Category Archives: Investment

Dazzle Shines at Telco Industry Gig

Posted on by
Reply

Dazzle Tickets co-founders Christopher Smith and Nicolas Schembri have had a big couple of weeks. Not only did they steal the show at the Creative HQ showcase party recently but they also scooped the launchpad prize at Planet 2010 a telecommunications and technology industry event. I’m predicting big things from Dazzle in the future.

Dazzle provide online ticketing services to the entertainment industry. The company are part of a new wave of companies emerging from Wellington’s Creative HQ incubator and which mark a new found appetite for technology plays as the business incubator carves out a different strategic direction. The incubator assists a wide range of business types, but there has been a few lean years without much focus on high tech. This was in part due to the fact that the regional economic development plan largely ignores the contribution of ICT as an enabler. But with Wellington being the home of well known companies such as TradeMe and Xero, it was becoming embarrassing that technology was not a major focus.

Unlimited Potential has been working hard to rectify that situation. Through promoting technology entrepreneurship as a winner and by working closely with other stakeholders such as Victoria University, we have been able to focus attention on ICT as a key aspect in regional economic development. So it is tremendously gratifying to see some smart companies emerging from what is now a rapidly strengthening ecosystem. To their credit, economic development agency Grow Wellington have seized the moment and have big plans for cultivating even more Bright Ideas.

Ideas alone are not enough however. In fact what I like most of all about Dazzle Tickets is that they present well and look like a great team. The fact that they already executed on their idea and went out and made some sales of their service says a lot about the potential as well. The real key to success will be identifying a model that can allow them to scale up globally. That next step will be an exciting one, but will require fresh capital and some well connected advice. That’s where an entrepreneurial ecosystem for bright technology kicks in.

Is “Productivity” the Wrong Goalpost?

Posted on by
7

A recent research report1, looking at the reasons for New Zealand’s relatively poor economic performance, has some fascinating theories as to why we have paradoxically lagged behind other developed nations despite many structural advantages. It also raise questions about whether aiming for “productivity” parity with Australia is the right goal for New Zealand.

The report, authored by Professor Philip McCann, observes that New Zealand has struggled to compete on the OECD ladder since the economic reforms of the mid-1980s, despite its notable status as a free economy. In fact GDP per capita has been eroding steadily for over 40 years, a trend that shows little sign of abating. Few now doubt that this reduction in income has increasingly serious implications in regards to the affordabiity of the lifestyle currently enjoyed by New Zealanders.

In a world where human and financial capital are highly mobile, McCann theorises that economic geography, rather than macro-economic settings, constrains New Zealand from achieving its full economic potential. McCann says that focusing on a “productivity” gap with Australia is entirely the wrong approach, when in fact we should be looking at how we can leverage regional advantages. Only through regional cooperation can we hope to position for better growth.

He says that New Zealand has been constrained in adapting fully to the era of globalisation because of its small scale and distance to global markets. He also observes that worldwide economic growth is now being concentrated within larger cities and hyper connected regions. Such regions attract creative people and are increasingly associated with knowledge-based, high value economic activities, according to work by other researchers.

Because of the intense competition for talent and capital from power-house “global cities” on the Pacific Rim such as Shanghai, Singapore and Sydney, second tier cities (like Auckland or Adelaide for example) have no choice but to actively strengthen the existing web of interrelationships that bind them together on a sub-regional basis, suggests Professor McCann. Unfortunately, enormous reductions in capital flows during the recession have only added urgency to addressing the challenge of regionalisation.

The World Bank reported2 that from a peak of $296 billion (U.S. dollars) in foreign direct investment (FDI) into Asia during 2007, the figure had dropped to around $88 billion in 2009 as European and American institutions reviewed their investment strategies. Despite a forecast investment rebound to about $120 billion in 2010, the refinancing needs of the region have been estimated in the order of $200 billion per annum, leaving a substantial deficit to be covered by borrowing. This situation is likely to have considerable flow-on effects to neighbouring countries and trading partner nations across the Asia-Pacific rim.

