A lot of the comments here and the actual website is devoid of any advice you'd actually find valuable if you were interested in applying to these kinds of programmes.
Here are my two cents on what to look for (I don't know the answers)
* Who are the partners behind the fund, what have they done in the past (pre-investor) and what is their core skill (tech, product, marketing, sales, operations)
* Who have you previously invested in, and where are they now?
* Who are the limited partners of the fund - did any VCs/rockstars/partners invest?
* Why are you superior to Y Combinator? Startup accelerators are very popular now. They generally have the same mentors, the same deal terms, the same investors come demo day, the same "industry connections", whats your USP? (some good answers here might be specific domain knowledge of partners, a strong alumni, and so on)
I am always bullish when sites list such an array of mentors because being a mentor is generally high upside (fame/feel good/networking/karma) and very little downside - no skin in the game, as it were.
A buddy of mine once told me that equity was "quick to give away, impossible to reclaim" - you're giving these guys a significant % of your company, be sure they're good - and there is nothing wrong in applying for dumb money. Just don't tell them that.
(full disclosure - I am one of the Springboard mentors so I may not be 100% objective)
Generally a valid comment about accelerators proliferating and being built in similar way, but:
* in case of the accelerators the people running them are fare more important than LPs behind;
* in this particular case Jon is one of the greatest mentors/startup supporters I met (I went through Seedcamp with on of the companies I am involved with);
* Jon used to run very successful TDE (see the track record from this program);
* Springboard is based in Europe (Cambridge near London, one of the few important tech clusters here), so for teams from EU applying to Springboard is easier than to Y-Combinator (e.g. just because of the US Immigration stupidity)
So summing up - I agree that it might look similar to others but in nitty gritty is not. But fair point about communicating it better on the website :)!
1. Springboard is funded by 9 angel investors and NESTA, all of whom have invested equal sums. All are very active investors and are seeking to find more deals to invest in. We believe through the mentors involved we cover all the key areas that a startup would need to consider. Where gaps exist we will active seek to plug these gaps.
2. Red Gate ran Springboard historically in a different format. Correct me if I am wrong - since you worked alongside the teams - but of the four teams involved - one received funding and two have gone on to YC. Under Difference Engine, 5 of the 9 teams have been funded, including a team who received angel funding and has gone to SV and one who has received £750k in funding.
3. All of the investors can be found within the mentor group, but they have for personal reasons not disclose their identity. Cumulatively, the investors have had exits in excess of several billion dollars.
4. I would not be so bold as to suggest we are superior to YC - the grand-daddy of accelerator programmes. The major issue in Europe is the lack of these resources. We are seeking to address a deficiency in the market and we have a proven track record.
5. Interestingly most of my mentors are massively busy and for them to take at least a full day out of their diary is a significant commitment for them. None of my mentors get paid and give freely of their time.
6. I personally don't think that 6% is a significant %. Do we believe that we can add at least 6% value to your business by taking part. Absolutely, many times over.
It would be good for you to clarify what you mean by dumb money - working alongside the programme mentors for the 13 weeks is quite the opposite - their insight, guidance, contacts and introductions is invaluable.
Happy to discuss this further offline, if you need further information. As you know - you can get me on jon at springboard dot com.
To make the programme sustainable in the longer term, unfortunately it has been necessary to adopt a similar model to YC and TechStars. I am sure you agree that the provision of similar programmes should be encouraged.
True, the model is different now (equity investment) and Red Gate has less direct involvement (but still involved). Red Gate did invest in TidePowerd after the first cycle.
It's only suspicious because the comments are essentially non-specific praise and add no actual value to the reader. They look like cheap shills; if they are in fact shills, that's not exactly inspiring to potential applicants.
There's nothing wrong with promoting the programme here, of course, the weird comments just seem... weird.
I made one such comment below, whose main point was "I am participating in this". I thought it would be useful for readers to know this is a real programme with real mentors and not, for instance, some kind of scam. (I don't know anything about the investors, so didn't comment on that aspect.)
My karma is indeed low - no time for big contributions - but I'd hoped some folks would know me from youDevise's sponsorship of HN meetups in London.
If mine wasn't a useful comment or led to confusion, I apologise.
First of all: I am one of the people you are trying to reach with this sort of programme. My comments are intended as feedback on how you present yourselves, I'm not trying to to imply anything about the quality of the programme or the people involved. I certainly didn't come into this discussion with any kind of negative bias.
If I'm giving up equity, especially for relatively little money, I want to know I'm getting a good deal. pclark's comments on this thread are basically spot-on in this regard, so I don't need to add much. These concerns do need to be addressed though.
I thought it would be useful for readers to know this is a real programme with real mentors and not, for instance, some kind of scam.
It's good to know that it isn't a scam, though that's kind of a minimum requirement. I'm curious about the alignment of interests between investors (who presumably own the equity the startups are giving up) and mentors (who seem to be doing the leg work).
