Hot 30 over 30 entrepreneurs -there are more than you think

There's often talk about hot & hungry young entrepreneurs -those types of list are everywhere -with good reason. I think they are talked (and often hyped) about because they are the exception, rather than the rule.

I suggest that there is a hotter, less spoken about group of entrepreneurs who are in fact the larger group of change agents actually driving entrepreneurship in startups - the 'over 30' set.

I should know; not only have I met hundreds of them in my last 2 1/2 years of pacing the startup hallways, but I'm also one of them. 

The ability to 'do' a startup in your 20's is made more possible often by the lack of entanglements - its much more difficult to take the plunge & follow your dream into StartUpLand when you have obligations that must be met; like a mortgage, kids school fees, car payments and other 'necessities'. 

Often the requirement for a steady pay-check to meet those daily bills is a set of 'golden-handcuffs' that keep would-be visionaries tied to their desks, a title or benefits, their careers and their current trajectory. 

In many cases, this group of aspiring entrepreneurs is tied through family requirements, expectations, or 'what would my wife/mother/ colleagues/ etc think of me if I chased my dream?'.

And yet, there are many who are doing just that. Some have thrown caution to the wind (like I) despite their circumstances, others have transitioned slowly into the space, and yet others have made that leap after a successful corporate career. Just like Troy Westley has.

One qualification here is that I am talking about startups that are actively engaged in driving their idea. Which means that I must, by definition, exclude the many people that attend startup groups & meetings as a 'wantapreneur'; those peolle that may have a great idea, but lack the drive or catalytic event required to actually make a start. 

In a more mature entrepreneur, that catalytic event could be a layoff, a life-event, an awakening moment or even just a gradual awareness of the 'ticking clock of life', and that the time is now. 

So if you know of a startup guy (or girl) who qualifies as a "hot 30 over 30", let me know - their story also deserves to be told.

Why Mick Liubinskas is wrong about centralising startup funding.

Today, Mick Liubinskas was quoted in a piece in StartUpSmart about an annoucement of $28m in startup innovation funding by Labour, to a Sydney incubator program. 

http://www.startupsmart.com.au/government-and-regulation/labor-pledges-28-million-in-co-funding-to-make-sydney-hub-for-innovation.html

Mick was quoted as saying “What hasn’t worked in the previous programs has been spreading the funds out too widely. It’s much better to put this money all to work in say Hobart or Sydney."

 

“I’m really passionate about fighting fragmentation, even if we can put it all to work in one industry and location, that’d be a breakthrough,” Liubinskas says. “If they have the courage to make it focused and local, it’s great.”

He's flat out wrong. 

My response comment to the article was 

"Last time I checked my citizenship documents, I distinctly remember them saying that I am an Australian citizen, not a Victorian or a New South Welshman. 

I understand what Mick is saying about focus, but since when did we as enrepreneurs, start buying into or accepting, the philosphy of scarcity?"

"Sydney is not the 'centre' of Australia (nor is my home town, Melbourne). And governments should not be in the business of 'picking winners' (especially based on their recent track record). "

"If we truly want Australia to be a force in the world startup ecosystem, governments need to encourage the whole ecosystem, not just one part of it. Governments know this better than any one, which is why we have a senate system which recognizes the rights if all states equally."

"I respect Mick's view & track record, but here, he is flat out wrong in buying into the typical pre-election pork-barrelling."

And here is why.

The recent PWC report (sponsored by Google) into the possible future of the Australian startup ecosystem, and the subsequent benefits to the Australian economy & new job creation in the sector, highlighted the immense opportunities that Australia will have over the next 20 years. 

If the last 20 years of Australian politics are anything to go by, namely 5 prime ministerial changes, 3 changes in government (with a 4th looming), a minority government, the rise of independents & minor parties controlling government policy (from Sen. Harradine etc), we will likely see those trends accelerate in the next 20 years.

If that is the case, the opportunities for Australian startups to emerge & thrive will be squandered as various factions & viewpoints sqwabble & scramble for meager funding opportunities offered by each of the major parties when each election period comes around. Worse, post-election, there will be (as there has always been), the traditional watering down & pandering to minority political interests, of pre-election promises. 

Direct personal experience tells me that changes to government policy can & will have a devastating impact on the success of many yet-to-envisaged startups across Australia.

My case in point is the NBN - which as a result of partisan politics in Australia -will likely become the largest fiasco in Australian political & technological history -against which the 'pink batts' disaster will pale into insignificance. 

We need a better plan than that -a plan that makes sense for those many thousand of professionals & startup entrepreneurs, most of whom will forgo traditional businesses & corporate roles, to invest 3-5 years of their lives in ventures that have an unforsee-able likelihood of success. 

So in our world of uncertainty, the one thing that we should ask for -no, demand -from our governments, is certainty of policy, and an ongoing commitment to consistency of approach - a bi-partisan long-term plan, free of pork-barelling, picking winners, and agenda-driven quotas.

Only then will we be in a position to create the opportunities of excellence that we can each imagine in our own spaces.

There are looming question of the 'funding gap', as well as equity-share taxation issues that will obviously need to be addressed, preferably sooner rather than later- but these are secondary. Without certainty of policy & committment, how could any government expect to get the funding initiatives right over a 20 year framework. 

I read a report recently that listed the top 25 startup locations in the US. Interestingly, 4 of the top 10 were in one middle-of-nowhere state called Colorado, which with just over 5 million people, is ranked 22nd largest state by population (roughly the same size & land area as Victoria). I'll venture that it didn't just happen by accident. 

So if Colorado can have 4 of the top 10 in the US, why can't Australia have 4 (or 6) of the top 10 in the world?

My dad used to say "A rising tide lifts all ships", but thats only true if there isn't an artificial dam put right in the middle of the harbour. 

So my request to Mick is simple - irrespective of the party elected, now and in the future, we need a plan from Government that helps, not hurts, our eco-system. Our best efforts should be directing to encouraging that to happen, rather than pitting one city against another. 

PS my original blog posted as "Mark Lubinskas" - which requires a direct apology to Mick (Sorry Mick) -I'm guessing I owe him at least a coffee.