Right now I’m at an un-conference called KinnerNet. It’s hosted by famed Israel entrepreneur Yossi Vardi and set near the Sea of Galilee. Funny thing: There are a few hundred entrepreneurs here, mostly Israeli. And only one has said something negative to me about my post earlier this week about the poor venture returns for Israeli startups that incited such passionate feelings everywhere else in the world.
No one is arguing that the returns have been good for Israeli companies in the last eight years. But there are some legitimate questions about how Dow Jones (whose numbers I used) slices its data and how the numbers could be quite so low. Since 2001, according to Dow Jones, $10 billion in venture investments have yielded only $860 million in IPO and M&A exits. The study of venture economics is at best imperfect, so it’s quite likely there are several big Israeli exits the numbers are missing. It’s like measuring Web traffic. Most Internet companies will tell you their traffic logs report higher numbers than measurement agencies like Hitwise or comScore.
But the Dow Jones numbers aren’t likely to be off by, say, a factor of 50 or 100. And since the same sources—usually venture firms—give firms like Dow Jones the investment data and the liquidity data, the relationship between the money going in and the money going out is pretty reliable, even if the absolute numbers are not. Put another way, if Dow Jones is missing some exits, they’re likely also missing some investments going into the country. In any case, the returns are down dramatically from the 1990s—period. Be mad at me all you want; those are still the numbers.
The more interesting question—and I think what’s creating such passion around the topic—is why the numbers are down? We’re actually going to do a session on this tomorrow at KinnerNet. It’s also the one question I’ve been asking Israelis pretty much non-stop for the week I’ve been in the country. Two interesting cultural answers have emerged that I wouldn’t have imagined. Both have to do with a phenomenon that’s hurt venture returns in the United States too: Entrepreneurs selling companies too early.
Both Roi Carthy (who occasionally writes for TechCrunch from Israel) and Matthew Hertz, who’s starting a deep-web people search company called Pipl.com, said many Israelis live in the “temporary.” Put another way, when Matt heard I was filling in for Michael Arrington “temporarily” in February, he laughed and said, “We Israelis know temporary is the most permanent state there is. Short-term is a way of thinking here.” (True enough, it’s March, and I’m still here writing on TechCrunch.)
That “temporary” mindset drives the same unabashed courage that makes quitting a job and starting a company so natural for Isreali entrepreneurs. But both Carthy, Hertz and a dozen or so other entrepreneurs I spoke with said there’s a flip side to that: When you live for the short term, and you get a $30 million acquisition offer; you’re more likely to take it. In other words, several entrepreneurs here have described themselves as having a huge appetite for taking risk on the front end; but being risk-adverse when it comes to turning down a huge chunk of money for a $1 billion IPO dream.
In my last book, David Sacks, an American entrepreneur who was the COO of PayPal and has started Geni and Yammer since, put the same feeling another way: Most people in the world would take the certainty of $1 million over a chance they could make $30 million. I’m not knocking that. I’ll sell SarahLacy right now for $1 million. (Takers?) But I tend to think of people who make that decision as being risk-adverse. What was surprising to me, is that people who have a huge tolerance for risk on the front end– literally creating something out of nothing—become risk-adverse when they’ve proven that it’s actually worth something.
I was discussing this idea last night with Nimrod Lev, who sold kSolo to MySpace and has worked in the Israeli Internet scene since its earliest days. He had a different cultural take on the same phenomenon. He said the fun part for Israelis, or at least for him, is solving a hard, technical problem. In other words, “the art of the hack.” Once it’s solved, managing the company, growing revenues, taking on HR problems—all of that is the boring part. He loves starting companies and has been successful at it, but he has zero desire to build one into the next Google. There are a lot of guys like that in the Valley, too, but they’ve also got a huge pool of experienced managers to hand the company off to.
I’ll give Israel another reason that returns have fallen so hard on a percentage-basis. And it has nothing to do with Israeli culture. In fact, it’s something the United States screwed up: Sarbanes Oxley. SarbOx put a chill on small-but-growing companies’ ability to go public on the Nasdaq. The costs of being SarbOx-compliant are so high, that unless you have more than $40 million or so in annual revenues and strong growth, it’s just not cost effective. And other regulations surrounding the Chinese Walls between research and trading mean that small companies get little research coverage and are too thinly traded to really be considered liquid stocks.
