[foundation-board] Viderum Budget Proposal

Jane Silber jane.silber at canonical.com
Mon Apr 18 13:15:11 UTC 2016


Of course.

thanks
Jane

On 18/04/16 14:12, Pavel Richter wrote:
> Hi Jane,
>
> thank you for your great comments, I will reply in more detail later. 
> But is it OK if I share them with Sebastian?
>
> Pavel
>
> On 18 April 2016 at 15:00, Jane Silber <jane.silber at canonical.com 
> <mailto:jane.silber at canonical.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hi -
>
>     Thanks for the thorough analysis, as always.
>
>     I support the proposal but have a few comments/conditions.
>
>     A. My recollection differ from yours on some of the assumptions. 
>     Specifically,
>         1. There was an assumption about a workable, scalable model. 
>     I think there were ideas to explore (e.g., SaaS) but the state at
>     the time was that there was no scalable model. We had
>     conversations about the current NRE/consulting model didn't scale.
>     When I raised that concern I was told that part of the spin out
>     idea was to give time and space to find that business model in a
>     way that couldn't be done directly by OKI.
>         2. OKI team would join. I agree that this was an assumption,
>     but it don't think it really mattered and is likely for the best
>     anyway. I specifically raised concerns about the
>     skills/temperament of those folks and whether they were right for
>     a start up. I've never met them so this wasn't a performance
>     review, but rather an observation that a commercial start up
>     requires a different intrinsic motivation than OKI
>         3. I do agree that this was an assumption.
>
>     B. I'd like a little more clarity on what will be achieved in the
>     period up to July 2016.  You say that you'll hire Irina as a
>     consultant to give a second opinion.  I don't think that's
>     enough.  If we're going back to basics, then we need to go back to
>     basics with a business case, plan and a board level go/no-go
>     decision in July.  This may be what you mean be "a review in
>     July", but I think it should be more explicit that there is a
>     clear decision point on whether we reverse the previous decision
>     to pursue Viderum or continue (and if we continue, what the
>     plan/milestones are).  We should avoid the slippery slope of
>     funding Viderum in 3 month chunks because it needs a little more
>     time/money to figure things out.
>
>     thanks,
>     Jane
>
>
>
>     On 14/04/16 22:21, Pavel Richter wrote:
>>     Dear Board of Open Knowledge International,
>>
>>     I am hereby asking you to approve the following proposal
>>     regarding changed to the business model and the budget of
>>     Viderum. You can find the same document as a Google Doc here
>>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x3dqMivjA1MfWoKFjkkOCAEj2QLocKSeBsOkszMe8UA/edit>.
>>
>>     ________________________
>>
>>     Viderum Budget Proposal
>>
>>
>>     From: Pavel Richter, CEO
>>
>>     To: The Board of Open Knowledge International
>>
>>     CC: Mark Gibbs, COO, Sander van der Waal, Portfolio Director
>>
>>
>>     Date: 14. April 2016
>>
>>
>>     Summary: In this memo, I make the case for a change in direction
>>     for Viderum. I propose to move from a model that seeks to raise
>>     venture capital quickly to a model that bootstraps our efforts in
>>     developing CKAN in a viable business. The reasons for this change
>>     in direction are outlined in this memo.As part of this change, I
>>     propose to change the compensation package of the CEO of
>>     Viderum.We will evaluate the progress of Viderum along this new
>>     proposal together with an external consultant, within the next 3
>>     months.
>>
>>
>>     Back in September 2015, when OKI hired Sebastian as CEO of what
>>     was has now become Viderum, all parties involved made a number of
>>     assumptions, based on available information.
>>
>>
>>     1.
>>
>>         Assumption:OKI commercial has a working, scalable business
>>         model.Reality:It turned out that this was not the case: The
>>         business model was dependent on one-off consultancy projects,
>>         which put a heavy strain on the sales approach. Sales was
>>         done by Rufus and through ckan.org <http://ckan.org>. Hosted
>>         sites were built on widely divergent, one-off  infrastructure
>>         with complex support requirements.What did Viderum do about
>>         it?Viderum designed a new  business model with the team and
>>         built a cloud-based highly scalable unified infrastructure to
>>         reduce cost of operation (ready in November 2015 - migration
>>         of customers from old systems ongoing).
>>
>>     2.
>>
>>         Assumption: OKI’s commercial team (Jo, Arturas, Adria, Brook)
>>         will join ViderumReality:Only Arturas accepted to join,
>>         others preferred involvement in non-commercial efforts at
>>         OKI. This let to loss of domain knowledge for Viderum, which
>>         in turn resulted in slower business development capabilities.
>>         It also let to some morale-reducing priority conflicts and
>>         time-consuming coordination tasks between Viderum and
>>         OKI.What did Viderum do about it?They had to hire whole new
