DOCSLIB.ORG

Evaluating the U.S. Small Business Administration's Growth Accelerator

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Evaluating the U.S. Small Business Administration's Growth Accelerator Evaluating the U.S. Small Business Administration’s Growth Accelerator Fund Competition Program A Report Prepared by the Federal Research Division, Library of Congress under an Interagency Agreement with the Office of Investment and Innovation, U.S. Small Business Administration FINAL February 2018 Researchers: Marieke Lewis Brock Meaghan Flattery Malinda K. Goodrich Wm. Noël Ivey Patrick M. Miller Project Manager: Malinda K. Goodrich Federal Research Division Library of Congress Washington, D.C. 20540−4840 Tel: 202−707−3900 Fax: 202−707−3920 Email: [email protected] Homepage: http://loc.gov/rr/frd/ 70 Years of Service to the Federal Government 1948 – 2018 Library of Congress—Federal Research Division Evaluating the SBA’s GAFC Program PREFACE The U.S. Small Business Administration’s (SBA’s) Office of Investment and Innovation (OII) contracted with the Library of Congress’s Federal Research Division (FRD) for an independent evaluation of the Growth Accelerator Fund Competition (GAFC) program. The OII oversees the program, which the SBA instituted to “support the development of accelerators and their support of startups in parts of the country where there are fewer conventional sources of access to capital.”1 The goal of this report is to evaluate the scope and value of the GAFC program as a federal government-sponsored means of spurring innovation and small business growth. The analysis included in this report is based on a literature review of scholarly research on the growing accelerator movement; data and reports from the Aspen Institute’s Global Accelerator Learning Initiative, Crunchbase, the Global Accelerator Network, and PitchBook; SBA-required reporting by the 2014–16 GAFC winners; interviews with key experts in the field; and a survey of the 2014–16 GAFC winners to build the fullest picture possible of the program’s impact. The report begins with a background on the accelerator movement in the United States, including a description of the landscape of accelerators and other similar entrepreneurial support organizations. It then investigates other startup support programs within the U.S. government, and provides a cursory examination of selected state- and local-level support efforts and the trend abroad. The report then goes on to examine the results of the survey of GAFC recipients and provides a SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis of the program. Additionally, after conducting its own research, FRD solicited the input of various government, nonprofit, and accelerator experts to provide independent feedback on both the GAFC program and this report. That feedback is highlighted in the conclusion. The project team would like to thank the following individuals who were kind enough to provide their perspectives: Mason Ailstock, Association of University Research Parks; Jason Bossie, SBA’s Office of the Chief Financial Officer; Mike Ehst, World Bank; Emily Reichart, Greentown Labs; and Dr. Stephen Tang, University City Science Center. The project team also extends its appreciation to the management of OII, Deputy Associate Administrator Michele Schimpp and Director of Innovation and Technology John Williams. The research team would also like to express its gratitude to the OII program staff, especially Nagesh Rao, Chief Technologist, Amber Chaudhry, Presidential Management Fellow, and Rebecca Rowe, Program Analyst, Government Contracting and Business Development who so generously extended their time, data, advice, input, and contacts to the FRD research team. FRD provides customized research and analytical services on domestic and international topics to agencies of the U.S. government, the government of the District of Columbia, and authorized 1 U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA), “SBA Launches 4th Annual Growth Accelerator Fund Competition to Award $1 Million to Support Startup Focused Centers of Excellence,” accessed August 9, 2017, https://www.sba.gov/offices/ headquarters/ooi/resources/1428931. i Library of Congress—Federal Research Division Evaluating the SBA’s GAFC Program federal contractors on a cost-recovery basis. This report represents an independent analysis by FRD and the authors, who have sought to adhere to accepted standards of scholarly objectivity. It should not be construed as an expression of an official U.S. government position, policy, or decision. ii Library of Congress—Federal Research Division Evaluating the SBA’s GAFC Program TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE............................................................................................................................................................................... i EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................................. 1 KEY FINDINGS .................................................................................................................................................................. 2 BACKGROUND ON ACCELERATORS ........................................................................................................................ 6 Accelerator Goals ........................................................................................................................................................ 9 Key Features of Accelerators .................................................................................................................................. 9 Success Factors and Benefits Provided by Accelerators ........................................................................... 10 THE LANDSCAPE OF ACCELERATORS IN THE UNITED STATES .................................................................. 13 OTHER KINDS OF ENTREPRENEURIAL SUPPORT ORGANIZATIONS ........................................................ 16 FEDERAL SMALL BUSINESS STARTUP SUPPORT PROGRAMS .................................................................... 20 Single Agency Initiatives ....................................................................................................................................... 20 U.S. Department of Energy .............................................................................................................................. 20 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services .................................................................................... 21 U.S. Department of Homeland Security ..................................................................................................... 21 U.S. Small Business Administration .............................................................................................................. 22 National Institutes of Health ........................................................................................................................... 24 National Science Foundation ......................................................................................................................... 25 Multi-Agency Initiatives ........................................................................................................................................ 27 State and Local Entrepreneurial Support ............................................................................................................ 28 California’s Experience with Entrepreneurial Support ............................................................................... 29 New York’s Experience with Entrepreneurial Support ............................................................................... 31 Ohio’s Experience with Entrepreneurial Support ......................................................................................... 34 Texas’s Experience with Entrepreneurial Support ....................................................................................... 37 Virginia’s Experience with Entrepreneurial Support ................................................................................... 39 Experience of Other Countries’ Government Accelerator Programs ........................................................ 41 DESCRIPTION OF SBA’S GAFC PROGRAM .......................................................................................................... 42 PROFILE OF 2014–16 GAFC PRIZE WINNERS .................................................................................................... 44 The Survey .................................................................................................................................................................. 45 Types of Organizations .......................................................................................................................................... 45 Mission and Focus ................................................................................................................................................... 49 Number of Cohorts and Startups ...................................................................................................................... 49 Geographic Distribution........................................................................................................................................ 50 Age and Size of Winners (Employees, Budgets, and Startups) .............................................................. 51 Industries Served ..................................................................................................................................................... 52 Sources of Accelerators’
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 2020 Diverse Founder Report 2021
    First Last Company Valuation Raise Status City Founded Race Gender ($mm) ($mm) 1 Robert Reffkin Compass $4,400 $1,500 Series G NYC 2012 African American Men 2 Daniel Perez Hinge Health $3,000 $426 Series D SF 2015 Latino Men 3 Tope Awontona Calendly $3,000 $351 Series A ATL 2013 African American Men 4 Pedro Franceschi Brex $2,600 $732 Series C SF 2017 Latino Men 5 Julia Collins Zume Pizza $2,250 $423 PE SF 2015 African American Women 6 Isabel Aznarez Stoke Therapeutics $2,160 $272 IPO BOS 2014 Latino Women 7 Jessie Woolley-Wilson Dreambox Learning $2,000 $176 Series C Seattle 2006 African American Women 8 Eugenio Pace Auth0 $1,920 $332 Series F Seattle 2013 Latino Men 9 Louis Von Ahn DuoLingo $1,650 $183 Series H Pittsburg 2011 Latino Men 10 Manny Medina Outreach $1,330 $289 Series F Seattle 2014 Latino Men 11 Jessica Alba Honest Company $1,000 $503 PE LA 2012 Latino Women 12 Toyin Ajayi City Block $1,000 $299 Series C NYC 2017 African American Women 13 Rihanna Fenty Savage x Fenty $1,000 $165 Series B LA 2017 African American Women 14 Michael Siebel Twitch $1,000 $35 M&A SF 2007 African American Men Total $28,310 $5,686 Investor Investments Investor Investments 1 Y Combinator 37 28 Rethink Education 6 2 Techstars 34 29 Salesforce Ventures 6 3 500 Startups 23 30 Sinai Ventures 6 4 Kapor Capital 19 31 AltaIR Capital 5 5 Harlem Capital Partners 16 32 Data Collective 5 6 Precursor Ventures 14 33 Founders Fund 5 7 Backstage Capital 12 34 Thrive Capital 5 8 Andreessen Horowitz 11 35 Village Global 5 9 Comcast Ventures 11 36 43North 4 10 Cross
    [Show full text]
  • Corporate Venturing Report 2019
    Corporate Venturing 2019 Report SUMMIT@RSM All Rights Reserved. Copyright © 2019. Created by Joshua Eckblad, Academic Researcher at TiSEM in The Netherlands. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS LEAD AUTHORS 03 Forewords Joshua G. Eckblad 06 All Investors In External Startups [email protected] 21 Corporate VC Investors https://www.corporateventuringresearch.org/ 38 Accelerator Investors CentER PhD Candidate, Department of Management 43 2018 Global Startup Fundraising Survey (Our Results) Tilburg School of Economics and Management (TiSEM) Tilburg University, The Netherlands 56 2019 Global Startup Fundraising Survey (Please Distribute) Dr. Tobias Gutmann [email protected] https://www.corporateventuringresearch.org/ LEGAL DISCLAIMER Post-Doctoral Researcher Dr. Ing. h.c. F. Porsche AG Chair of Strategic Management and Digital Entrepreneurship The information contained herein is for the prospects of specific companies. While HHL Leipzig Graduate School of Management, Germany general guidance on matters of interest, and every attempt has been made to ensure that intended for the personal use of the reader the information contained in this report has only. The analyses and conclusions are been obtained and arranged with due care, Christian Lindener based on publicly available information, Wayra is not responsible for any Pitchbook, CBInsights and information inaccuracies, errors or omissions contained [email protected] provided in the course of recent surveys in or relating to, this information. No Managing Director with a sample of startups and corporate information herein may be replicated Wayra Germany firms. without prior consent by Wayra. Wayra Germany GmbH (“Wayra”) accepts no Wayra Germany GmbH liability for any actions taken as response Kaufingerstraße 15 hereto.
    [Show full text]
  • Read Dissertation
    Doctoral Dissertation: The Journey towards a Growing Diffusion of Entrepreneurship Learning and Culture in Society Written by: Mirta Michilli Role DETAILS Author Name: Mirta Michilli, PhD Year: 2019 Title: The Journey towards a Growing Diffusion of Entrepreneurship Learning and Culture in Society Document type: Doctoral dissertation Institution: The International School of Management (ISM) URL: https://ism.edu/images/ismdocs/dissertations/michilli-phd- dissertation-2019.pdf International School of Management Ph.D. Program The Journey towards a Growing Diffusion of Entrepreneurship Learning and Culture in Society PhD Dissertation PhD candidate: Mirta Michilli 21st December 2019 Acknowledgments I wish to dedicate this work to Prof. Tullio De Mauro who many years ago believed in me and gave me the permission to add this challenge to the many I face every day as General Director of Fondazione Mondo Digitale. The effort I have sustained for many years has been first of all for myself, to satisfy my desire to learn and improve all the time, but it has also been for my fifteen year old son Rodrigo, who is building his life and to whom I wish the power of remaining always curious, hungry for knowledge, and capable of working hard and sacrificing for his dreams. I could have not been able to reach this doctorate without the support of my family: my mother, for having being present all the time I needed to be away, my sister, for showing me how to undertake continuous learning challenges and, above all, my beloved husband to whom I owe most of what I know and for dreaming with me endlessly.
    [Show full text]
  • The Best Partnering Opportunities and Market Entry Strategies for a Finnish Start-Up Venturing Into Silicon Valley
    The best partnering opportunities and market entry strategies for a Finnish start-up venturing into Silicon Valley Case company: Witrafi Oy Niki Matilainen Sampsa Siitonen Bachelor’s Thesis Degree Programme in International Business 2016 Abstract 10 April 2016 Authors Niki Matilainen, Sampsa Siitonen Degree programme in International Business Report/thesis title Number of pages The best partnering opportunities and market entry strategies for a and appendix pages Finnish start-up venturing into Silicon Valley 135 + 23 This study examines what methods there are for a Finnish startup to enter Silicon Valley in pursuit of the American Dream. The primary goal is to determine which concrete and ac- cessible alternatives are available in pursuing business in the Silicon Valley for Witrafi Oy, a smart parking startup from Finland. Thus, the aim is to provide information on methods available for the case-company to enter Silicon Valley with varying degrees of resource commitment. The thesis work consists of a theory review, data collection and subsequent analysis with recommendations made on how market entry could be pursued by the case company. The theory discusses funding options for a startup in addition to internationalization theories ap- plicable to an early-stage company. The empirical part focuses on providing viable interna- tionalization options for the case company, finishing with recommendations for Witrafi for various levels of resource commitment. The study involved both quantitative and qualita- tive methods. A qualitative exploratory research approach was used because the aim of the study was to provide additional information for decision making. Thus, no hypotheses were set in the beginning, rendering the research inductive.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bay Area Innovation System Science and the Impact of Public Investment
    The Bay Area Innovation System Science and the Impact of Public Investment March 2019 Acknowledgments This report was prepared for the Bay Area Science and Jamie Lawrence, IBM Corporate Citizenship Manager – Innovation Consortium (BASIC) by Dr. Sean Randolph, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Utah, Washington Senior Director at the Bay Area Council Economic Daniel Lockney, Program Executive – Technology Transfer, Institute. Valuable assistance was provided by Dr. Dorothy NASA Miller, former Deputy Director of Innovation Alliances at Dr. Daniel Lowenstein, Executive Vice Chancellor and the University of California Office of the President and Provost, University of California San Francisco Naman Trivedi, a consultant to the Institute. Additional Dr. Kaspar Mossman, Director of Communications and support was provided by Estevan Lopez and Isabel Marketing, QB3 Monteleone, Research Analysts at the Institute. Dr. Patricia Olson, VP for Discovery & Translation, California Institute for Regenerative Medicine In addition to the members of BASIC’s board of Vanessa Sigurdson, Partnership Development, Autodesk directors, which provided review and commentary throughout the research process, the Economic Institute Dr. Aaron Tremaine, Department Head, Accelerator Technology Research, SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory particularly wishes to thank the following individuals whose expertise, input and advice made valuable Eric Verdin, President & CEO, Buck Institute for Research on Aging contributions to the analaysis: Dr. Jeffrey Welser, Vice President & Lab Director, IBM Dr. Arthur Bienenstock, Special Assistant to the President for Research – Almaden Federal Policy, Stanford University Jim Brase, Deputy Associate Director for Programs, Computation Directorate, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory About BASIC Tim Brown, CEO, IDEO BASIC is the science and technology affiliate of the Doug Crawford, Managing Director, Mission Bay Capital Bay Area Council and the Bay Area Council Economic Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Seed Accelerator Rankings Yael V
    U.S. Seed Accelerator Rankings Yael V. Hochberg and Kristen Kamath Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University The goal of the U.S. Seed Accelerator Rankings, now in its second year, is to begin a larger conversation about what makes seed accelerators successful, and to provide startups with a tool to help them decide which seed accelerators are a good match for their needs. The rankings below evaluate the relative success of accelerator programs in the US based on our ranking criteria: Rank Overall 1 Y Combinator 2 TechStars Boulder 3 KickLabs 4 i/o Ventures 5 Excelerate Labs 6 AngelPad 7 TechStars NYC 8 TechStars Boston 9 Launchpad LA 10 500 Startups 11 DreamIt Ventures 12 TechStars Seattle 13 NYC SeedStart 14 Entrepreneurs Roundtable Accelerator 15 The Brandery For the purposes of this study, we define an accelerator as a program that offers mentorship, office space, and a small stipend in exchange for equity. To be included in the rankings, an accelerator program must have defined cohorts and hold fixed duration sessions of less than 1 year, culminating in a demo day for potential investors. This study does not include accelerators that require entrepreneurs to have affiliations with specific universities or minority groups. These accelerators provide young companies with mentorship and help achieve the declared goal of building a powerful network in the early stages of the start-up’s development. Affiliation with the top accelerator programs can also provide a strong branding and certification mechanism for young companies. Evaluation Criteria The greatest benefit of an accelerator is to position start-ups for long term success.
    [Show full text]
  • How Business Startup Accelerators Envision Their Future
    Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management Rabat, Morocco, April 11-13, 2017 How Business Startup Accelerators Envision their Future Ana Clara Carvalho Departamento de Engenharia Mecânica e Industrial Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa Caparica, Portugal [email protected] António Grilo Departamento de Engenharia Mecânica e Industrial and UNIDEMI Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa Caparica, Portugal [email protected] Joaquim P. Pina Departamento de Ciências Sociais Aplicadas and CEFAGE-FCT/UNL Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa Caparica, Portugal [email protected] Aneesh Zutshi Departamento de Engenharia Mecânica e Industrial and UNIDEMI Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia, Universidade NOVA de Lisboa Caparica, Portugal [email protected] Abstract Accelerators have become an important agent for the growth of new Startups across the world. They provide training and mentorship to startups and help them find investors. However the very nature of accelerators is evolving as they are trying to evolve sustainable Business Models. Through an in depth literature review, we try to explore a deeper understanding about the various types of Accelerators across the world and how they help startups. Also, through a worldwide survey to accelerators landscape, we identify their opinion about major challenges for the future, and through statistical exploration, provide an anatomy of these entrepreneurial firms. Therefore, this research provides a complete portrait on accelerators, regarding their business models, strategies and challenges for the future. Keywords Accelerators, Survey, Nonlinear Principal Components 1. Motivation It is believed that entrepreneurial activity is related to the economic growth, but there is still a lack of theoretical foundation and the community would benefit a lot from further research being conducted (Hochberg, 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • GUIDE to Doing Business on the US East Coast for Dutch Companies Information for Small and Medium Enterprises, Startups, and Scale-Ups 2 Contents
    LOPENDE TITEL 1 GUIDE TO Doing Business on the US East Coast for Dutch Companies Information for small and medium enterprises, startups, and scale-ups 2 Contents Introduction 5 Foreword Ambassador Haspels 6 Foreword Pauline Dirkmaat 7 Chapter 1: An introduction to the US East Coast 8 1 The US East Coast: a Great Place for Internationalizing Companies 9 2 East Coast vs. West Coast 10 3 Business Culture 11 4 Dutch Government Network on the East Coast 12 Chapter 2: Practical Information for Setting Up a Business on the US East Coast 13 1 Legal Aspects 14 1.1 The three Levels of Law & Incorporation 14 1.2 Immigration: Getting to and Staying in the US 14 1.3 Insurance 15 2 Finance and Banking 15 3 Human Resources 15 4 Communication and Networking 16 4.1 Communication Tips 16 4.2 Networking Tips 17 5 Practical Tips for Startups 18 5.1 Raising Capital 18 5.2 Pitching 19 5.3 Other Resources for Startups 20 Chapter 3: Boston 21 1 Introduction 22 2 Why Boston? 23 3 Key Sectors in Boston 23 3.1 Life Sciences and Health 23 3.2 Cleantech 24 3.3 Artificial Intelligence 24 3.4 Robotics 25 3.5 Edtech, FinTech and Cybersecurity 25 4 Startup Ecosystem Drivers 26 5 Other Resources 28 Chapter 4: New York City 30 1 A Brief Background 31 2 Why New York City? 31 3 Key Sectors & Opportunities 32 3.1 Finance, FinTech & Cybersecurity 32 3.2 Life Sciences and Health and Biotech 32 3.3 Creative Industries 33 3.4 Manufacturing 34 3.5 Circular Economy & Resiliency 34 3.6 Cleantech & Energy 35 3.7 Water Management & Resiliency 35 4 Startups and Scale-ups 35 5 New York Online Resources 38 CONTENTS 3 Chapter 5: Washington, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • The Startup Factories. the Rise of Accelerator Programmes
    Discussion paper: June 2011 The Startup Factories The rise of accelerator programmes to support new technology ventures Paul Miller and Kirsten Bound NESTA is the UK’s foremost independent expert on how innovation can solve some of the country’s major economic and social challenges. Its work is enabled by an endowment, funded by the National Lottery, and it operates at no cost to the government or taxpayer. NESTA is a world leader in its field and carries out its work through a blend of experimental programmes, analytical research and investment in early- stage companies. www.nesta.org.uk Executive summary Over the past six years, a new method of incubating technology startups has emerged, driven by investors and successful tech entrepreneurs: the accelerator programme. Despite growing interest in the model from the investment, business education and policy communities, there have been few attempts at formal analysis.1 This report is a first step towards a more informed critique of the phenomenon, as part of a broader effort among both public and private sectors to understand how to better support the growth of innovative startups. The accelerator programme model comprises five main features. The combination of these sets it apart from other approaches to investment or business incubation: • An application process that is open to all, yet highly competitive. • Provision of pre-seed investment, usually in exchange for equity. • A focus on small teams not individual founders. • Time-limited support comprising programmed events and intensive mentoring. • Cohorts or ‘classes’ of startups rather than individual companies. The number of accelerator programmes has grown rapidly in the US over the past few years and there are signs that more recently, the trend is being replicated in Europe.
    [Show full text]
  • Creating LAIA Foreword
    Creating LAIA Foreword The lack of capital and support has been a constant refrain a feasibility study on the potential of a women-focused heard from female entrepreneurs at every stage of growth. LA incubator and accelerator, hence this publication A recent report by JPMorgan Chase and The Initiative for of Creating LAIA: The Feasibility of a Women-Focused a Competitive Inner City (ICIC) found that women (and Incubator & Accelerator in Los Angeles. minorities) “are not participating in high-tech incubators and accelerators at the same rates as their white, male Creating LAIA is the definition of collaboration - what counterparts.” women do organically. Although it was ofcially and adroitly written by We Are Enough Executive Director and After I gave my 2015 TEDx Talk, “Why You Should be Sexist Co-founder, Delilah Panio, the final product was birthed by with Your Equity Capital,” I was surprised by how many many. Along with the women entrepreneurs and women- women entrepreneurs approached and requested to meet focused incubator and accelerator leadership listed in with me – each emotionally describing their reactions to the appendix, we have had conversations with or have what I thought was the unemotional subject of finance and listened to many female investors and entrepreneurs who money. The majority of these women were small business have informed the conclusions reached in Creating LAIA. owners who articulated stories of the difculty in growing To name a few – Monica Dodi, Kara Nortman, Efe Epstein, their businesses, specifically the lack of support and Dana Settle, Kesha Cash, Carman Palafox, Noramay capital. I soon learned that many women had an emotional Cadena, Adena Smith, Diane Manuel, Ana Quintana, Darya and insecure relationship with money.