This has hurt the Valley, when it comes to returns, for sure. But the Valley also is replete with large companies that buy each other for enough money that investors can eke out enough to keep going. Geographic proximity does help in working these kinds of things out. (You think YouTube didn’t benefit from sharing an investor with Google? VCs actually count this as one of their so-called “value adds.”) A good number of European companies have gotten around the SarbOx problem by going public on the London exchange over the last few years, to the extent where several articles were written about the London Stock Exchange becoming a bigger financial force than the Nasdaq.
So if it was a problem for all startups, why do I bring it up in relation to Israel? Because pre-Sarbanes Oxley, Israel had more Nasdaq-traded companies than any other country. Outside the Valley, they were, by definition, the most vulnerable to the change. Perhaps in the intervening years, it’s not the entrepreneurs that have lost their mojo; there’s just no good financial system for their investors to profit off of said mojo. That’s certainly a hack I’d like to see a smart Israeli pull off because its not just hurting the Israeli startup ecosystem—it’s dragging down returns for investors everywhere.
(Photo by Hans Splinter).
I think the 1990s we the internet bubble so the numbers now will be significantly down since during the bubble everyone thought .com was the new thing. I doesn’t surprise me that is down now. Generally in venture investment in .com companies, the returns are very low. I read somewhere that an investor will invest in 5-8 companies and expect one to succeed or reasonably take off and that company’s investment pays off the rest 4. .com risk of loosing is extremely high. There have been number of companies that are extremely successful like google, yahoo and vast majority are less successful, but your observation is interesting 10 billion going in and 850 million in returns.
Perhaps they are just not very good?
Corporate wise – ur right.
R&D \ Creativity wise – you couldn’t be more wrong.
Also I think selling early is kind of a natural instinct, meaning that “let’s sell it early, before it blows up” mentality. For me I think it is true, because if I build a web company and it returns profit somewhat and gets noticed by others, my natural tendency is to sell it early before we start loosing money. You are right some entreprenuers just like the excitement/challenge of building something exciting and never really have the inclination to finish it to the end by saying that I figured out most of the interesting challenges so there is no reason for me to continue and finish the trivial developments. I think that can be one huge disadvantage in startups (persistence). Building a company is a lot of work though I found it. You definitely have to do many trivial things everyday besides your overall huge concept. You just have to be persistence, I guess.
@John
I think you say right: I meet every day entrepreneurs, among them some argue and persist in their ‘innovative ideas’ and lots of them fail to engage.
The wave of those who carry is very limited and we are left with a small pool of entrepreneurs who move into a financial framework without necessarily contributing to the technological advances they have begun.
What is unfortunate is that we end up with hundreds of obsolete tools, but what is good is that it forces us to stay in the innovative competition.
@John
It’s true, and for the Israeli it’s even more crucial.
One should born and live in Israel to realize how life are short in the perception of the average Israeli.
Being from childhood aware to the horror of the Holocaust, of the Independence War, the story of the almost elimination war in 1973, then joining the army at age 18. At the age of 21 starting saving money for a backpacking travel in the Far East or South America, going to college only at the age of 24, and starting his first “At last, mummy is proud” job at the age 28. Add to that the 20-30 days a year he’s going to military duty until the age of 40, risking his live time and time again, and you get a very short-term thinking civilian.
It works both ways, Israelis are risk takers, if they got an idea, they will not wait a second, they will quit their job and start building it and dreaming on wealthy life.
But when it come to exists, most entrepreneurs will gladly take their $1M-2M now rather $20M tomorrow, because in the Israeli way of thinking, maybe there will not be a tomorrow.
Sarah says,
“What was surprising to me, is that people who have a huge tolerance for risk on the front end– literally creating something out of nothing—become risk-adverse when they’ve proven that it’s actually worth something.”
The flaw in her thinking is the “huge amount of risk” part. The only thing you’re risking when you found a company is your salary. So unless you are VP in a financial services firm, the risk of turning down a 1 million dollar pay day is much more than the risk of quitting your job.
Gabe da Silveira is right on the money.
.
The entrepreneurs are consistent.
You reach the roulette table with $100, you’re lucky and pile up $1000, and then you leave your table (unless you are a complete gambler at heart).
That is very rational behavior.
Maybe you start again with another $100
I second that.