So where does this leave New Zealand? A 2009 survey by Financial Times subsidiary publication FDI Magazine placed both Auckland and Wellington in the top ten of 133 Asia-Pacific cities in terms of quality of lifestyle. Auckland also surpassed many others by ranking an impressive number 10 with its FDI attraction strategy. But New Zealand cities ranked poorly in terms of infrastructure, education and the ability to create jobs through foreign investment or by leveraging technology and intellectual property. So whilst we can attract people for lifestyle reasons, our conversion rate is somewhat less impressive in respect of wealth creation.

MacDiarmid Institute physicist Shaun Hendy has been looking at patent data from the OECD. His study3 showed that Australia was well ahead of New Zealand on numbers of patents filed per capita, but that this was to be expected because data also suggested that larger cities produced more patents anyway. However he found that individual inventor productivity did not increase markedly with city size. This suggests that there are quite likely other influences such as quality of educational institutions, existence of research networks and availability of funding. Interestingly, the role of social effects and “knowledge spillover” on science researcher productivity has yet to be fully explored in this context.

Might the government’s well intentioned but controversial efforts to bridge the perceived “productivity gap” with Australia possibly be aiming at the wrong set of goal posts? Unless we fully acknowledge the importance of attracting and connecting people and capital on a regional basis we risk having to compete in isolation with much more powerful players throughout Asia-Pacific. A joint Australia-New Zealand investment showcase planned for March seems like the perfect opportunity to demonstrate a commitment to regional cooperation. But the government will have to ensure that the talk is followed up with decisive and timely actions as well as a leadership vision.

Bibliography:

  1. McCann, Philip. (2009). Economic geography, globalisation and New Zealand’s productivity paradox. Motu Research Group Public PolicyPaper
  2. Seward, J. (2009). Would a regional fund help get Asia through the financial crisis? World Bank weblog – East Asia and Pacific on the Rise.
  3. http://sciblogs.co.nz/a-measure-of-science/2009/12/16/the-productivity-of-inventors-in-cities/

A bullet point summary of the McCann report can be found here:

http://www.motu.org.nz/files/docs/McCann_seminar_slides.pdf

Photo Credit: Luke Appleby

Plug ‘n Play in the USA

Posted on by
1

The state government of Victoria in Australia has recently taken up space at Californian tech incubator the Plug and Play Tech Center. The Australian contingent brings the number of nations represented to a dozen or so. New Zealand is not amongst them.

Plug and Play operate a private full service technology incubator at a handful of physical locations on the West Coast. The incubator is deeply embedded in the Silicon Valley entrepreneur ecosystem with linkages to local universities, major corporations, angel investor groups and leading venture capital firms. In less than four years, companies involved with Plug and Play have raised an astounding total of $450 million in capital.

For technology firms that are serious about scaling up, engaging meaningfully in the North American market is a necessity and there is simply no better way to do this than being in the company of peers and mentors. To help firms connect offshore, New Zealand Trade & Enterprise runs an excellent global programme called Beachheads. The North American advisory board is headed by the very able and well connected Bridget Liddell and is a virtual offering rather than a physical incubator. But selection criteria are tight and they won’t look at any company doing less than $5 million revenue per annum.

So where does this leave early stage firms? Going it alone is simply not an option. The U.S. is a huge and complex market with many distinct sub-regions. Without proper advice, attacking the West Coast alone could burn up many years and a wad of capital. But testing the water with the assistance of a locally networked incubator is an affordable commonsense approach for smaller firms. Unfortunately, unlike our friends in Victoria, I don’t expect to see our government making this option available anytime soon. So it will be up to individuals to take the initiative.

Technology firms with global growth ambitions must be looking to engage within Asia-Pacific over the next few years.  Apart from the sheer size of this consumer audience, at least half of global capital market activity springs from the region. New Zealand also occupies a privileged position with its free trade status with China and likely eventual agreement with the U.S. We must find effective ways to plug New Zealand technology firms (of all sizes) into this space now.

W2W Tech Showcase Gains Traction

Posted on by
Reply

Unlimited PotentialUnlimited Potential’s W2W is the only event that brings together New Zealand’s technology innovators, entrepreneurs and investors under one roof for a half day of demos, presentations and networking. W2W attracted a stellar speaker line-up this year as well as increased interest from the investor community.

W2W is all about strengthening the entrepreneurial ecosystem for emerging tech firms by facilitating conversations between ICT researchers, business entrepreneurs and technology investors. The event focuses on specially chosen emerging ventures that have the potential to scale globally.

Entrepreneur presenters included Dan Lee, who discussed Beetil an I.T. management and compliance SaaS product and Jody Bullen from Yonix who provide software for business analysts. Both Lee and Bullen are recently arrived skilled migrants, underlining the importance of migrants to the regional economy. John Mitchell showed off Learning Source, a great tool that helps manage and administer training programmes, and Ben Nolan demonstrated the impressive capabilities of digital rendering software Indigorenderer.

Keynote speaker for the event was local hero Richard MacManus, founder of ReadWriteWeb, and one of the world’s most influential tech bloggers. Richard spoke about how he operates a virtual business. Other speakers included entrepreneur and author Ben Young and John Watt nanotechnology researcher and New Zealand Young Scientist of the Year.

Support for W2W’09 by Wellington City Council, Grow Wellington, UK Trade & Investment, Summer of Code, CafeNet, VicLink and iWantMyName was greatly appreciated. If you would like to support W2W 2010, please contact Unlimited Potential co-chair and W2W event project manager Paul Spence:  paul [at} up [dot) org (dot} nz

BB Build Begs Benefits

Posted on by
Reply

It is certainly a relief to finally see some leadership from the government in terms of their expectations around the broadband rollout. But in 5-10 years time when the project is finally complete will we have found a way to leverage this huge investment of public funds?

Industry ginger groups are being politely optimistic about the plan but it remains to be seen for how long the honeymoon lasts. Telecommunications is a highly political arena with many vested interests. Indications that the Crown Fibre Holding company will remain a Crown entity rather than a commercial state owned enterprise are certainly encouraging however; because the last thing we need is the new network being flogged off to an incumbent player or other foreign controlled interests at some point in the future.

But what are we going to use high speed broadband networks for once they are built? One would like to think that there will be more lofty social benefits than facilitating faster access to pornography, violent online games and moronic TV shows. Of course despite all the clamour by telcos and their equipment suppliers for a bite of the apple, we have never yet seen a properly articulated explanation of exactly what the social and economic return will be.

That aside, there is a wonderful window of opportunity for the government here. Surely we now need to provide an innovation challenge to stimulate the development of novel online services? Imagine how many creative new start-up companies could be kick-started. It seems glaringly obvious, but this aspect of the plan appears to have been somewhat overlooked as the government instead heavily promotes cowshit and tourism as our economic saviours.

There is another issue that has been overlooked as well. Until New Zealand gets access to better bandwidth and some decent competition on networks across the Pacific,  improving domestic connectivity is likely to have only a limited overall effect on economic growth.

Cultivating an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem

Posted on by
2

seedlingI can’t tell you how many meetings I’ve attended recently where I was involved in explaining the importance of having an entrepreneurial ecosystem within which to grow high value technology ventures. Unfortunately it can be hard work explaining why social capital is important when people are focused solely on linear metrics.

Recently I was inspired by a great success story that powerfully underlined my long held belief that building healthy communities and networks is an essential aspect of cultivating an entrepreneurial ecosystem. This is especially so in New Zealand where we are disadvantaged by our distance from the major consumer and capital markets of the world. But that disadvantage can be overcome by leveraging the creative boundaries where local networks overlap with those offshore.

Networks have  multiplier effects, as witnessed by the density of economic activity found in Silicon Valley. By building and maintaining social capital in our local technology sector we are establishing the pre-conditions for new economic life and the basis for small seedlings to grow into very large Kauri trees. But it takes time, 5 to 7 years for a good idea to develop into a viable business and then emerge as a high growth venture. Unfortunately this timeframe can be a problem for sponsoring organisations which rely on political support for their existence.

Investors in technology start-ups typically take a 5 to 10 year view of how much time will be required to launch, grow and then exit a high value business. But securing investment in the entrepreneurial ecosystem that underpins such ventures can be highly problematic because social capital is intangible and cannot be transacted. However, building the ecosystem is about making the pie bigger for everyone. Please consider supporting initiatives such as Unlimited Potential and Global Entrepreneurship Week if we come knocking at your door.

There is Snow Recession in New Zealand

Posted on by
1

remarkablesRecently I indulged my eight year son with a short holiday down south, including a day on the slopes at the very scenic Remarkables range. He’s already a very competent skier and full of confidence after only one season. In contrast, I spent most of the day sitting on my backside wondering why snow-boards do not have brakes installed – design flaw no doubt. But my son’s lack of fear provided me with some insight into what a difference attitude makes.

The recession may have dulled most travelers’ enthusiasm for spending in the short term; but the southern lakes region actually managed a small increase in visitor overnights in the past year. The “world’s adventure capital” must be one of the few places in which commercial and residential real estate development continues unabated and there remains a steady stream of incoming buses, boats and aircraft overflowing with families and young backpackers. Sure there has been the odd mortgagee sale and some of the trendy apparel retailers were a obviously bit quiet. But the town retains an optimistic feel about it, even in the midst of winter.

My point is that attitude can take you  long way. If other tiny Pacific Island nations can refuse to “participate” in the recession – why can’t we also? If positive-minded, friendly and engaging tourism industry employees and entrepreneurs can keep local economies ticking over – why can’t we apply this mindset to the whole country? And I don’t just mean tourism. Singapore has Biopolis, the U.S. has Silicon Valley and India has Bangalore. Regional resource advantage can be channelled by deliberate agglomeration, especially when there is sufficient access to capital and intellectual talent.

You can write good software code and draw up financial contracts just as easily from a villa overlooking beautiful Lake Wakatipu as you can from an office block in Palo Alto. So instead of polluting our landscape producing commodities that continually drop in price, we should be inviting entrepreneurs from offshore to base themselves here to create new enterprises and wealth whilst enjoying the scenery. The only crisis in well endowed New Zealand is one of lack of confidence.

Can Private Equity Rebalance?

Posted on by
1

Private equity firms in the U.S. alone are reportedly sitting on over $US 1 trillion in funds whilst at the same time economies are being hollowed out as cash strapped businesses go to the wall. But a surge in buyouts in the first quarter of 2009 suggests that equity investors are emerging to pick over the fallen carcasses of once great firms. In Asia, private equity firms successfully raised over $US 50 billion in 2008. Now with the faltering of several leading equity firms in Australia, there has been a resurgence of interest by Asian firms in that market especially.

It remains to be seen how the rebalance of power across Asia-Pacific will impact on New Zealand. But one thing remains certain, private equity deal-making is alive and well across the region and New Zealand will not go untouched. One example of this is the sale of accounting software provider MYOB. Although critics claimed at the time the price was too low, there was an ironic twist when founder Craig Winkler reinvested some of his winnings in a direct competitor. Small shareholders in such target firms would be well advised to remain alert to any further machinations that may impact on the value of their holdings.

What is clear at present is that there is generally a dearth of quality assets on the market. Profitable medium sized firms are hard to come by, but this situation will change. In particular family owned firms that survive the recession may attract more attention as their baby boomer owners head into retirement and look to offload. At the other end of the scale relatively new companies, that have a unique value proposition, may begin to look more interesting. But current indications are that such businesses are few and far between and even some local venture capital firms are struggling to place cash.

So what does this mean for New Zealand technology companies? Asia-Pacific looks like becoming the “buyout destination of choice”, according to the Asia Venture Capital Journal. Deal flow was up in the first quarter of 2009 and (surprisingly) the more developed economies benefitted most, as opposed to the emerging economies of China and India. The implications of that fact are that eventually a bunch of cashed up former business owners from around the region, like Craig Winkler, are going to be looking for new projects.

Innovation, Property Rights and the Political Economy

Posted on by
2

In recent months I have noticed an elevated volume of commentary relating to the overlap between economic development and the political expression of property ownership rights. Part of this debate has been driven by sea changes on the political landscape and new analysis of the role previous governments have played through intervening in markets. Last week’s OECD report card on New Zealand fanned the flames of this debate to a new level.

The report suggests that previous governments have consistently failed to address historically poor levels of productivity and innovation. In the face of a global economic emergency there is a strong call for urgent action to reconfigure policy on this front.

“New Zealand’s living standards remain well below the OECD average. This is entirely attributable to persistently low labour productivity, which in turn is related to economic geography as well as structural policy factors. The small size and remoteness of the economy diminish its access to world markets, the scale and efficiency of domestic businesses, the level of competition and proximity to the world’s technology frontier. This points to the need for a “New Zealand policy advantage”, that is, a set of structural policies attractive and welcoming enough to overcome the geographic handicap and attract the drivers of prosperity – investment, skills and ideas – to New Zealand.”

Innovation, property rights and the political economy are intertwined. For example without a robust framework for the protection of intellectual property there is little incentive to innovate and generate economic returns from new ideas. But implicit in the OECD calls for macroeconomic restructuring is the suggestion that Crown assets be sold to address fiscal debt. This remarkably unoriginal idea seems to mysteriously surface every time a National government is elected.

Some have argued that New Zealand’s historically interventionist approach has discouraged investment in innovation and critical infrastructure. However, hurried or ill considered sales of State assets (originally funded by taxpayers) in some respects seems contradictory to ongoing academic arguments that favour less intervention, more consistency and the protection of unalienable rights to property. How do we reconcile these positions? Should we be doing so? As was once proposed, would it not be better to leverage the capital invested in State owned enterprises to create new, high value spin-off ventures?

Of course the situation is complicated in New Zealand by the fact that Maori have strong views in terms of property rights, securing favourable State regulation and the connection this makes with their own economic development aspirations. But can we promote a free and unfettered market with strongly protected property rights on the one hand whilst at the same time contemplating separate justice and electoral systems and the wholesale transfers of property assets based on race? External investors no doubt also weigh these risks when considering New Zealand as a destination.

Jobs Summit Lacked Innovation

Posted on by
8

Predictably the sketchy proposals emerging from last week’s “Jobs Summit” ranged from mildly interesting to the completely ridiculous and I’m left wondering how many will actually come to pass. But the ideas fest, hosted at Manukau City, was not actually about generating sensible approaches to the economic crisis, it was about putting on a display of unity and generating some positive buzz. Ironically, the business leaders at the conference will likely preside over hundreds of layoffs themselves in the coming months.

I like that John Key is an ideas man and is prepared to entertain novel concepts. But his sidekick Bill English made it very clear going into the summit that the state of the nation’s finances would not allow for a great deal of additional expenditure. By lowering expectations ahead of the summit he allowed the government to wiggle out of addressing any meaningful economic reform. His comments may even foreshadow some backpeddling on big ticket sacred cows like tax cuts, broadband and superannuation.

I guess my real concern is that the Jobs Summit hoopla has eclipsed the fact that economic realities have shifted so much that we really need to make a quantum leap in how we approach investing in our future as a nation. I’m not convinced that the summit properly addressed these issues. Borrowing cash to dig cable trenches and build a cycleway will simply not cut the mustard in my opinion.

Since it was elected, the government has astutely avoided making any comments about the need to invest in research, science and technology innovation. In fact the only promise they have made in this area is to kill off the R&D tax credit. They still don’t get it. The only businesses that are growing right now are precisely those that have invested in technology research and development. For example colostrum manufacturer New Image have exploded onto the Asian market. Even the horrendous balls-up in China by dairy commodity behemoth Fonterra has failed to suppress the demand for this high end, added value product.

Saving jobs in the breakfast cereal factories and assembly lines of South Auckland is important. But even more important is creating more high tech companies and developing our largely under-educated workforce. The lack of aspiration we currently demonstrate as a nation is reflected more and more in the ugly twin cultures of ethnic gangs and idiot boyracers that are furtively permeating our society and populating our streets with a generation of social rejects. What we really needed was an all encompassing social, economic and technological Innovation Summit.