Welcome

Late last year, retailer Target made its big online play by releasing a 'shoppable' Web TV series starring well-known Hollywood actors. I have since been wondering if they provided us an advanced view of the future of advertising.

'Falling For You' could pass as your typical TV show. It has actors Kristen Bell, Nia Long, and Zachary Abel. It has a script and storyline. It is set in Manhattan, New York.

The difference is that as you are watching the show at http://fallingforyou.target.com/ using your web browser, the right of your screen features a scrolling array of the clothing and accessories the stars are wearing during the specific scene.



Target's user interface allows you to add these goods to your 'favorites', which you can bring up later and buy direct from Target's website.

It is definitely visionary. But it is also entirely possible, as the worlds of TV and Online continue to amalgamate.

All major TV manufacturers, like Samsung, Sony, Panasonic and LG, are building all current and future sets with 'Smart' technology built-in, including Wi-Fi, web browsers and apps. Also, we have Google TV and Apple TV becoming more prevalent in homes, while Play Stations and similar gaming consules are web-enabled.

This opens the door for the Target 'shoppable' concept to be stretched onto series that are better known and already on TV.

I can only imagine how much fun my wife would have had if this was available during 'Sex and the City' days. I personally wouldn't mind adding one of Harvey Specter's ties to my 'favorites' while watching 'Suits'.

This opens up huge possibilities, and moreso, it could secure the future of TV advertising by answering its need to be more measurable. All clicks will naturally be tracked in 'shoppable' viewing and advertisers may begin paying for TV ads similar to how they pay for online ads - using an infinitely more measured 'pay per click' or 'pay per impression' system.

'Falling For You' was a great piece of visionary innovation by Target. I am very excited about where this can go as the worlds of TV and Online further amalgamate over coming years.

I always look out for this presentation of the state of the internet, by Mary Meeker of Kleiner Perkins. So I thought I would embed below...

I came across an awesome resource for the tech company-interested folks out there, courtesy of Seer Interactive.

CLICK HERE to see an interactive table showing how leading tech companies make... or don't make... money!

The screenshot below of Instagram's result is particularly bleak, as the photo sharing app doesn't even fit into one of the key revenue-generation categories... yet.

Do you go out? Do you drink?

A hot web/mobile startup I consult requests that you please fill out a survey and help us understand you better!

Click here for the survey or fill it out below!



Thank you.

As entrepreneurs, I am sure you have read one-liners and quotes that are tweeted and re-tweeted for the world to read and latch onto.

Some are attributed to great people. Some are very opinionated. Some are personal crusades. Importantly, some are true.

Equally importantly, some are completely bullsh*t.

I am an investor in technology startups through my company, KAYWEB Angels. Therefore I am always reading about people's thoughts on technology, and sometimes, what they write riles me.

There are many myths in the world of entrepreneurship. And the assertion that "tech entrepreneurs must know or learn how to code" is one of those myths.

I started KAYWEB Angels on the back of the success of my web and mobile application development company, KAYWEB. At KAYWEB, I employ over a dozen programmers, designers and managers. We operate in three continents, with offices and staff in New York, Sydney, Melbourne and Manila. We have built over 200 websites and mobile applications over seven successful years. We have won many awards.

And I do not know how to code.

But let's forget about me, because this myth that "tech entrepreneurs must be able to code" is too big for it sound like a personal crusade.

Instead, let's focus on some of the most successful technology startups and ask one question... could people who do not know how to code have come up with these ideas?

1. Facebook, Twitter and other social networks?
2. Yelp, Foursquare and other location-based recommendation engines?
3. Zillow, AirBnB and other property search applications?
4. Net-a-Porter, Zappos and other clothing-based ecommerce giants?
5. Instagram, Flickr and other photo-sharing applications?
6. Angry Birds, Draw Something and other clever mobile adaptations of addictive games?

I am very excited to welcome busEasy and PicturPass to the KAYWEB Angels portfolio of web and mobile startups.

busEasy, a concept presented by Australian duo Tony Fairweather and Tony Antoniou, will bring a new and long overdue dynamic to the consumer transportation industry with its unique web offering.

PicturPass, which was conceived and presented  by an 11-year-old girl from New Jersey, is a fun, social game application for the next generation.

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR OUR ANNOUNCEMENT

By now, you have likely heard that there was a major stock exchange listing of a company called Facebook recently.

You may have also heard some of the lead-up talk ahead of the IPO. That Facebook will list for between -42 per share, valuing the company at over 0 billion - the largest internet company IPO in United States history.

If you are reading this blog (written by an Internet Business Consultant), you will likely have heard that things haven't quite panned out as many would have hoped since Facebook closed its first day on the NASDAQ at due to a late-in-the-day surge by investors - likely by those with most to lose if it finished below its opening value.

After just over a week as a public company, Facebook is now trading at just under per share, knocking billions off its valuation in the process.