>>         staff (currently one new product manager, one new project
>>         manager, two developers) that needed onboarding and training
>>         on the technology used.
>>
>>     3.
>>
>>         Assumption:Most importantly, we assumed that OKI has a
>>         profitable commercial services business in September
>>         2015Reality:The visibility into the actual financial
>>         situation was not given for a long time, and only recently
>>         could we assess the actual financial situation. It turned out
>>         that profitability of the OK commercial services was
>>         dependent on heavy resource sharing and cross-project
>>         bookings between commercial and noncommercial projects.This
>>         made the search for VC capital over the last couple of months
>>         impossible, because we were not able to show a viable and
>>         sustainable business model to potential investors.What did
>>         Viderum do about it?Worked with OKI finances to properly
>>         account for commercial services and developed a business case
>>         that is attractive to outside investors.
>>
>>
>>     None of these things are really show-stoppers; given the state of
>>     administrative processes of OKI in September 2015, and given that
>>     OKI never invested in commercial services as a sustainable
>>     business, it is no surprise that things turned out different than
>>     we expected them in September 2015.
>>
>>
>>     But this has two consequences, that OKI needs to address:
>>
>>
>>     1.
>>
>>         We initially expected Viderum to be able to take on larger
>>         amounts of external funding from VCs in order to grow its
>>         business. But because development of Viderum will take more
>>         time and effort than we expected, I now propose to bootstrap
>>         Viderum until July 2016. Therefore, OKI needs to make the
>>         decision to continue to support the development of Viderum.
>>         We expect this process to be funded out of the current
>>         business of Viderum
>>
>>     2.
>>
>>         The contractual agreements between OKI and Sebastian (as CEO
>>         of Viderum) were very much dependent on the key assumptions
>>         listed above. We were expecting Viderum to get VC funding
>>         much quicker than it turned out to be possible, and we
>>         expected the whole business to grow faster than it actually did.
>>
>>
>>     Regarding the development of Viderum, Sebastian, at my request,
>>     has put together a budget that addresses the additional work and
>>     the new circumstances under which Viderum needs to operate.He has
>>     broken it down to three possible scenarios:
>>
>>
>>     Viderum Budget March 2016 - July 2016 (5 months)
>>
>>
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     Worst
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     Likely
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     Best
>>
>>     Revenue
>>
>>     	
>>     	
>>     	
>>
>>      *
>>
>>         One-time
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     118,300 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     313,300 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     400,800 €
>>
>>      *
>>
>>         Recurring
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     66,682 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     66,682 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     66,682 €
>>
>>     Total Revenue
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     184,982 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     379,982 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     467,482 €
>>
>>
>>     	
>>     	
>>     	
>>
>>     Cost of Sales
>>
>>     	
>>
>>      *
>>
>>         33,902 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>      *
>>
>>         130,152 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>      *
>>
>>         152,027 €
>>
>>     Gross profit
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     151,080 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     249,830 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     315,455 €
>>
>>
>>     	
>>     	
>>     	
>>
>>     	
>>     	
>>     	
>>
>>     	
>>     	
>>     	
>>
>>     	
>>     	
>>     	
>>
>>     	
>>     	
>>     	
>>
>>     Expenses
>>
>>     	
>>     	
>>     	
>>
>>     Staff
>>
>>     	
>>     	
>>     	
>>
>>      *
>>
>>         Staff
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     127,235 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     131,631 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     144,818 €
>>
>>     General Expenses
>>
>>     	
>>     	
>>     	
>>
>>      *
>>
>>         Technical
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     19,167 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     19,167 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     19,167 €
>>
>>      *
>>
>>         Marketing
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     5,500 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     12,500 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     25,000 €
>>
>>      *
>>
>>         Others (Rent, legal, supplies)
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     17,900 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     17,900 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     17,900 €
>>
>>      *
>>
>>         Accounting
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     15,266 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     15,266 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     15,266 €
>>
>>      *
>>
>>         Travel
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     5,000 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     5,000 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     5,000 €
>>
>>     Total general Expenses
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     62,833 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     69,833 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     82,333 €
>>
>>
>>     	
>>     	
>>     	
>>
>>     Net income / loss
>>
>>     	
>>
>>      *
>>
>>         38,988 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     48,366 €
>>
>>     	
>>
>>     88,304 €
>>
>>     For a detailed breakdown of these numbers, please see this
>>     spreadsheet.
>>     <https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1e27qBfXC-x8uS2dA3nQKalDWVhq70BjEK7ZMKypzIjQ/edit#gid=1821942248>
>>
>>
>>     Our new COO has been actively working through the figures that
>>     have been accrued against the projects that Viderum have taken
>>     over.  Although we are still having a difficulty to forecast we
>>     do perceive that the CKAN projects that are now in viderums
>>     portfolio would yield a net profit in excess of £30,000.  This
>>     would then mitigate a proportion of the perceived loss in regards
>>     to the worst case scenario listed above, further reducing the
>>     maximum potential loss to 9.000 GBP.Mark Gibbs is actively
>>     working with our auditors to define the best way to breakout that
>>     income from OKI.
>>
>>
>>     Part of this budget is a revised compensation package for
>>     Sebastian as CEO. Based on the positive case presented in the
>>     fall by Rufus (who was himself relying on an incomplete overview
>>     of the actual financial situation), Sebastian agreed to a
>>     considerable discount in expectation of external investment
>>     within six months. Since September, Sebastian earns just 2,500 €
>>     / month. His monthly pay would have been raised to 7,500 € as
>>     soon as outside investment would have been secured.
>>
>>
>>     Due to the factors detailed above, finding external investment
>>     has been significantly delayed. While Sebastian (and I) are still
>>     confident that it is possible, it will definitely require a more
>>     patient, long-game approach than anticipated.  Based on this new
>>     approach, I want to increase Sebastian's monthly costs to 7,500
>>     €, which would give Viderum the needed management attention while
>>     allowing Sebastian to focus on Viderum exclusively. This is
>>     already part of the budget scenarios above.
>>
>>
>>     Both myself and Mark Gibbs believe that the above listed approach
>>     should be supported and then make a full review of Viderum in
>>     July 2016. In order to be able to make a full assessment of the
>>     potential of Viderum with this new business model, I am planning
>>     to hire Irina Bolychevsky as a consultant. She will be tasked
>>     with evaluating the business model and giving me a second opinion
>>     on the proposed way forward for Viderum.
>>
>>     _______________
>>
>>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Kind regards
>>
>>     Pavel Richter
>>     CEO
>>     Open Knowledge International
>>
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     foundation-board mailing list
>>     foundation-board at lists.okfn.org
>>     <mailto:foundation-board at lists.okfn.org>
>>     https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
>>     Unsubscribe:https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/foundation-board
>
>     -- 
>     Jane Silber | CEO | Canonical
>     Dir:+44 (0)20 7630 2472 <tel:%2B44%20%280%2920%207630%202472>  | Mob:+44 (0)7899 891 943 <tel:%2B44%20%280%297899%20891%20943>
>     www.canonical.com <http://www.canonical.com>  |www.ubuntu.com <http://www.ubuntu.com>  
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     foundation-board mailing list
>     foundation-board at lists.okfn.org
>     <mailto:foundation-board at lists.okfn.org>
>     https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
>     Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/foundation-board
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> Kind regards
>
> Pavel Richter
> CEO
> Open Knowledge International
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-board mailing list
> foundation-board at lists.okfn.org
> https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-board
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/foundation-board

-- 
Jane Silber | CEO | Canonical
Dir: +44 (0)20 7630 2472 | Mob: +44 (0)7899 891 943
www.canonical.com | www.ubuntu.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/private/foundation-board/attachments/20160418/7d3cb0c4/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the foundation-board mailing list