    [Show full text]
  • IMMERSIVE MEDIA a STATE of the INDUSTRY May 2017
    IMMERSIVE MEDIA A STATE OF THE INDUSTRY May 2017 VR/AR Project VR/AR Project vrarproject.com [email protected] VR/AR Project New Amsterdam Media 1 VR/AR Project May 1, 2017 Rev 3.0 Editor: Seth Shapiro Deputy Editors: Bryce Paul & Andriy Pishchalenko Contributors: Perisa Brown, John Canning, Amy Dai, Xingting Gu, Hudson Leiser, Francisco Serna, Kinsey Thompson V2 Seth Shapiro 2016 Andriy Pishchalenko V1 Seth Shapiro 2015 Andriy Pishchalenko [email protected] VR/AR Project New Amsterdam Media 2 VR/AR Project [email protected] VR/AR Project New Amsterdam Media 3 VR/AR Project THIS IS AN OPEN COMMUNITY PROJECT. THIS IS A SNAPSHOT OF A RAPIDLY EVOLVING LANDSCAPE. TO OPT IN FOR FUTURE VERSIONS OF THIS PAPER, JOIN US AT VRARPROJECT.COM EMAIL US AT [email protected] [email protected] VR/AR Project New Amsterdam Media 4 VR/AR Project TABLE OF CONTENTS I 1. Preface 7 2. Overview 8 3. Enterprise Use Cases 9 Advertising & Marketing 9 Aerospace & Defense 11 Construction 12 Education 14 Entertainment 15 Fashion 18 Finance 19 Gaming 21 Healthcare 24 Live Events 26 Real Estate 28 Retail 29 Training 31 Travel & Hospitality 32 4. Computer Rendered VR 35 5. Live Action VR 37 6. Web VR 38 7. Social VR 39 8. Location-Based VR 42 Theme parks 42 VRcades 44 9. Smartphone VR/AR 46 10. VR Head Mounted Displays (HMDs) 49 11. AR/MR Head Mounted Displays (HMDs) 54 12. Spatial Audio 59 13. Haptics, Accessories, and Control Systems 63 Omnidirectional Treadmills 66 Exercise and fitness 29 Haptic Suits 64 Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation (GVS) 67 [email protected] VR/AR Project New Amsterdam Media 5 VR/AR Project TABLE OF CONTENTS II Advanced movement tracking 66 14.
    [Show full text]
  • Copyrighted Material
    INDEX 10x rule 122 angel investments 168–9, 172, 387 42patents.com 412 angel investors 135, 168–70, 185 70:30 rule 74 angel round 169–70 99designs 151, 411, 412 AngelList 169, 414 500 Startups 116, 179 AngelPad 116 anti-dilution clause 228–9 accelerators 154, 177–9 aperiodic discounting 393 accounting system 149 Apollo 274, 416 accruing dividends clause 230 Apple 25, 27, 30, 124, 149, 150, add-on business model 392 305, 308, 333 ADHD 23 arbitrage 400 Adobe Fill & Sign 49 ArcelorMittal 400 advertising 7, 338 as-a-service models 393 advisory board 267–8 ask-me-anything (AMA) session 73 adwords.google.com 421 assuming the sale 98 affiliate marketing 120, 398 atlassian.com 412 after-sales 99 attitude, positive 51–2 agencyanalytics.com 422 attorneys 154 age of entrepreneurs 27–31 auction pricing 393 aggregation strategy 331 Audible 40 agile business development 306–7, 309 audible.com 67, 415 AgoraPulse 53, 418 audio blogs 67 Airbnb 8, 30, 121, 124, 132, 333, 398, 400 audiobooks 40, 67, 414 airport test 251–2 audit, legal 201 Alchemist 116 automatic personal website generators 46 alcohol 38–9 aweber.com 421 Ali, Muhammad 333 Alibaba 27 backdoor reference 280 Allen & Company 181 back-of-the-envelope calculation alliances 345 13, 125, 344 all-or-nothing 342 backstop 248 AltaVista 210 Balachandra, Lakshmi 216 Amazon 1-Click Ordering 391 barriers to entry 123 Amazon 27, 65, 124, 150, 153, 160, 246, 331, Beckman, Finn Paavo 341 334, 343, 396, 414 Bentley cars 128, 401 Amazon AssociatesCOPYRIGHTED 398 Berkus MATERIAL method 223 Amazon Cloud Drive
    [Show full text]