Stupid tech investors (4 July, 2017)

Have your say on today's Aardvark Daily column

Stupid tech investors (4 July, 2017)

Postby aardvark_admin » Tue Jul 04, 2017 8:23 am

This column is archived at: http://aardvark.co.nz/daily/2017/0704.shtml

Well I told you so (GLOAT).

MJP shares are down to just $0.05 from an issue-value of over $2.

How the hell can someone who his presumably smart enough to accumulate $1.25m be stupid enough to throw it at the MJP without doing any sensible due-diligence on the company, the product and its viability?

Hell, didn't Mr Rodl even google long enough to find my multiple warnings about this product?

Or is it that I (despite my very impressive track-record at predicting losers in the tech-sector) wasn't considered a credible source of information on the future of the MJP?

I have to confess that I despair at the stupidity of the average Kiwi investor when it comes to the tech sector and I consider that companies such as MJP who spin a web of hype in order to extract money from the taxpayer and investors are no better than the 911 scammers and those Indians who keep telling me my computer has viruses.

What do readers think?

Why are our investors (including the NZ government) so damned naive when it comes to tech stuff?

Why won't they listen to folk (like myself) who have no problem spotting all the warning signs of a doomed venture or product?
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Stupid tech investors (4 July, 2017)

Postby GSVNoFixedAbode » Tue Jul 04, 2017 10:04 am

Good to hear the Sense'n'Avoid system is still underway in the background!
GSVNoFixedAbode
 
Posts: 129
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 8:53 am

Re: Stupid tech investors (4 July, 2017)

Postby roygbiv » Tue Jul 04, 2017 10:14 am

:shock: I wouldn't say MBIE and the guy who invested $1.25m was a typical kiwi investor, like all the others they took a punt. But, as you have stated, it was not a well informed decision which resulted in the inevitable. MBIE may well have had been influenced too much by those in charge, all the same took a punt. KCS are just paying for the IP when the company is wound up. It will no doubt add IP to their existing developing technologies.
From the Stuff article :
"The Martin Jetpack was named as one of Time Magazine's Top 50 inventions for 2010."
THAT WAS 7 YEARS AGO now, come on, it just is not going to fly, both machine and business. Mind you something that will/has . . . . . :o

Credit where credit is due Bruce you telegraphed this one well
Last edited by roygbiv on Tue Jul 04, 2017 12:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.
roygbiv
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed May 21, 2014 9:28 pm

Re: Stupid tech investors (4 July, 2017)

Postby Kiwiiano » Tue Jul 04, 2017 10:18 am

Good grief! When you look at the hysteria over a 500g quadcopter, imagine how CAA would react when people wanted to commute with a MJP?
~ Kiwiiano
“I'm right 98% of the time, so who gives a damn about the other 3%?"
User avatar
Kiwiiano
 
Posts: 294
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 5:36 pm

Re: Stupid tech investors (4 July, 2017)

Postby phill » Tue Jul 04, 2017 11:04 am

hmmm
not surprising really .. in this case like attracts like
practically useless but super hyped up flashy product presentation
attracts
super hyped up but practically useless entrepreneurial greedies ( accountants / marketing narcissistic sociopaths )

good luck trying to inform them they cant tell shit from sugar
User avatar
phill
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 8:31 pm

Re: Stupid tech investors (4 July, 2017)

Postby Perry » Tue Jul 04, 2017 11:15 am

Bruce wrote:I've heard Kiwi investors say that they want to stick to property because the tech sector is too risky as an investment. Well to them I'd say -- perhaps you're just too stupid and lazy to spot the gems that are out there in the tech sector.

Perhaps you could also have said that the minimum investment requirements made that understandable?

Perhaps you could also have appreciated that the average investor with a few coins (no pot of gold) simply does not have the technical know-how to reasonably assess tech start-ups?

It's not necessarily so that such people must be stupid or lazy.

If you had to pitch a start-up something to someone, somewhere, would you not do so to the folks on this forum? They likely have the smarts to tell the lemons apart from the rest. A few of them may even want to actually help, hands-on, rather than just invest some dosh.
Perry
 
Posts: 337
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Stupid tech investors (4 July, 2017)

Postby aardvark_admin » Tue Jul 04, 2017 11:22 am

Perry wrote:If you had to pitch a start-up something to someone, somewhere, would you not do so to the folks on this forum? They likely have the smarts to tell the lemons apart from the rest. A few of them may even want to actually help, hands-on, rather than just invest some dosh.

True... but I learned a long time ago that the biggest asset most people have when trying to get a hi-tech startup going is sweat equity and the longer you can leave investor buy-in the better.

When a hi-tech project is at the angel-funding stage you have to give away a huge percentage of ownership for a small amount of funding

At the seed-capital stage you can give away a little less per dollar of investment you seek.

However, if you leave seeking investment until you're at the commercialisation phase (ie: you have a proven working product and have secured the intellectual property rights with patents, trademarks etc) then you have to give away *much* less to get the same number of dollars.

Also, in this day and age of crowdfunding and kick-starting, the need for VC is almost completely eliminated -- if you're savvy enough. Pre-sales (by way of a kickstarter campaign) are the most effective way of getting the funding needed for commercialisation because you're not giving away any of the actual business. Sadly however, far too many people seek kickstarter funding when the product is still at the concept stage -- and thus silly people who believe the hype still lose their money.

The ethics of the whole startup/funding scene is sometimes pretty dubious -- so I'd rather stay well clear. I don't feel comfortable taking money from anyone until I *know* that the level of risk is low and I especially would not want to offer a high-risk investment to the Aardvark community (even if the risk profile was well disclosed).
aardvark_admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2477
Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 2:10 pm

Re: Stupid tech investors (4 July, 2017)

Postby paulw » Tue Jul 04, 2017 11:30 am

$0.05 per share!! Whoohoo I'll splash out and buy a dollars worth . I was really surprized to see that they were still in business.
paulw
 
Posts: 221
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 8:33 am

Re: Stupid tech investors (4 July, 2017)

Postby Screw » Tue Jul 04, 2017 12:07 pm

How the hell can someone who his presumably smart enough to accumulate $1.25m be stupid enough to throw it at the MJP without doing any sensible due-diligence on the company, the product and its viability?


Peter Thiel? Buying residency?
Screw
 
Posts: 1204
Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 3:52 pm


Return to Today's column

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests