Some thoughts on organisation
68 views
Skip to first unread message
Dominic Cleal
Jul 8, 2012, 3:33:38 PM7/8/12
to sh-hac...@googlegroups.com
Hi all,
I'd just like to raise a few points - thanks to a chat with Kate (of
OxHack/Oxford HS) who I met yesterday at LHS. OxHack are at a stage
similar to our own, without a space of their own and not yet
incorporated, but have been going for longer.
1. There has been a huge amount of chatter since Friday evening in the
IRC channel, far too much for even me to follow. Lots of business plans
and apparently "financial issues" flying about which the list is
completely unaware of. It seems to have also resulted in Alan Bell
losing interest in the project.
IRC is useful for realtime comms, but please remember that very few
people are on it and that not even those who are on it are able to read
or take part in important discussions all the time. Could discussions
that concern all of us remain on the mailing list or at public meetings?
2. Kate explained that OxHack's meetings are hack meetings, not business
meetings. Business however gets done at them, while hacking takes place
or to one side. The point here is it allows them to collect funds from
people attending meetings, they build a membership and people interested
in hacking and still get "business" done.
3. She had been doing loads of research into how to incorporate the
hackspace and into funding - they are going to go down the charity
route. The funding side was interesting, as she had been describing the
group as being a "tech arts" group rather than a science/technology
education type organisation, which had got LHS refused charity status.
This seemed to be a concept that councils etc could grasp easily, as
co-working space and workshops for artists are common and she saw
hackspaces as being a technology-focused extension of this (and indeed
pointing out that theatre companies have lots of tech too). They were
approaching the local council's community development officer (again,
arts-focused) about funding and looking into various European grants
which are matched with corporate contributions.
Cheers,
--
Dominic Cleal
dom...@computerkb.co.uk
I'd just like to raise a few points - thanks to a chat with Kate (of
OxHack/Oxford HS) who I met yesterday at LHS. OxHack are at a stage
similar to our own, without a space of their own and not yet
incorporated, but have been going for longer.
1. There has been a huge amount of chatter since Friday evening in the
IRC channel, far too much for even me to follow. Lots of business plans
and apparently "financial issues" flying about which the list is
completely unaware of. It seems to have also resulted in Alan Bell
losing interest in the project.
IRC is useful for realtime comms, but please remember that very few
people are on it and that not even those who are on it are able to read
or take part in important discussions all the time. Could discussions
that concern all of us remain on the mailing list or at public meetings?
2. Kate explained that OxHack's meetings are hack meetings, not business
meetings. Business however gets done at them, while hacking takes place
or to one side. The point here is it allows them to collect funds from
people attending meetings, they build a membership and people interested
in hacking and still get "business" done.
3. She had been doing loads of research into how to incorporate the
hackspace and into funding - they are going to go down the charity
route. The funding side was interesting, as she had been describing the
group as being a "tech arts" group rather than a science/technology
education type organisation, which had got LHS refused charity status.
This seemed to be a concept that councils etc could grasp easily, as
co-working space and workshops for artists are common and she saw
hackspaces as being a technology-focused extension of this (and indeed
pointing out that theatre companies have lots of tech too). They were
approaching the local council's community development officer (again,
arts-focused) about funding and looking into various European grants
which are matched with corporate contributions.
Cheers,
--
Dominic Cleal
dom...@computerkb.co.uk
Alan Bell
Jul 8, 2012, 5:32:10 PM7/8/12
to sh-hac...@googlegroups.com
On Sunday, July 8, 2012 8:33:38 PM UTC+1, Dominic Cleal wrote:
1. There has been a huge amount of chatter since Friday evening in the
IRC channel, far too much for even me to follow. Lots of business plans
and apparently "financial issues" flying about which the list is
completely unaware of. It seems to have also resulted in Alan Bell
losing interest in the project.
yeah, I guess I could explain that in a bit more depth
IRC is useful for realtime comms, but please remember that very few
people are on it and that not even those who are on it are able to read
or take part in important discussions all the time. Could discussions
that concern all of us remain on the mailing list or at public meetings?
someone want to post logs? I don't keep any.
so yeah, I was interested in the project a bit, sadly the pub meets so far have clashed with other stuff and I am not really a mailing list person most of the time, I like IRC. I did post a bit of an outline of what I thought was a useful direction the other day and we chatted on IRC about the finances of the hackspace. A spreadsheet had been put together of outline costs for the Wydnam road hackspace showing what looked like a rough break even position. Here it is: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlKLZQD6xflKdGZwZ0xXcjNQY3laZWplSzR5bFNfREE The principal problem with the spreadsheet was that all the costs were exclusive of VAT and all the revenues were inclusive of VAT. This is a *bad* thing. These kind of spreadsheets are just educated guesses full of notional figures, however the point is that if you get the VAT muddled up like this then your guess is 20% more optimistic than you think. If the plan worked and the guesses were spot on and all targets were met then this was planning to achieve a 20% shortfall on the rent at the end of the year. OK so this is fine, this is a standard cockup, easily done. This is failing to plan correctly and it is OK, everyone does it, and it is fixable.
So I helped fix it. We put together a costed spreadsheet modeling a rising membership over the first year with and without VAT, with some members contributing £150 per month and others £30 per month (and that really is now 3 ten pound notes leaving your wallet, not £36 inc VAT) and all these numbers are in the spreadsheet and you can mess with the model by changing the numbers in bold. You can have a play with it here, look at the £500 hackspace tab, maybe download a copy and mess with the numbers in bold (the rest calculate off those, but do check the formulas too)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ankl5FhsdSiZdGNYRDFOS2ZyRTgxNUZVWVFlNVU2QVE
This showed some problems in the finances, in addition to the cashflow problem which I didn't attempt to model. I also created a similar plan for the makerspace that I discussed on the list. I found a reasonable looking location for it which is £2000/month including rates and some other stuff. I put in some educated guesses for costs including 5k for equipment, 10k to do the place up (well 6k to do it up and 4k for rent on two unproductive months before the start of year 1 trading) plus some staffing costs and other things that sounded reasonable. As this would be a limited company it can raise capital and I put in a 30k initial capitalisation. the plan makes an operating loss in the first year and a profit in year 2 with the loss carried forward and offset against the profit in year 2 there isn't much corporation tax and it can pay a 10% dividend to shareholders in the second year. This means if you invested 3k in the space for a 10% stake in the business you might get a £300 dividend and your stake is probably worth quite a bit more than it was. This model includes a marketing budget which is needed to get to 300 members, all paying £12 a month, it is unashamedly a maker space rather than an industrial hackspace, but it will allow us to inspire hundreds of people across the area to get excited and make things. The space would be used during the day as a bit of a business incubator/hub area with the focus moving to classes/individual projects in evenings and weekends.
There are incremental revenue opportunities by doing central purchasing, so members could decide they want to build something, plan it all out in the space, put together a bill of materials and we price it up and procure the bits from wholesalers and get it delivered to the space, taking a retail margin on the materials.
You could do theme months, "so this month we are all going to make kites and then go out at the end of the month and see who's can go the highest" or "this month is circuit board planning, because next month we are renting a bunch of etching baths". Evening classes could be stuff from simple kit assembly to more self-directed projects. In the same way the Farnham Rock Choir has inspired a heap of people to go singing we could inspire a heap of people to do creative stuff making things.
That is all costed up in some detail in the spreadsheet, on the £2000 makerspace tab. I believe it would be possible to raise the required capital from people interested in investing in a cool project that would enhance the future of the area - I don't think you could get it gifted to the project.
So this is fine, we have a couple of plans modeled up, one cheap with low numbers of members and one at the high end inspiring large numbers of people to get involved. The ambitious one looks viable, the cheap one doesn't yet, but perhaps it could do, or perhaps there is a happy medium somewhere.
Today there appeared to be more of a decision that the cheap industrial space was what the project was all about, which is fine, that was the consensus on the mailing list too, I just did the finances spreadsheets for the expensive one for my own amusement to see if it would work. I lost interest in the whole project when the plan for the cheap place started to rely on £5,500 in "donations" (and there was another scenario for a smaller place which broke even based on 3.5k in donations). This isn't realistic and is working back from the bottom line. You should put in what you think you can get in donations (I would put in zero, but I wouldn't challenge a figure of up to £500 or so) and then see what the bottom line is. You can't decide that you can go for a cheap option that you can definitely afford on the basis that it only relies on a £3.5k handout from the donation fairy.
This is not failing to plan (a forgiveable thing) this is planning to fail. So we have a plan that results in a 3.5k deficit at the end of year 1. What happens then? It was suggested that it wouldn't be the directors picking this up, that would be unreasonable, but any deficit should be shared across all the members. There was some discussion about it being a community project rather than a business so everyone should pick it up - but this is bogus. Everyone might chip in for an unplanned problem, but this is a planned and scheduled deficit that is designed to sting the members at the end of the first year (well actually it won't get that far because the cashflow won't work, but lets imagine the cashflow is plausible). This isn't a community chipping in for a problem, it is planning to sting people.
What we know from Reading hackspace is that it is making a loss. They have someone who is currently picking up the slack, but it sounds like that is unsustainable. Cloning a model that you know is failing without making any effort to do things differently is unwise.
