3 ms·

"even some high-profile investors that include [Mark Cuban] have not seen the uBeam working." I don't understand how people can raise money like this. Investor

by api 11y ago

"even some high-profile investors that include [Mark Cuban] have not seen the uBeam working." I don't understand how people can raise money like this. Investors usually like to actually see evidence that you are actually doing something, right? Right?

joshu 11y ago
It really depends, but personally, yeah, I like to see proof behind extraordinary claims.
jacquesm 11y ago
I've seen a few requests come in where I really wondered if the subject investors had any technical knowledge at all. Investor scams are unfortunately rather common. As soon as secrecy, a breakthrough and a very large market coincide the gullible and their money are soon parted. I personally don't think this is a bad thing because it keeps me employed, at the same time you'd wish that this sort of thing would stop because it most likely hinders genuine breakthroughs from being given the attention they deserve. Some of those get recycled a few years or decades later so not all is lost but still, a few cold fusions and AI winters and the tech industry as a whole suffers. As for the uBeam, ultrasound is a strange medium to choose for this particular job, ultrasound is fickle, has a ton of side effects, isn't particularly efficient and interferes with living creatures in all kinds of un-desirable ways. Going the electromagnetic route would seem to be the first thing to try (and some companies are doing this and have products, maybe not 'miracle class' but they'll do the job they're designed to). The best bet for getting rid of the charger cord are a strong reduction in required power for the phones, better battery technology, maybe micro fuel cells or some other exotic conversion technology. Populating the world with ultrasonic transmitters with about the same range as the charge cord they replace seems to fix one minor inconvenience by replacing it with a much larger one, not a company I'd bet on.
- api 11y ago
  With the opening of seed investment to the general public, I unfortunately think you're going to see a huge increase in professional investor scams. I fully expect organized crime to get involved. Of course anyone can go blow their money at a casino and with a much lower odds of return than investing on AngelList, so I'm not sure it's an overall bad thing. Still I am concerned about loss of signal in noise and about 'winters' as you say.
  - jacquesm 11y ago
    In plenty of places seed investments have been open to the general public just about forever and as far as I know there have not been any major differences between the number of scams purported there versus in countries where investors need to be accredited. Crowdfunding is currently doing a great job educating people on the risks of putting money up for vapourware but since those are not investments per se there is still a gap in that education that will surely be filled once the stops are pulled. Organized crime is already involved in investments, look no further than the LPs of some of the funds that have high visibility. That's a far quicker way to get a return than to bilk a few million out of the pockets of the gullible public at large.
- sandworm101 11y ago
  >The best bet for getting rid of the charger cord are a strong reduction in required power for the phones, better battery technology, maybe micro fuel cells or some other exotic conversion technology. Or, and this is really out there, larger batteries? Which elfin focus group told everyone that a phone's weight should be measured in carats? I'd sacrifice a few extra ounces for a doubling in battery life without adding new devices.
tlb 11y ago
Empirically, "tech not actually possible" is a relatively rare reason for startups to fail. Other reasons are much more common. So putting a lot of effort into verifying this doesn't affect an investor's return much. Also, a common trajectory is shooting for something impossible, but discovering possible and useful things along the way which turn into great businesses. So even if you're 100% sure the idea is impossible, it might still be a good investment.
- api 11y ago
  Empirically, very few people lose races due to broken legs.
kzhahou 11y ago
I'm picture a Demo Day for the incubator hosting uBeam, and also Theranos. It's very awkward, just a big crowded room with people looking around at each other, no one saying a word, interrupted only by the occasional "Can we see a demo?" or "Has this been verified?", and the CEO runs up on stage and says "No" and sits down again. After about an hour and half of this staring contest, there's a mad rush of investors throwing open their checkbooks.
dikdik 11y ago
I believe the founder runs in the Summit Series circles. I don't have anything against the organization, but it seems to attract a lot of trust-fund types.

by api 11y ago

joshu 11y ago

It really depends, but personally, yeah, I like to see proof behind extraordinary claims.

jacquesm 11y ago

I've seen a few requests come in where I really wondered if the subject investors had any technical knowledge at all. Investor scams are unfortunately rather common. As soon as secrecy, a breakthrough and a very large market coincide the gullible and their money are soon parted. I personally don't think this is a bad thing because it keeps me employed, at the same time you'd wish that this sort of thing would stop because it most likely hinders genuine breakthroughs from being given the attention they deserve. Some of those get recycled a few years or decades later so not all is lost but still, a few cold fusions and AI winters and the tech industry as a whole suffers. As for the uBeam, ultrasound is a strange medium to choose for this particular job, ultrasound is fickle, has a ton of side effects, isn't particularly efficient and interferes with living creatures in all kinds of un-desirable ways. Going the electromagnetic route would seem to be the first thing to try (and some companies are doing this and have products, maybe not 'miracle class' but they'll do the job they're designed to). The best bet for getting rid of the charger cord are a strong reduction in required power for the phones, better battery technology, maybe micro fuel cells or some other exotic conversion technology. Populating the world with ultrasonic transmitters with about the same range as the charge cord they replace seems to fix one minor inconvenience by replacing it with a much larger one, not a company I'd bet on.

api 11y ago
With the opening of seed investment to the general public, I unfortunately think you're going to see a huge increase in professional investor scams. I fully expect organized crime to get involved. Of course anyone can go blow their money at a casino and with a much lower odds of return than investing on AngelList, so I'm not sure it's an overall bad thing. Still I am concerned about loss of signal in noise and about 'winters' as you say.
- jacquesm 11y ago
  In plenty of places seed investments have been open to the general public just about forever and as far as I know there have not been any major differences between the number of scams purported there versus in countries where investors need to be accredited. Crowdfunding is currently doing a great job educating people on the risks of putting money up for vapourware but since those are not investments per se there is still a gap in that education that will surely be filled once the stops are pulled. Organized crime is already involved in investments, look no further than the LPs of some of the funds that have high visibility. That's a far quicker way to get a return than to bilk a few million out of the pockets of the gullible public at large.
sandworm101 11y ago
>The best bet for getting rid of the charger cord are a strong reduction in required power for the phones, better battery technology, maybe micro fuel cells or some other exotic conversion technology. Or, and this is really out there, larger batteries? Which elfin focus group told everyone that a phone's weight should be measured in carats? I'd sacrifice a few extra ounces for a doubling in battery life without adding new devices.

tlb 11y ago

Empirically, "tech not actually possible" is a relatively rare reason for startups to fail. Other reasons are much more common. So putting a lot of effort into verifying this doesn't affect an investor's return much. Also, a common trajectory is shooting for something impossible, but discovering possible and useful things along the way which turn into great businesses. So even if you're 100% sure the idea is impossible, it might still be a good investment.

api 11y ago
Empirically, very few people lose races due to broken legs.

kzhahou 11y ago

I'm picture a Demo Day for the incubator hosting uBeam, and also Theranos. It's very awkward, just a big crowded room with people looking around at each other, no one saying a word, interrupted only by the occasional "Can we see a demo?" or "Has this been verified?", and the CEO runs up on stage and says "No" and sits down again. After about an hour and half of this staring contest, there's a mad rush of investors throwing open their checkbooks.

dikdik 11y ago

I believe the founder runs in the Summit Series circles. I don't have anything against the organization, but it seems to attract a lot of trust-fund types.