x better. But in Europe. That
alone would be full of win.

------
bobds
Giving up 30% of your company seems like a lot to me but I'm sure there will
be plenty of takers. The maximum funding you can get in return is fairly high
(at least compared to YC):

91,000 euros - single founder

141,000 euros - two founders

191,000 euros - three founders

~~~
nivertech
The formula is:

FundingAmount = €41K + NumFounders * €50K

------
alain94040
At least in France, where I help organize the Founder Institute, we have
plenty of angels, who will invest as little as 25K€.

The difference with the US is that culturally, money and success is not as
accepted as in Silicon Valley, so angels tend to hide. They don't put
themselves up front and center as much as in Silicon Valley, but they are
around to be found.

~~~
mcxx
Will the angles invest pre-seed/seed money? Will they invest in teams not in
France?

~~~
alain94040
The ones I know will invest very early, before you have a finished prototype.

Since I was talking about France specifically, they tend to invest in France
only (the fancy ones invest in France and US). But I'm sure other European
countries have similar angels.

------
axod
"We take 27%"

Ouch.

~~~
delano
First time founders that are considering funding should be more concerned
about the people involved, the terms, and the impact on operations than the
specific amount of equity.

Edit: for clarification, care about equity, sure, but whether you're giving
away 10%, 20%, 30% of your company is much less important in the beginning
than the other things I mention.

~~~
gyardley
This is true, but only to a point, and only when compared with a founder's
other alternatives.

Seed-stage fundraising has never favored the entrepreneur more. In this
climate, founders can get a higher valuation for their company from a high-
quality set of angels, so 'ouch' seems pretty appropriate to me.

~~~
delano
$90k+ for 27% is a higher valuation than most alternatives, particularly the
alternatives available in Europe.

------
frisco
Unrelated to the content of the site, the design is beautiful. Does anyone
know who's the designer behind it?

------
jonathanbriggs
I am another (UK based referrer) and I was attracted to the model which seems
innovative. It will not suit everyone but for those who have an idea and want
both funding and support it seems like an interesting approach.

All of the referrers are on the look out for projects but also welcome contact
from those with the right sorts of ideas at the right stages of development.

~~~
jlees
How did you become a referrer? Is there any benefit to being one (other than
the warm glow of watching an awesome company get funded)?

------
ccarpenterg
_You get to keep 70% equity. You give 3% to your advisors. We take 27%._

What do they actually offer?

~~~
troels
A years salary, it seems.

~~~
timelinex
Which varies from individual to individual. This program seems to favor a more
mature Hacker.

------
edanm
Does anyone know if HackFwd is planning on working with Israeli startups? From
the looks of their site, it seems they don't currently have any Israeli
operations.

------
afaict
Based on my actual salary? Why not just a fixed amount for everyone? Seems
unfair to those who have already reduced their income to a minimum to get
started.

~~~
jlees
Presumably because it's not aimed at those people so much as fledgling
entrepreneurs in steady jobs afraid to take that risk.

------
Vojto
I heard about them in September, unfortunately you can't just apply you need
to know somebody in their network.

~~~
bizerda
You don't need to know someone in the network, you need to get to know someone
in the network if you don't.

------
rmoriz
any success stories yet?

------
jkent
There is a European equivalent to YC. It's YC. (maybe)

~~~
frisco
> Will you help us set up something like Y Combinator in our country?

> Actually, the seed funding business [is] international.

From the YC FAQ.

