2 ms·

My primary objection is that they seem to be focused on acquisition of nascent talent and ideas in an attempt to corner the market on potential startup develope

My primary objection is that they seem to be focused on acquisition of nascent talent and ideas in an attempt to corner the market on potential startup developers without a clear plan about what to do with them. The amount of money and perks going out to everyone involved both lessens the pressure to succeed and suggests a focus on acquisition instead of development. Of course everyone's there to make money and successful ventures support others but it seems like advisors are filling the roles of VC partners without appropriate remuneration and founders are being treated like employees. I don't like the value relationships all around, it doesn't seem like they help build successful companies, just cherry pick ideas and products in exchange for a salary. That doesn't seem good for the European tech economy or those who would otherwise become real founders on their own. It seems like they're trying to do an even earlier stage acquisition than companies like google have moved into, but without offering the future google does. Again, it might work there, but it's not something I'd want to be a part of or what I'd like to see long term in Europe. If it's a stopgap measure to keep talent there and in a few years a stronger community exists to help startups develop, then that's great.

kayoone 16y ago
i dont really know where you got that aquisition idea from, but thats not what they want to do. The core message is that they want to help Hackers build a business, without them needing to worry too much about setting up the business and giving them good advice over the course of a year. Problems/Changes etc are discussed in quarterly meetings, foudners get high quality feedback and can work on their product. The goal is still getting another round of financing if the concept proves to be successfull but with that amount of money some startups will even have the chance to walk on their own without further funding. I dont see whats wrong with that, and i also dont see much difference with Angel investing for example. In fact many successfull angel investors work together with their early stage startups to make them succeed, thats exactly what HackFwd does, just on a bigger scale. If you need more funding, they will prepare you for that, if not, fine. Potential startups still have to have a good prototype, have to deliver a good pitch and ultimately get accepted which is how it works for any other investment vehicle basically. It is much harder to get early stage funding in Europe, so the existence of companies like HackFwd is a great thing for the tech economy imo.

kayoone 16y ago

i dont really know where you got that aquisition idea from, but thats not what they want to do. The core message is that they want to help Hackers build a business, without them needing to worry too much about setting up the business and giving them good advice over the course of a year. Problems/Changes etc are discussed in quarterly meetings, foudners get high quality feedback and can work on their product. The goal is still getting another round of financing if the concept proves to be successfull but with that amount of money some startups will even have the chance to walk on their own without further funding. I dont see whats wrong with that, and i also dont see much difference with Angel investing for example. In fact many successfull angel investors work together with their early stage startups to make them succeed, thats exactly what HackFwd does, just on a bigger scale. If you need more funding, they will prepare you for that, if not, fine. Potential startups still have to have a good prototype, have to deliver a good pitch and ultimately get accepted which is how it works for any other investment vehicle basically. It is much harder to get early stage funding in Europe, so the existence of companies like HackFwd is a great thing for the tech economy imo.