If you didn’t have an exit opportunity before, $1M cash will change your life much more than the next $99M will.
Together with the excitement being in building a product from nothing and bringing it to market, rather than in managing a large company and having to deal with the ever decreasing level of employees that this entails, selling as soon as there’s a meaningful offer and moving on to the next start-up is the most rational choice.
@ Moshe
It’s not rational by definition, it’s risk-averse. To define a risk chance in terms of rationality you would not only had to calculate the EMV (Expected Monetary Value) but also the risk-ratio of the decision maker.
@ Gabe da Silviera
You’re wrong. For the comparison that you make you assume the net value of money. Sure one million is more than a salary (let’s say 50 thousand) but 2 dollars for homeless people isn’t the same 2 dollars for the man driving a Benz. So when your salary is the only thing that can pay the bills and you are risking that for a chance, that risk is higher than turning down a million. Why? Because if you turn down that million you can always get a job. But turning down a job doesn’t guarantee you anything.
@ Melvin M. Tercan
Ok, so assume for the discussion that the risk of a startup failing is about the same as the risk of a company you can sell for X, will go down and not be sellable again at X. The point was that it is reasonable (so as not to use “rational”) behavior for risk-averse people and most people are risk-averse.
You are wrong regarding your 2nd point. An entrepreneur leaving a job does not take a big risk at all. It is very reasonable (current economy not withstanding) that in case of failure the entrepreneur can look for a job and find one. Indeed, many failed entrepreneurs just went back to a regular job.
Normally, such an entrepreneur will have saved some money for paying bills and buying food. People with zero personal savings do not normally start companies.
Are poor venture returns a unique problem for Israel or is this a common trend in other regions too? Is it really fair to isolate one group from another like this? I’m an Aussie – do we suck too?
Also I think your reference to “the valley” and the fact that big companies can buy each other and therefore make good investment returns is kind of like describing a ponzi scheme …the money just goes round and round until someone eventually lose the farm.
“And only one has said something negative to me about my post earlier this week about the poor venture returns for Israeli startups that incited such passionate feelings everywhere else in the world.”
Maybe the rest of them haven’t said anything to you because they’re silently preparing to kill you. Flee! Now!
Israelis are careless regard such posts.
They will keep with what they are doing – No matter what.
They did it when Economic Crisis has welcomed us and they will keep doing it after your post and as well in the near and far future.
They are aware of their skills.
Once again you miss a key point: most Israeli tech companies OEM or license IP to big brands, or become parts of big brands. They grow to a certain size and sell because they really can’t “grow” any more unless they become part of a bigger piece of an integrated solution.
You seem in a calmer mood. Hopefully your bad spell is over. Talk to Jeff Pulver who is with your group. He gets this big time and you still dont.
“What was surprising to me, is that people who have a huge tolerance for risk on the front end– literally creating something out of nothing—become risk-adverse when they’ve proven that it’s actually worth something.”
Hardly inexplicable: if you have nothing, you have nothing to loose, so you can take all the risks in the world. If you turn your nothing into something, then you have this something to grow even more, OR LOOSE, so you better get some cash before it’s too late.
I couldn’t agree more. What upfront risk are they taking, leaving a mediocre job and going 6 months without salary? How can that be a valid comparison with the potential of losing a $30 million offer because someone has copied your idea and built a better mousetrap? This is especially true since most of us can live very comfortablly on the proceeds of a $30 million acquisition.
Don’t get me wrong Sarah, I love your articles, and you breath new life into TechCrunch.
one thing is clear tough, those guys at kinnernet have no idea how to make a website. This is the ugliest thing i have seen…
The numbers go do, as USA go down. the same money, as the same stocks.
Sarah, have a great time at the best place of earth, Israel.
Very well-written post!!! Please check out my site as well at http://macmaniapodcast.com
No.
Hello no.
Good points made, but there are some dynamics not being addressed:
1) VC level cash isn’t needed to build a company worth buying for $30MM. People can absolutely bootstrap their way to a solid exit, with less people (egos) involved, and move on to bigger ideas.
2) Your point about turning down low offers is wise, but it is sure as hell unwise to turn down fair offers. The more you do this, the less buyers you have in the acquirer pool, the less likely you are to get acquired.
3) IPO(s) are more than just a little unlikely. With this being the case, #2 becomes even more critical.