As a result, poor Mark Zuckerberg is now no longer on the world's 40 Richest People list. He seems to be feeling it also after a Kosher restaurant owner in Italy reported this week that he failed to tip them after splurging on a lunch with his new wife while on their honeymoon.

Laughs aside about how some of the wealthiest people remain the tightest asses in the world, Facebook's IPO cannot be described as a success. There are many reasons being given for this.

Some experts say it is because the company has not yet worked out how to monetize its gigantic user base of 800 million - people are there to socialize, they say, not to be sold to.

Some say its primary monetization avenue, which is advertising, is unproven - despite Facebook raking in billion in advertising revenue over the last year, large advertisers are unconvinced by its ROI potential and in the immediate lead-up to the IPO, General Motors (GM) pulled its ads from the social network.

Some say Zuckerberg and his inexperience at 28 is worrying for Wall Street - as is his attitude, wearing hoodies to meetings and announcing 'I'm CEO bitch', is not very investable.

Some say the initial valuation expected was simply ridiculous and unrealistic, and it is now simply settling at where it should have always been to start with.

Whatever the reason, the Facebook IPO has been underwhelming.

Working and investing in the internet industry every day, many in my game were hoping the Facebook IPO would overwhelm, and this would lead to a flurry of activity on Wall Street - a boom (rather than a bubble) which would capture the imagination of traditionally non-internet investors to the internet industry.

There is no evidence since the Facebook IPO that enthusiasm for internet investments will die down.

Venture Capital dollars are still going to internet investments in the multi-millions every day, near-billion dollar exit contracts are being drawn up, and funds are being raised to find more internet success stories.

Since the Facebook IPO, there is however a steadily growing maturity in discussions around internet success stories. People are again focusing on 'revenue potential' rather than simply 'social networking potential' when assessing ideas. Folks are realizing that cash may also be king in the internet world, and this is a sobering positive for our space.

The underwhelming Facebook IPO means internet businesses are still welcome on Wall Street, evidenced by the fact that there is still plenty of investor appetite in this brand of business, however more questions will be asked of them before they reach the stage of IPO.

Statista has published the below infographic, showing Google's meteoric rise.

Google really knows how to arouse geeks...

Check out this video of Google presenting is "Glass Project" - glasses that bring Google products and the internet to the tip of your nose.

Much has been said since Facebook dived into their war chest to purchase photo-sharing application king Instagram for a cool US billion earlier this week.

Most of the reaction in the media and social networks was of 'shock'. I was not surprised.

"A billion dollars of money? For a thing that kind of ruins your pictures?" - Jon Stewart said on his The Daily Show.

"This will make you think: at its current, public market valuation, the New York Times company is worth about million less than the billion that Facebook just paid for Instagram." - The Next Web reported.

Of course the mobile application - which recently maintained its standing as the leading photo-sharing mobile application when it released its Android version and attracted 1 million downloads in a day - does more than ruin your pictures.

It provides a fantastic mobile interface for taking and sharing pictures with your Instagram social network, and other social networks like Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr and Foursquare.

While the value of such a product can be debated, it cannot be debated that today's market is valuing good web and mobile businesses very highly. Particularly ones with social appeal like Instagram, which has over 30 million active users.

The market does not rate traditional news sources anywhere near as highly. The New York Times is a wonderful global brand, but what it is not is a growing business in a growing industry. Instagram added 5 million users within 6 days of launching their Android application. That is a growing business in what is a growing industry.

We should not be surprised. Since the advent of capitalism, the market has determined the value of things, and tech is now valued very highly and Instagram is a growing tech business with a cult following.

What was the market thinking? What contributed to the billion price tag that Facebook coughed up? Here are some thoughts:

• Competition: I find it hard to believe that Facebook was the only bidder for Instagram, with the likes of Google and Yahoo mentioned as other interested parties. Like in any barter, competing bids drive up prices.
  
  
• Fear: Instagram does not yet integrate with Google+, Google's latest social networking play. While it is hardly a relevant competitor to Facebook yet, the brains trust at the leading social network would not have wanted the integration of Instagram into Google+ to go ahead.
  
  
• China: It is no secret that Facebook has so far been frustrated in its attempts to dominate the social networking industry in the world's biggest marketplace, China. Instagram is already a smash hit in China and will give Facebook a foot in the door.
  
  
• Talent: Facebook's mobile applications are not the greatest. They receive much criticism due to their non-native feel and bugs. Instagram is in contrast brilliant and native. The talent that brought that to the world will likely lead Facebook's future mobile efforts.
  
  
• Cash: Facebook has raised large rounds and is heading towards what is expected to be a record IPO. The company has cash and have not shown an ability to spend it in the past, and they are about to come across a lot more cash. This purchase shows that acquisitions and market consolidation will clearly be a tactic employed by Facebook post-IPO.