article

100m 

"a plan for the BC.gov VC money"

[WHAT]

1. ] by Don Sagrott - An open letter to bc premier Christy Clark re the gov.bc decision to invest $ 100M into a venture capital fund
1. ] in dec of 2015 the bc government announced they will be investing 100M /$ into a venture capital fund to invest in the provinces technology sector
2. + ] the details of the plan will be announce at the #bctech conference on jan 18 
2. ] AIUI/from what i can glean of "their plan" at this point it looks something like this
1. ] the .gov will hire a private sector manager via its RFP process, to oversee the disbursement and management of these funds to various VC firms 
2. ] there is currently only a handful of VC firms operating in the province, part of the fund managers mandate will be to bring further VC business to the province.
3. ] the VC firms will then select where to invest the gov funds ( imagine your surprise when the investments they make go into their own portfolio companies)
4. ] it sounds like - targeting - series A investments  ( series A investments aren't really 'startup' investments ) 
3. ] Hootsuite founder Ryan Holmes shared "his plan" for what the government should do with these funds
1. ] # 4898 - SUMMARY on dec xx,, Ryan Holmes wrote an open letter to cC premier B with his suggestions on investing the 100m ( aka "a PLAN for BC's 100M VC fund" )
2. ] 50M for education - 
3. ] 50M for investment, down the line - 
4. ] 

[WHY]

1. ] should the government be "investing" in the tech industry?
1. ] this article is not an arguement for/against investing in 'the industry', this article assumes that 'the decision' to invest has been made to invest, this article is about "how" we should be investing. I assume the arguement as to wether we should be investing looked something like this / pointing out some of the PROS/CONS ,
2. ] PROS it creates jobs, the jobs that it creates are better, aka they pay more then other jobs, white collar, green, its a growing industry, its a diversified ]  it is an investment, NOT a grant or a gift, we should expect a return. 
3. ] CONS ] if this industry is so wonderful, why does it need gov investment, ] shouldn't private investors be lining up to invest. ] gov should NOT be in business, ] 
4. ] CONCLUSIONS - 
1. done right - it could be a huge success and a big win for the province
2. done - it will benefit some, 
3. done wrong - it will benefit some, it will likely close the door on future initiatives
2. ] 

[WHERE]

1. ] READ THE FULL ARTICLE
1. ] 

[WHEN]

1. ] 2016-01-0d

[EXAMPLE]

1. ] 

[HOW-TO]

1. ] DO leverage your capital 
1. ] 100M - federal government, municipal governments, private BUT most importantly benafactors ] VC firms, ] startups 
2. ] DON'T invest in those who dont need it
1. ] The hootsuite, slacks, avigilons, build direct's of the Vancouver startup ecosystem are all succesfull startup companies, they have the means, the people, the experience to pursue VC on thier own accord.
2. ] Lets also not confuse our startup ecosystem with the established players in the tech industry. Amazon, Google, Apple, Microsoft don't need your investment capital. 
3. ] DO develop a "super accelorator", "modelled on" silicon valleys most successfull accelorator(yc) but better 
1. ] We currently have 5+ "accelorators" operating in the province, Whats the biggest difference between our most well known homegrown accelorators and the (arguably) worlds most successfull accelorator, ] almost every single one of our current BC 'accelorators' are looking to take money out of the startup companies up fron - aka they want to earn money off of the potential startup companies that they "sponsor".  
2. ] YC puts money into the startup companies it selects, they provide expert training and ongoing guidance at NO COST and most importantly .... - YC makes a small investment(125k) for a small equity stake(approx. 7%) in the startup. YC wins when the startup wins.
4. ] DO utilization - use it for your own purposes
1. ] according to recent press reports, the gov has spent/invested over $115M and counting on a single system(panorama) for the Health Ministry. ] At the current time panorama is partially implemented, partially functional, riddled with bugs(12,000+) and being re-assessed(at additional cost) all accruing cost. 
1. ] BOTTOM LINE The gov has WASTED 100+M on a single system from a single vendor. SO FAR. 
2. ] The gov has many, many systems.
2. ] hire/sponsor your own accelorator backed "startup companies" to build gov it projects - Lets assume our startup company could build you a working prototype of a functional, bug free system, that users actually liked, for a mere fraction of the development and operating costs of big old tech giants. Why wouldnt you want to invest in this?
5. ] DO re-invest 
1. ] assuming we can generate a profit, lets be prepared to re-invest that profit and grow this fund further. 
6. ] DO marketing 
1. ] educators - 
2. ] capital - investors/ - 
3. ] companies - 
4. ] talent - 

[REFERENCE]

1. ] SRC = 
2. ] # 4843 - SUMMARY bc gov announcement of 100M venture fund - SUMMARY articles(2) about announcement by IN gov-systems/bc/index
3. +] # 4898 - SUMMARY article ryan holmes open letter
4. ] # 4894 - southern ont should be an innovation cluster, not a farm team
5. ] # 4423 - ycombinator - qry='ycombinator company success rate' ] yc success rate, ] some yc portfolio stats, ] sequoia is the big winner behind yc

100m/4.6m

== $ 21.75 pp

Details

ID: 4895

NAME: 100m

DESCRIPTION: ] by Don Sagrott - An open letter to bc premier Christy Clark re the gov.bc 100M venture fund

AUTHOR: article.author/s

EDITOR: article.editor/s

PUBLISHER: article.publisher/s

STATUS: Write

PRIORITY: -5

OWNER ID: 75

photos

actions