Good thoughts all around though. Thanks!
Interesting post..
You got to know when to hold em, know when to fold em,
Know when to walk away and know when to run.
You never count your money when youre sittin at the table.
Therell be time enough for countin when the dealins done.
your numbers are a little unclear. are you saying that the 860MM is the return on the 10B investments, or are there some companies in the 10B that have not yet been exited/acquired?
The truth is nobody knows. Nobody knows exactly how much was invested because many of those happen silently. And nobody knows exactly how much was “cashed out”.
But it’s reasonable to say that someone who received a $1 million investment last year is not ready to be acquired yet. And some of the 860M was from money invested prior to 2001.
Gutsy is a good attribute to have but is not a profession
From my experience, Israelis are very good tacticians and poor strategists. They are good at hacking but less so in builiding coherent and polished products. They improvise well but do not perform consistently over time. They are good salesmen and poor marketers.
The tech industry have moved towards small products for a large population of users, SaaS, free software, less is more. These do not play on the local strenghts.
In addition, the local VC scene is stuck in the 90s, looking for bloated, “patentable” or “high barrier of entry” software that can be sold for huge sums to enterprises. This in contrast to the web 2.0 trends in the US market.
I think this explains the difference between global and israeli trends.
This perception of global vs. Israeli trends is wrong. Israel is right on par with the Valley when it comes to SaaS (and probably past it when it comes to online data storage and security). SaaS companies such as Imperva, Trusteer and SAManage all have good management and little problem executing. More established software companies, such as Magic Software are starting to integrate SaaS into their products as well.
Perhaps if the investors create enough incentive for the entrepreneurs to take the back-end risk then they would.
As you take in more money, investors receive terms like liquidation preference and founders have a smaller slice. Is there something about the terms that make founders think they should take the money now.
There are geographic differences when it comes to terms. For example, multiple liquidation preference is more common on the east coast than with valley firms.
Just another angle to explore.
vay?
Sarah,
You finally are making good points.
1) Selling early: Israelis have been promised many things by many people all throughout their history. How long have politicians around the world promised peace, prosperity, growth etc? So Israelis are much more realistic than others (and fed up with waiting for promises of a better future to materialize). They put their faith in themselves and not the market, others etc So they’ll take the $30M offer and start another company
Europeans would retire to Switzerland and buy a place on the Riviera.
2) SarbOx: SarbOx legislation has decimated IPOs in the US and Tech was were the most new companies hence new IPOs came from. It is not an Israeli problem but an American one. WASP CEOs who turned out to be crooks (Ken Lay @Enron, Bernie Ebbers @MCI etc) have brought this legislation upon America…
3) You are missing a key point specific to Israel: Lack of top managerial talent. Israelis are great technologists. However they are not great managers and that has to do with several factors:
- a strong emphasis on learning science vs management
- a tiny interior market fostering very few large companies to improve one’s management skills
- an appetite for risk and the temporary hack which in turn brings a lack of appeal for long steady growth (on both the personal and corporate level)
So that essentially prevents great managers to make the decision to stick the course into building large companies. In essence we can argue that there never really were any large Israeli companies. Just overvalued start ups during the bubble…
@Sarah, great story, as usual. @Allain thanks for amplifying as a credible second source.
To paraphrase a quote that has been attributed to many (Bernard Baruch): “I made a lot of money by selling too soon.”
Good article – and nice not see the ignorant anti-Israel comments…yet.
http://youtube.com/befryxell
This be da best article evar !!
I think one of the reasons why Israeli entrepreneurs “sell early” is because after spending 3-4 years on a start-up they are ready for their next start-up. As an entrepreneur and the founder of an Israeli Start-up I often come in contact with other Israeli founders and even though we are all driven and focused with our current companies, innovation and ideas don’t stop coming along.
Perhaps from founders outside of Israel the feeling is “this is my one shot”, but in Israel the feeling is I can recreate the success many times. Haughty? For sure! True? Absolutely!
Too lazy to look it up, but there’s definitely a basic result in psychology that shows people prefer to take a gamble to not lose some amount of money rather than take a risk to gain that amount of money.
Not sure if that made sense, but people are risk averse and its very common. We try (to an irrational extent, mathematically) not to lose certain gains. We get attached.
I totally identify with being fearless at the beginning and a chicken at exit. Then again, it sure has worked out for me
.