Quoting your comment elsewhere: "I am helping these guys out as a mentor. Seems like a good idea."
With all due respect, that doesn't sound overly enthusiastic. From your comment above, it sounds like you don't receive equity. Do Springboard pay you? If not, what's in it for you, other than karmic retribution and a CV bullet point? Why allow Springboard to advertise using your name?
These questions may seem nosy, but I think they are legitimate concerns. I'm trying to understand the "product" here.
I don't run the programme and am not particularly trying to "reach" you. Just think it is of interest to the HN community and worth an upvote and brief comment.
I don't receive equity and don't have anything to do with the investors in the programme. I do expect to make contacts with interesting people who have an entrepreneurial bent - generally, people I meet like this help me learn things my team and I can use, and sometimes they help me find people I can hire. Those are two of my main missions as CTO of youDevise.
Springboard don't pay me. I'm not aware they're advertising using my name, but if they were I'd ask them to include my company's name too, which would help us to get better known and (I hope) attract more smart people to apply for jobs with us.
Edit: They _are_ advertising with my name! http://springboard.com/douglas-squirrel/ The bio's a bit tired but it does mention my company, which is good enough for me.
I can assure you we are not a scam - I would hope that the inclusion of Cambridge University and NESTA would provide some credibility.
All of our investors are also included within the mentor list - but do not want to be specifically identified. Interesting our investors have much more to lose ($$$) than the mentors who are giving up their time.
All our mentors give up their time freely. We take a minimal stake to ensure sustainability - but the ultimate objective to help teams accelerate their businesses.
If you have any further questions, drop me a line at jon at springboard dot com.
It's not a massive deal, it just seems a bit odd. The HN crowd is the main market for something like this, so you'd think somebody there would have a clue about this site before promoting on it. Plus, this would be an opportunity to e.g. link to blog posts by previous participants describing their experience. I think that would probably be the most useful for potential applicants.
I understand your point. I posted it here and been around long enough to (mostly) understand how HN works. That may not be true of all the others involved in the programme.
My name is Paul. I am CEO and Founder of a company called Screenreach (screenreach.com) which was on a programme called The Difference Engine which was basically the trial run for Springboard.
So I can speak from first hand experience of being on the programme and what I actually got from it. When we entered the programme we started with a technology. We used the programme to help accelerate the business and to really help put meat behind the areas where we were lacking.
Over the 13 weeks we effectively went from a technology to a business that was investor ready. At the end of the process, we started to put a team behind Screenreach (one of my mentors joined us fulltime), 2 days after the process finished we raised £250,000 from an angel who also joined us as our chairman and we really have gone from strength to strength.
We are now expanding, just raised another round and have a really strong management team behind us.
The programme really helped us achieve this and as it says on the tin, accelerated us through the process.
Happy to discuss further with anyone who wants to know more, just drop me a line.
The team behind SpringBoard ran the Difference Engine for a few sessions (http://thedifferenceengine.eu) which due to the lack of public sector funding is closing this year.
Unlike The Difference Engine, SpringBoard has private sector funding. My understanding is that this is the first intake for SpringBoard.
For an example of the impact which the programme can have check out ScreenReach who took part in the Difference Engine a programme I have historically run.
They are totally open to collaborate with diverse incubation programs allover Europe. It was great to have Jon Bradford in Timisoara (Romania) Software Business Incubator, one week ago, facilitating his meetings with regional startups and potential investors.
The timing of the deadline strikes me as very odd. Is there a good reason to make it 5-6 weeks before YC's? What if a startup applies to both? Why should you choose Springboard over YC or any other accelerator? With so many mentors, who has what stake in the startup? I don't see any of these questions answered, and they're just what comes to mind immediately. Surely these are very important pieces of information for applicants.
I am humbled to think that we can compete with Paul and his investors (including their $150k). Seriously, we announced the deadline in mid November when we launched. PS if you know any YC applicants who would like to apply - send them my way.
Here are my two cents on what to look for (I don't know the answers)
* Who are the partners behind the fund, what have they done in the past (pre-investor) and what is their core skill (tech, product, marketing, sales, operations)
* Who have you previously invested in, and where are they now?
* Who are the limited partners of the fund - did any VCs/rockstars/partners invest?
* Why are you superior to Y Combinator? Startup accelerators are very popular now. They generally have the same mentors, the same deal terms, the same investors come demo day, the same "industry connections", whats your USP? (some good answers here might be specific domain knowledge of partners, a strong alumni, and so on)
I am always bullish when sites list such an array of mentors because being a mentor is generally high upside (fame/feel good/networking/karma) and very little downside - no skin in the game, as it were.
A buddy of mine once told me that equity was "quick to give away, impossible to reclaim" - you're giving these guys a significant % of your company, be sure they're good - and there is nothing wrong in applying for dumb money. Just don't tell them that.