Jews rock!
I think there are several reasons the Israeli companies sell too early:
1. Most Israelis like thinking more than they actually like working. Creating a new and profitable company entails some serious problem solving. After that, the reality of day to day routine work is not as glamorous.
2. Geographical location plays a huge part. In general, Israel is a small country situated far away from the markets they sell their products to. If you offer a service who’s target audience is elsewhere, in order to maintain it once the dazzle of innovation has faded, you must understand what your users want. That’s a very hard thing to do when you don’t share the same mentality or culture. Think of how many potential Israeli users there are for a service, then think of how many American, Chines, Indian or European. Being innovative is one thing, but maintaining a company’s appeal over time, is something very different.
3. As the Israeli economy becomes stronger, Israelis start to develop a higher standard of living. This means that it becomes more expensive to satisfy your Israeli staff while migrating your development team overseas is cost effective.
4. Israel is a very small country. The laws of probability state that larger populations have a higher likelihood of producing innovation over time. It’s true that there are a lot of smart, hard working Israelis, but Israelis are not superior. Over time, statistical probability prevails.
There are probably a lot of other reasons too.
4. India? China? Indonesia?
You must admit that there is a complete innovative dis-proportionality to the size of the population.
Even if you compared Israel’s high tech centers populations to Silicon Valley and Boston, this dis-proportionality increases (Israel is the size of New Jersey in landmass, half of which is desert and has LESS population then New Jersey).
Israeli start ups sometimes sell early (many many examples), sometimes sell late (Alladin), and sometimes sell on time (ICQ). Timing is key and hindsight is not always 20/20.
Not again. I’m waiting for the flame wars to start.
See Yaron Samid’s blog post: http://www.tech...chs-sarah-lacy/
TC, how about double-checking your facts for once?
Who’s to say Yaron’s got the facts more than Sarah does? You don’t know. Yaron has a vested interest in the numbers being higher – he’s basically a “promoter” of Israel tech companies.
In fact, nobody knows. Because most investments are done silently, without a press release. And even some acquisitons are done that way.
But anyone who’s a little familar with the tech industry in Israel has to be able to “see” or “feel” that things aren’t as good as they once were. Things have quieted quite a bit.
After living in Israel for 3 years I can tell you that Israelis sell early because they understand that there are no guarantees in life.
In the middle east anything can happen at any time, so if you get a chance to make it big, you take it!!!
Not to mention once you have one “exit” it becomes much easier to get investments on your next venture.
Our judgment of what constitutes an appropriate limit on anything — for example, on wealth or esteem — is never arrived at independently. Instead, we make such determinations by comparing our condition with that of a reference group, a set of people who we believe resemble us. We cannot, it seems, appreciate what we have for its own merit, or even against what our medieval forebears had. We cannot be impressed by how prosperous we are in historical terms. We see ourselves as fortunate only when we have as much as, or more than, those we have grown up with, work alongside, have as friends or identify with in public realm.
This was an excellent well-balanced article. Nice to see all the anti-semites and anti-arabs in the comments have taken the day off today. Take the rest of the year off guys!
No, anti-semites =/= anti-zionist.
Anti-semitism is wrong; no one would argue that.
Anti-zionism is just common sense.
So you are saying the Jews don’t deserve a State of their own even if one would exist in peace side by side to a Palestinian one?
Are there any other people you deny such a right? Because that is racism.
One of the biggest mistakes for an inexperienced to be co-founder is to go into a business with someone who had already made their fortune. The veteran entrepreneurs tend to get delusional based on the successful experiences with their previous startups. They look at the new venture as a pissing contest with their fellow entrepreneurs, often failing to realize the needs of other people in the company.
Selling early is a sign of wisdom and not giving in to the societal pressure of the delusional minds.
People lend money to people – people they understand, people they like, people they know. As any VC will tell you it’s “the team” that matters. The Jewish community is over-represented in the financial community – consequently it’s over-represented in VC deals.
There’s plenty of talent in Israel, I’m sure – but probably not significantly more than there is in any other first world country. These stats could well be because the talent is spread too thin.
Is talking about Israelis as one herd mentality not a generalisation…what if the article was titled – jews sell way too early?? Most would agree that the article then becomes offensive, so label them as Israelis and it becomes acceptable talk fodder at Techcrunch….No wonder all the anti semites came crawling out of the woodwork..
Here’s a lesson for You Miss Nationality psychiatrist – Israelis are like any other nationality – some sell early, some sell late and some sell at just the right time….its a bit like writers – some make sense, some do not and then there are those who talk out their arse.
Speaking of writers there are those who motivate and those who put you to sleep. Which one are you?
most probably is that because they can’t market their services in the region because they are bordering their enemies. The best solution is to do peace and to resolve all the issues with the Arab World. And i don’t think that the peace action should be from the Arab World, but from Israel itself, because it is the one that keeps on doing its inhumane acts.
In addition, Israelis (the people) are very intelligent people and what they are doing is absolutely right.
i hope to see more startups from that region
In my opinion these posts are filled to the brim with gross over-generalizations, to the point of racism.
Sarah – I don’t know where you got these half-baked notions about Israelis (possibly from Israelis trying to be friendly during a one-on-one) but peddling them in a professional blog is pointless, tasteless and dangerous.
To the point – I think most people would agree that at the end of the day, Israel tends to produce startups which focus on and excel in technology and innovation;
in other words – I think it’s safe to say that so far Israel has not produced too many hype-based, “we’re like X only with a new interface”, useless, no-innovation-AND-no-business-model services and products, which seems to be the main focus of this particular blog.
I mean – the audacity! blaming Israeli start-ups for “wanting to cash in quickly”!
9 out of 10 of the companies you write about regularly here on techcrunch- those “tweeter meets facebook with vimeo for the iPhone” stuff – I mean – these guys aren’t even pretending to have done anything new, or to have improved anyone’s life!
All they are doing is riding the (extremely short-lived and treacherous) hype wave, created around and by their mates just the week before.
So do me a favor – think about Israel and Israelis what you may – but don’t blame Israelis for business strategies which are in fact the cornerstone of most companies you write about here in your own blog.
Could you please provide some examples of companies that sold too early?
Why is a $1B exit the holly grail of exits? You are assuming that entrepreneurs are making a risk a verse decision when passing a possibility for $1 billion for a certainty of thirty million, or even just five. You do forget however to account for an entrepreneur’s cut of $1 billion deal, be it an IPO or an acquisition.
Fact of the matter is that by the time a VC-backed company grows into a $1 billion corporation, most entrepreneurs holdings have been diluted back to water. Investors tends to leave the founders’ interests well behind their own, and by the time the cake has been cut after the exit, the entrepreneur’s cut may not be over the $30M he (she?) could have gotten five or eight years earlier with an early exit.
You also forget that one of the major pressures on entrepreneurs to sell, are the investors themselves. When a company doesn’t grow at the rate investors expect it to, they loose patience with the company and pressure for an exit, even at lower returns.
In the special case of Israel, take whatever data you can get your hands on (though I know for a fact that the Dow Jones data is far from the best you can get on Israel) and ask yourself what percentage of the total mount of exits did $1 billion companies account for, and how are these data compared to number from the US and Europe. I think you’d be amazed.
You see the thing with data is – while the source matters greatly – what matters even more is how you look at the numbers and what questions exactly are you looking to get answered. You know what they say about statistics – validity does not account for significance. So while your questions was valid, your conclusion is far from significant (statistically speaking, that it).
Out of MYvosi LLC, comes the face of Web 3.0, Maurice Valentino. Valentino never thought that out of his humble past that he would soon be the creator and innovator of the newest web technology that positions him to become the next Internet billionaire.
The Firm United LLC, which is a holding company for several companies including MYvosi LLC which houses Valentino’s genius creation, Myvosi Web 3.0, the wave of the future.
Myvosi Web 3.0 is a media/data exchange tool, a search engine that gains knowledge of the user the more it is used. It can be used for networking, it offers the most up to date encryption for product being sold/personal information and has a virtual mall with a presence of 250,000 national and international vendors in contract.In addition to your own personal virtual assistant that controls your every experience desire.
“It will challenge us and move us into the future now,” says Valentino. The site offers human deductive reasoning and inference. “Imagine a machine with personality that’s proactive,sounds like efficiency to me.” states The Face Of Web 3.0(Maurice Valentino).
Valentino also went on to explain in more detail what to expect from MYvosi LLC and Web 3.0.”MYvosi Web 3.0 is the successful marriage of artificial intelligence and the web. In addition we want to be efficient not only from an economical and an environmental perspective but also from an individual and technological perspective. Web 1.0 was for all to read, Web 2.0 was for all write and Web 3.0 is and will be for all to innovate.” personalize your future, live out your potential. Myvosi web 3.0 allows you to search by sentences not eliminating the keyword based search but expanding on it. You can type in sentences and in turn it would return relevant results and suggest other content related to your search terms. You can ask your browser questions such as “where can i go for lunch” and it will provide you, based on your likes & dislikes something suitable (human deductive Reasoning).”Many fear that this detailed information about them will be exposed, but it is the exact opposite,” says Valentino. Your likes and dislike /personal information are not publicized they are on an encrypted network using the same encryption’s as the one used by the major banks in the world(ex. the TLS and the high 128 bit encryption). This graduates the common concept of the current web, typing in the same information and getting the same information. What’s now offered is a unique individual experience on the web tailored to fit you personality. Myvosi Web 3.0 consist partially of “mashup” applications. An example would be looking up restaurants and have it tie in to another application(GPS) giving you place and directions. Myvosi Web 3.0 has the most intelligent software agent at the click of a button. You can share data files securely and efficiently without the threat of viral and other harmful applications (worms,Trojan horses,malware,etc) infecting your computer.A quote from Thomas Chille” For manifesting a web 3.0, we need a web 3.0. We need a real evolutionary shift in the perception of the web by the end users. Much like the paradigm shift in involving the user generated content for web 2.0.” Its purpose is to educate, create, and innovate the end User’s experience of the Web’s resources. It is the web’s Advanced Version Of the 3 dimensional giant”Second Life,”but Extremely user efficient. The applauding moment was simply this stated by The Face Of Web 3.0 “Most importantly Web 3.0 Is all of you. It isn’t the dominating player with the most Bank. It is about you (the user). We as individuals craft web 3.0. we all have a major role in its implementation” says Valentino. This is just an overview what Myvosi Web 3.0 offers. The detailed version would require a 1,000 paged text book and far superceeds what was said today. Myvosi Web 3.0 launch date is in the summer (July) of 2010.
Special Acknowledgments:
*Barack Obama in his spirited aura of change
*Tim Berners-Lee and Robert Cailliau who created the World Wide Web at CERN
*James Hendler An artificial Intelligence Researcher
*Nigel Richard Shadbolt founder of the Web Science Research Initiative
*Ora Lassila a Finnish computer scientist
*Computer Science University of Southampton
*Artificial intelligence department @ University of Edinburgh
*Eric Schmidt CEO Of Google
*Doug Lenat Computer Scientist Ceo of Cycorp
*Kevin Kelly Great Mind
If I left anyone out you are not forgotten, but for the sake of time, many more I give thanks to. Thank you all for your research , your time invested in making us better and more efficient economically and environmentally, America and the World thanks you.
A few pioneers of Green Energy who deserve recognition
*Scott mcnealy co founder of sun micro systems say that technology of the Internet is the most planetary efficient way of conducting business
*John Doer partner, Kleiner Perkins Caufield Byers
says that Germany is the largest buyer of solar cells around the world
“These are point that should be noticed and implemented in our economic and environmental strategy and conducive to like such recovery” Says Valentino
*MIT chemist Daniel Nocera
*Thomas Hinderling innovator who wants to build solar island to make us more efficient.
*Texas oilmen like T. Boone Pickens started pushing alternative energy
*Steven Chu head the Department of Energy
just to name a few.
“These are a few of the people who have inspired me to offer the Next generation ready platform. I look at their stories and their desire to innovate and to make better. These are things and mindsets I was conceived in. These Great minds gave me the foundation to start myvosi and change the future. So I personally feel they deserve a great deal of recognition” Says The Face Of Web 3.0 Maurice Valentino
…just curious if Sarah has ever even worked at a startup. backseat drivers have little credibility until they actuallyknow what it’s like to toil away at something most consider destined to fail.
Your numbers are plain wrong. If you want to get the accurate data contact Alan Feld at Vinyard Ventures in Hertzliya. Vinyard is a secondary fund that buys out LP interests in Israeli VC firms. Vinyard has the best data bar none. I spoke Alan and he reviewed your article. He says it is completely inaccurate.
Sorry I meant Vineyard Ventures.