I think the fundamental problem is that there are not people here who want to run a hackspace and are looking at the best way to run a viable and sustainable hackspace that will inspire people to hack on cool projects with an ambition to make a difference to Surrey and Hampshire. There are people here who want a hackspace to exist so they can do their stuff in it. If other people happen to also use it then that is considered acceptable and more members is an unavoidable compromise to make the thing viable, much like having office space was an undesireable compromise. (and no, I was never after a cheap office, and it is not a lack of commitment to the concept of a hackspace on my part, I was talking about committing to the project to the extent of investigating relocating my business to provide £600/month revenue plus an investment of £3000 for a 10% stake in a viable proposition and probably sponsorship as well)
so yeah, I am out. Hope you get it to work somehow, good luck!
so yeah, I was interested in the project a bit, sadly the pub meets so far have clashed with other stuff and I am not really a mailing list person most of the time, I like IRC. I did post a bit of an outline of what I thought was a useful direction the other day and we chatted on IRC about the finances of the hackspace. A spreadsheet had been put together of outline costs for the Wydnam road hackspace showing what looked like a rough break even position. Here it is: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AlKLZQD6xflKdGZwZ0xXcjNQY3laZWplSzR5bFNfREE The principal problem with the spreadsheet was that all the costs were exclusive of VAT and all the revenues were inclusive of VAT. This is a *bad* thing. These kind of spreadsheets are just educated guesses full of notional figures, however the point is that if you get the VAT muddled up like this then your guess is 20% more optimistic than you think. If the plan worked and the guesses were spot on and all targets were met then this was planning to achieve a 20% shortfall on the rent at the end of the year. OK so this is fine, this is a standard cockup, easily done. This is failing to plan correctly and it is OK, everyone does it, and it is fixable.
So I helped fix it. We put together a costed spreadsheet modeling a rising membership over the first year with and without VAT, with some members contributing £150 per month and others £30 per month (and that really is now 3 ten pound notes leaving your wallet, not £36 inc VAT) and all these numbers are in the spreadsheet and you can mess with the model by changing the numbers in bold. You can have a play with it here, look at the £500 hackspace tab, maybe download a copy and mess with the numbers in bold (the rest calculate off those, but do check the formulas too)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Ankl5FhsdSiZdGNYRDFOS2ZyRTgxNUZVWVFlNVU2QVE
This showed some problems in the finances, in addition to the cashflow problem which I didn't attempt to model. I also created a similar plan for the makerspace that I discussed on the list. I found a reasonable looking location for it which is £2000/month including rates and some other stuff. I put in some educated guesses for costs including 5k for equipment, 10k to do the place up (well 6k to do it up and 4k for rent on two unproductive months before the start of year 1 trading) plus some staffing costs and other things that sounded reasonable. As this would be a limited company it can raise capital and I put in a 30k initial capitalisation. the plan makes an operating loss in the first year and a profit in year 2 with the loss carried forward and offset against the profit in year 2 there isn't much corporation tax and it can pay a 10% dividend to shareholders in the second year. This means if you invested 3k in the space for a 10% stake in the business you might get a £300 dividend and your stake is probably worth quite a bit more than it was. This model includes a marketing budget which is needed to get to 300 members, all paying £12 a month, it is unashamedly a maker space rather than an industrial hackspace, but it will allow us to inspire hundreds of people across the area to get excited and make things. The space would be used during the day as a bit of a business incubator/hub area with the focus moving to classes/individual projects in evenings and weekends.
There are incremental revenue opportunities by doing central purchasing, so members could decide they want to build something, plan it all out in the space, put together a bill of materials and we price it up and procure the bits from wholesalers and get it delivered to the space, taking a retail margin on the materials.
You could do theme months, "so this month we are all going to make kites and then go out at the end of the month and see who's can go the highest" or "this month is circuit board planning, because next month we are renting a bunch of etching baths". Evening classes could be stuff from simple kit assembly to more self-directed projects. In the same way the Farnham Rock Choir has inspired a heap of people to go singing we could inspire a heap of people to do creative stuff making things.
That is all costed up in some detail in the spreadsheet, on the £2000 makerspace tab. I believe it would be possible to raise the required capital from people interested in investing in a cool project that would enhance the future of the area - I don't think you could get it gifted to the project.
So this is fine, we have a couple of plans modeled up, one cheap with low numbers of members and one at the high end inspiring large numbers of people to get involved. The ambitious one looks viable, the cheap one doesn't yet, but perhaps it could do, or perhaps there is a happy medium somewhere.
Today there appeared to be more of a decision that the cheap industrial space was what the project was all about, which is fine, that was the consensus on the mailing list too, I just did the finances spreadsheets for the expensive one for my own amusement to see if it would work. I lost interest in the whole project when the plan for the cheap place started to rely on £5,500 in "donations" (and there was another scenario for a smaller place which broke even based on 3.5k in donations). This isn't realistic and is working back from the bottom line. You should put in what you think you can get in donations (I would put in zero, but I wouldn't challenge a figure of up to £500 or so) and then see what the bottom line is. You can't decide that you can go for a cheap option that you can definitely afford on the basis that it only relies on a £3.5k handout from the donation fairy.
This is not failing to plan (a forgiveable thing) this is planning to fail. So we have a plan that results in a 3.5k deficit at the end of year 1. What happens then? It was suggested that it wouldn't be the directors picking this up, that would be unreasonable, but any deficit should be shared across all the members. There was some discussion about it being a community project rather than a business so everyone should pick it up - but this is bogus. Everyone might chip in for an unplanned problem, but this is a planned and scheduled deficit that is designed to sting the members at the end of the first year (well actually it won't get that far because the cashflow won't work, but lets imagine the cashflow is plausible). This isn't a community chipping in for a problem, it is planning to sting people.
What we know from Reading hackspace is that it is making a loss. They have someone who is currently picking up the slack, but it sounds like that is unsustainable. Cloning a model that you know is failing without making any effort to do things differently is unwise.
I think the fundamental problem is that there are not people here who want to run a hackspace and are looking at the best way to run a viable and sustainable hackspace that will inspire people to hack on cool projects with an ambition to make a difference to Surrey and Hampshire. There are people here who want a hackspace to exist so they can do their stuff in it. If other people happen to also use it then that is considered acceptable and more members is an unavoidable compromise to make the thing viable, much like having office space was an undesireable compromise. (and no, I was never after a cheap office, and it is not a lack of commitment to the concept of a hackspace on my part, I was talking about committing to the project to the extent of investigating relocating my business to provide £600/month revenue plus an investment of £3000 for a 10% stake in a viable proposition and probably sponsorship as well)
so yeah, I am out. Hope you get it to work somehow, good luck!
Andy Smith
Jul 8, 2012, 6:16:21 PM7/8/12
to sh-hac...@googlegroups.com
Hi Alan,
On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 02:32:10PM -0700, Alan Bell wrote:
> I think the fundamental problem is that there are not people here who want
> to run a hackspace and are looking at the best way to run a viable and
> sustainable hackspace that will inspire people to hack on cool projects
> with an ambition to make a difference to Surrey and Hampshire. There are
> people here who want a hackspace to exist so they can do their stuff in it.
> If other people happen to also use it then that is considered acceptable
This seems a bit harsh, because it reads like you're painting people
as selfish; ruining the dreams of others because of their own
desires; not caring about the community or growth of the project as
long as they get to play with some hardware. My experiences differ a
great deal.
I completely agree with you that there is not the financial basis to
rent premises yet and that talk of that is premature. Most
hacker spaces I am aware of started small and stayed that way for
*years*, many without a regular meeting space, taking on donations
and pledges. I'm not sure that everyone involved here is/was
prepared for that, and I'm sure that some people are getting carried
away and wishing their dreams into reality much too soon.
But to give them a good kicking for having those dreams seems rather
unfair. A reality check, sure.
Is it so unreasonable for people who see the things they want to do
happening in London and Reading to want the same in Surrey and/or
Hampshire? It's what they want to do and they see it being done
elsewhere. Should they just be told to not want it?
What has happened here is that you have encountered a bunch of
people who want those things, and those things aren't the same
things that you want, so you offer them what you want and then
express dismay when they don't take what you are offering.
Hacker spaces are hard. Co-working spaces logically must be easier.
Is it news that a co-working space would be an easier business to
set up?
> I was talking about committing to the project to the extent of
> investigating relocating my business to provide �600/month revenue
> plus an investment of �3000 for a 10% stake in a viable
> proposition and probably sponsorship as well)
As far as I can see there is nothing at all stopping you from doing
this other than that the company name "Surrey and Hampshire
Makerspace Ltd" is taken.
It seems like there is bad feeling about not being able to convince
some people that your business idea could work for them. I don't
really understand - those people would not be your customers anyway,
would they?
Is it that you feel that the people who do want to be able to do the
things they can do in London and Reading are dragging along a
greater mass of people who aren't really that bothered, and that
this could be the difference between having something that works vs.
abject financial failure?
I bet if you still went ahead with your idea then most of the people
here who are potential customers would find out about it and take an
interest anyway, leaving behind those who it wouldn't be suitable
for. Wouldn't that be best?
I know I keep harping on about London Hackspace but it's the only
hacker space I have more than passing knowledge of. The thing is,
Tech Hub exists, and it hasn't spelled doom for LHS. Turns out that
LHS offers stuff that Tech Hub doesn't, and a lot of people like
that. I'm sure that at Tech Hub they also make remarks about LHS's
staircase that smells of urine, too.
> so yeah, I am out. Hope you get it to work somehow, good luck!
Well I hope you go ahead with your co-working space as it seems like
a nice idea. Totally agree with you that anyone who wants to see
something like this in Surrey or Hampshire any time soon would be
better off hitching up to your wagon, as I'm sure it would be
quicker and easier to get off the ground than a hacker space.
Cheers,
Andy
On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 02:32:10PM -0700, Alan Bell wrote:
> I think the fundamental problem is that there are not people here who want
> to run a hackspace and are looking at the best way to run a viable and
> sustainable hackspace that will inspire people to hack on cool projects
> with an ambition to make a difference to Surrey and Hampshire. There are
> people here who want a hackspace to exist so they can do their stuff in it.
> If other people happen to also use it then that is considered acceptable
as selfish; ruining the dreams of others because of their own
desires; not caring about the community or growth of the project as
long as they get to play with some hardware. My experiences differ a
great deal.
I completely agree with you that there is not the financial basis to
rent premises yet and that talk of that is premature. Most
hacker spaces I am aware of started small and stayed that way for
*years*, many without a regular meeting space, taking on donations
and pledges. I'm not sure that everyone involved here is/was
prepared for that, and I'm sure that some people are getting carried
away and wishing their dreams into reality much too soon.
But to give them a good kicking for having those dreams seems rather
unfair. A reality check, sure.
Is it so unreasonable for people who see the things they want to do
happening in London and Reading to want the same in Surrey and/or
Hampshire? It's what they want to do and they see it being done
elsewhere. Should they just be told to not want it?
What has happened here is that you have encountered a bunch of
people who want those things, and those things aren't the same
things that you want, so you offer them what you want and then
express dismay when they don't take what you are offering.
Hacker spaces are hard. Co-working spaces logically must be easier.
Is it news that a co-working space would be an easier business to
set up?
> I was talking about committing to the project to the extent of
> investigating relocating my business to provide �600/month revenue
> plus an investment of �3000 for a 10% stake in a viable
> proposition and probably sponsorship as well)
this other than that the company name "Surrey and Hampshire
Makerspace Ltd" is taken.
It seems like there is bad feeling about not being able to convince
some people that your business idea could work for them. I don't
really understand - those people would not be your customers anyway,
would they?
Is it that you feel that the people who do want to be able to do the
things they can do in London and Reading are dragging along a
greater mass of people who aren't really that bothered, and that
this could be the difference between having something that works vs.
abject financial failure?
I bet if you still went ahead with your idea then most of the people
here who are potential customers would find out about it and take an
interest anyway, leaving behind those who it wouldn't be suitable
for. Wouldn't that be best?
I know I keep harping on about London Hackspace but it's the only
hacker space I have more than passing knowledge of. The thing is,
Tech Hub exists, and it hasn't spelled doom for LHS. Turns out that
LHS offers stuff that Tech Hub doesn't, and a lot of people like
that. I'm sure that at Tech Hub they also make remarks about LHS's
staircase that smells of urine, too.
> so yeah, I am out. Hope you get it to work somehow, good luck!
a nice idea. Totally agree with you that anyone who wants to see
something like this in Surrey or Hampshire any time soon would be
better off hitching up to your wagon, as I'm sure it would be
quicker and easier to get off the ground than a hacker space.
Cheers,
Andy
Robin Fordham
Jul 8, 2012, 7:18:31 PM7/8/12
to sh-hac...@googlegroups.com
> Hi all,
>
> I'd just like to raise a few points - thanks to a chat with Kate (of
> OxHack/Oxford HS) who I met yesterday at LHS. OxHack are at a stage
> similar to our own, without a space of their own and not yet
> incorporated, but have been going for longer.
>
> 1. There has been a huge amount of chatter since Friday evening in the
> IRC channel, far too much for even me to follow. Lots of business plans
> and apparently "financial issues" flying about which the list is
> completely unaware of. It seems to have also resulted in Alan Bell
> losing interest in the project.
I have had no input in the plans, but have joined in on IRC so I could
>
> I'd just like to raise a few points - thanks to a chat with Kate (of
> OxHack/Oxford HS) who I met yesterday at LHS. OxHack are at a stage
> similar to our own, without a space of their own and not yet
> incorporated, but have been going for longer.
>
> 1. There has been a huge amount of chatter since Friday evening in the
> IRC channel, far too much for even me to follow. Lots of business plans
> and apparently "financial issues" flying about which the list is
> completely unaware of. It seems to have also resulted in Alan Bell
> losing interest in the project.
discuss and understand the hard work Alan (folknlgy) and Alan (Bell)
have put in trying to come up with a sensible budget, I have then
conveyed it to the mailing listing for discussion. I don't believe any
decisions have been made on IRC it's just a good platform to discuss
in real time and do things such a plan out a budget.
> IRC is useful for realtime comms, but please remember that very few
> people are on it and that not even those who are on it are able to read
> or take part in important discussions all the time. Could discussions
> that concern all of us remain on the mailing list or at public meetings?
> 2. Kate explained that OxHack's meetings are hack meetings, not business
> meetings. Business however gets done at them, while hacking takes place
> or to one side. The point here is it allows them to collect funds from
> people attending meetings, they build a membership and people interested
> in hacking and still get "business" done.
ourselves and encourage others to join and have fun too.
> 3. She had been doing loads of research into how to incorporate the
> hackspace and into funding - they are going to go down the charity
> route. The funding side was interesting, as she had been describing the
> group as being a "tech arts" group rather than a science/technology
> education type organisation, which had got LHS refused charity status.
>
> This seemed to be a concept that councils etc could grasp easily, as
> co-working space and workshops for artists are common and she saw
> hackspaces as being a technology-focused extension of this (and indeed
> pointing out that theatre companies have lots of tech too). They were
> approaching the local council's community development officer (again,
> arts-focused) about funding and looking into various European grants
> which are matched with corporate contributions.
revisit it. I also do have the contact details for rushmoor's
(farnborough / aldershot) community officer, maybe get some kind of
plan together and then contact here (I am worried if I contact her
straight away I will scare her off with babble about hacking etc)
Norro
Jul 8, 2012, 7:27:51 PM7/8/12
to sh-hac...@googlegroups.com
I'm sure London hackspace would love to hear how their business is not commercially viable! Your mistake seems to be treating it far more commercially than the type of not for profit hackspace, arts center, etc. model that others have followed and shown to work. The point is to work as a community to get a space that is convenient for members of that community to use, not to make a profit out of members for investors. Again you seem to be looking to get a return for a short term investment up front which is not what it is about.
This is not the dragons den, we don't need venture capitalist wannabees, it works as more of a coop.
Additionally your plan is entirely boom or bust. A bigger space doesn't guarantee larger number of members attracted, that is a complete gamble. In reality a bigger space is a bigger risk and building up a small space with the view to grow or relocate is far more shrewd. Your figures only look attractive because you have added on these massive one off costs. You mention things like £10k to decorate the place, I'm pretty sure RHS has not spent anything like that and we already have a usable space up and running. Nor did we need £5k to buy equipment because when people don't feel that they are being pumped for cash at every opportunity they are happy to donate or lend all the equipment that is needed. The vast majority being another man's trash being put to something useful which is kind of the ethos of the maker community. RHS is certainly not a failure, it itself has only just started and so far has been geared up on setting up the space rather than a marketing push.
If you are out then just get out and stop trolling :) otherwise you need to look back at what other people are suggesting, see if that is actually something that you want to be involved in and open your mind to working with people to a common goal rather than just trying to make money out of them. Also as you have pointed out it isn't financially viable if you go spending money that isn't there. As I mentioned in the other thread - beggars can't be chosers. You might need to scale back some of your ideas until a space is established and there are funds to spare on them. Showing that an extravagant plan can't be done, does not mean that a more modest one won't work either.
I hope this post doesn't come across too unfriendly because it is not intended to be, but I am finding your negativity about what others are trying to acheive and already putting into practice pretty insulting. There is more than one way to skin a cat, just because people aren't thinking the same way you are doesn't mean that their way won't work. Treading on their ideas won't prove your point, it just makes them less likely to listen to it.
Additionally your plan is entirely boom or bust. A bigger space doesn't guarantee larger number of members attracted, that is a complete gamble. In reality a bigger space is a bigger risk and building up a small space with the view to grow or relocate is far more shrewd. Your figures only look attractive because you have added on these massive one off costs. You mention things like £10k to decorate the place, I'm pretty sure RHS has not spent anything like that and we already have a usable space up and running. Nor did we need £5k to buy equipment because when people don't feel that they are being pumped for cash at every opportunity they are happy to donate or lend all the equipment that is needed. The vast majority being another man's trash being put to something useful which is kind of the ethos of the maker community. RHS is certainly not a failure, it itself has only just started and so far has been geared up on setting up the space rather than a marketing push.
If you are out then just get out and stop trolling :) otherwise you need to look back at what other people are suggesting, see if that is actually something that you want to be involved in and open your mind to working with people to a common goal rather than just trying to make money out of them. Also as you have pointed out it isn't financially viable if you go spending money that isn't there. As I mentioned in the other thread - beggars can't be chosers. You might need to scale back some of your ideas until a space is established and there are funds to spare on them. Showing that an extravagant plan can't be done, does not mean that a more modest one won't work either.
I hope this post doesn't come across too unfriendly because it is not intended to be, but I am finding your negativity about what others are trying to acheive and already putting into practice pretty insulting. There is more than one way to skin a cat, just because people aren't thinking the same way you are doesn't mean that their way won't work. Treading on their ideas won't prove your point, it just makes them less likely to listen to it.
Dominic Cleal
Jul 9, 2012, 2:04:37 AM7/9/12
to sh-hac...@googlegroups.com
On 09/07/12 00:18, Robin Fordham wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'd just like to raise a few points - thanks to a chat with Kate (of
>> OxHack/Oxford HS) who I met yesterday at LHS. OxHack are at a stage
>> similar to our own, without a space of their own and not yet
>> incorporated, but have been going for longer.
>>
>> 1. There has been a huge amount of chatter since Friday evening in the
>> IRC channel, far too much for even me to follow. Lots of business plans
>> and apparently "financial issues" flying about which the list is
>> completely unaware of. It seems to have also resulted in Alan Bell
>> losing interest in the project.
>
> I have had no input in the plans, but have joined in on IRC so I could
> discuss and understand the hard work Alan (folknlgy) and Alan (Bell)
> have put in trying to come up with a sensible budget, I have then
> conveyed it to the mailing listing for discussion. I don't believe any
> decisions have been made on IRC it's just a good platform to discuss
> in real time and do things such a plan out a budget.
Ok, thanks very much for the summary.
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'd just like to raise a few points - thanks to a chat with Kate (of
>> OxHack/Oxford HS) who I met yesterday at LHS. OxHack are at a stage
>> similar to our own, without a space of their own and not yet
>> incorporated, but have been going for longer.
>>
>> 1. There has been a huge amount of chatter since Friday evening in the
>> IRC channel, far too much for even me to follow. Lots of business plans
>> and apparently "financial issues" flying about which the list is
>> completely unaware of. It seems to have also resulted in Alan Bell
>> losing interest in the project.
>
> I have had no input in the plans, but have joined in on IRC so I could
> discuss and understand the hard work Alan (folknlgy) and Alan (Bell)
> have put in trying to come up with a sensible budget, I have then
> conveyed it to the mailing listing for discussion. I don't believe any
> decisions have been made on IRC it's just a good platform to discuss
> in real time and do things such a plan out a budget.
>> 3. She had been doing loads of research into how to incorporate the
>> hackspace and into funding - they are going to go down the charity
>> route. The funding side was interesting, as she had been describing the
>> group as being a "tech arts" group rather than a science/technology
>> education type organisation, which had got LHS refused charity status.
>>
>> This seemed to be a concept that councils etc could grasp easily, as
>> co-working space and workshops for artists are common and she saw
>> hackspaces as being a technology-focused extension of this (and indeed
>> pointing out that theatre companies have lots of tech too). They were
>> approaching the local council's community development officer (again,
>> arts-focused) about funding and looking into various European grants
>> which are matched with corporate contributions.
>
> Maybe we discounted the charity status too quickly and we should
> revisit it. I also do have the contact details for rushmoor's
> (farnborough / aldershot) community officer, maybe get some kind of
> plan together and then contact here (I am worried if I contact her
> straight away I will scare her off with babble about hacking etc)
it via the current setup, but I thought the approach and description was
an interesting way to unlock doors (rather than the babble about hacking).
Andy Smith
Jul 9, 2012, 4:44:06 AM7/9/12
to sh-hac...@googlegroups.com
Hi Norro,
On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 04:27:51PM -0700, Norro wrote:
> If you are out then just get out and stop trolling :) otherwise you need
> to look back at what other people are suggesting, see if that is actually
> something that you want to be involved in and open your mind to working
> with people to a common goal rather than just trying to make money out of
> them.
Not wanting to put words in Alan's mouth, but:
Knowing of Alan's work in the Ubuntu community, I feel it's more
likely that he is just frustrated that what he perceives as a
sustainable business model is being disregarded in favour of
something which can't (at this stage) work financially.
Also if you read his email again, although he is thinking big it's
in order to create a sustainable business, not a hugely profitable
one.
So while I, like you, think that he has misjudged things, I don't
see that there is any trolling or profiteering going on. It's just a
difference of opinion. Let's try to assume good faith in each
others' views.
Cheers,
Andy
On Sun, Jul 08, 2012 at 04:27:51PM -0700, Norro wrote:
> If you are out then just get out and stop trolling :) otherwise you need
> to look back at what other people are suggesting, see if that is actually
> something that you want to be involved in and open your mind to working
> with people to a common goal rather than just trying to make money out of
> them.
Knowing of Alan's work in the Ubuntu community, I feel it's more
likely that he is just frustrated that what he perceives as a
sustainable business model is being disregarded in favour of
something which can't (at this stage) work financially.
Also if you read his email again, although he is thinking big it's
in order to create a sustainable business, not a hugely profitable
one.
So while I, like you, think that he has misjudged things, I don't
see that there is any trolling or profiteering going on. It's just a
difference of opinion. Let's try to assume good faith in each
others' views.
Cheers,
Andy
Christopher Roberts
Jul 9, 2012, 5:14:07 AM7/9/12
to sh-hac...@googlegroups.com
The fact that hackspaces are not profit-making isn't a big worry -
we're not in it for the profit. The fact that some are loss-making is
more of a concern and we need to watch for this. So far the finances
have been something of a side issue, and we need to move this centre
stage, to ensure we don't prove Alan (Bell) right.
The level of interest that we have seen already is just amazing, and I
believe this will enable us to be one of the sustainable hackspaces.
We already have a number of people who are willing to pay exceptional
amounts of money to get this off the ground and with such strong
support, I feel we can surely get to where we want to be.
At the last meeting I said that I felt that we could provide good
co-working space for Alan (Pope), Christel and others, but I said that
I felt that Alan (Bell) was probably after something more than we
would could offer. I didn't expect to be quite so right - but there
you are.
Alan (Bell) has now accepted that we are not going his route and is
leaving us to it. That's fine, we should give him a friendly wave and
get on with it.
My only fear is that the co-working idea has been dealt something of a
body blow. The last meeting showed overwhelming support for the
co-working concept. I am still strongly in favour - providing we can
get a space with some separation between offices and hackspace.
Without the co-workers, it would take us longer to get a space and the
space will be much smaller.
I do feel though that we need to take seriously the need to get the
office space suitably decorated, and I think the communal spaces as
well - if at all possible. I am sure many of us would be willing to
slum it, but if we want to attract people to the hackspace, I think it
is really important that it is presentable.
But decorating is not expensive - a few weekends, powered by beer and
pizza, should make light work of it.
As for the charity status, my feeling is - we are currently a company
limited by guarantee, I think we can easily move to being a
cooperative, which I think will help people to perceive us as being
something of a charity. But let's leave the actual charity status for
the future - we can move to that at any time, but it will undoubtedly
be a lot more work, and I think we'd need a decent amount of
management to take us there - management that would be better spent
getting us into a space.
-
Chris Roberts
http://chrisjrob.com
we're not in it for the profit. The fact that some are loss-making is
more of a concern and we need to watch for this. So far the finances
have been something of a side issue, and we need to move this centre
stage, to ensure we don't prove Alan (Bell) right.
The level of interest that we have seen already is just amazing, and I
believe this will enable us to be one of the sustainable hackspaces.
We already have a number of people who are willing to pay exceptional
amounts of money to get this off the ground and with such strong
support, I feel we can surely get to where we want to be.
At the last meeting I said that I felt that we could provide good
co-working space for Alan (Pope), Christel and others, but I said that
I felt that Alan (Bell) was probably after something more than we
would could offer. I didn't expect to be quite so right - but there
you are.
Alan (Bell) has now accepted that we are not going his route and is
leaving us to it. That's fine, we should give him a friendly wave and
get on with it.
My only fear is that the co-working idea has been dealt something of a
body blow. The last meeting showed overwhelming support for the
co-working concept. I am still strongly in favour - providing we can
get a space with some separation between offices and hackspace.
Without the co-workers, it would take us longer to get a space and the
space will be much smaller.
I do feel though that we need to take seriously the need to get the
office space suitably decorated, and I think the communal spaces as
well - if at all possible. I am sure many of us would be willing to
slum it, but if we want to attract people to the hackspace, I think it
is really important that it is presentable.
But decorating is not expensive - a few weekends, powered by beer and
pizza, should make light work of it.
As for the charity status, my feeling is - we are currently a company
limited by guarantee, I think we can easily move to being a
cooperative, which I think will help people to perceive us as being
something of a charity. But let's leave the actual charity status for
the future - we can move to that at any time, but it will undoubtedly
be a lot more work, and I think we'd need a decent amount of
management to take us there - management that would be better spent
getting us into a space.
-
Chris Roberts
http://chrisjrob.com
Paul Hegarty
Jul 9, 2012, 9:04:26 AM7/9/12
to sh-hac...@googlegroups.com
On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Christopher Roberts <chri...@gmail.com> wrote:
The fact that hackspaces are not profit-making isn't a big worry -
we're not in it for the profit. The fact that some are loss-making is
more of a concern and we need to watch for this. So far the finances
have been something of a side issue, and we need to move this centre
stage, to ensure we don't prove Alan (Bell) right.
The level of interest that we have seen already is just amazing, and I
believe this will enable us to be one of the sustainable hackspaces.
We already have a number of people who are willing to pay exceptional
amounts of money to get this off the ground and with such strong
support, I feel we can surely get to where we want to be.
We also have something else going for us right now, Momentum. People are willing to put in the effort now, not at some point in the future, but now. We have excitement and that can help drive things along. It is not something to squander lightly, and that is my biggest worry, either by inaction, or by infighting.
It was mentioned that most hackspaces take a long time to get a space. The question we need to ask is what is being done in that gap? I know Reading had a problem getting enough people on-board at once. They were losing members at almost the same rate as gaining them. It was only when Ryan bit the bullet and arranged the space, dispite the too tight budget, that things begane to snowball upwards. Right now we seem to have a lot of excited people from a very wide spectrum. That can be converted into a sustainable membership base, IF we act soon. Option B, is to slowly try and build a core group without the advantages of a physical space to keep people interested. Both options have risks and benefits.
As for finances. It's another catch 22. People won't commit until they know what they are getting, but we cant figure out what we can get until we know how many people are committed and for how much. By finding a potential space, and seeing what sort of deal we can get we can start saying what we can offer to potential members. We are not committed to any space yet, we are merely searching, but if we find a great one, AND enough people are willing to pay in for THAT space, then I see no reason not to advance it at a rapid rate. Yes there is a risk in that, the question is though, will the risk get less or more if we rest on our laurels? My instinct is that what we gain in detailed plans from waiting is more than lost with the accompanied loss of momentum of the group. There are just too many unknowns until we have a potential space ready to sign.
I still think the co-worker idea can work. In fact I think it's a great idea, to allow a larger, more cost efficient space. In the future it could even bud off as a Tech Hub style venture in it's own right, linked to the space. We just need to keep in mind that the co-workers are to support the space, and not vice versa. I think several people blinkered into a nice techy office, while forgetting the original purpose of it.
Paul H
Jacqui Caren
Jul 10, 2012, 4:31:55 AM7/10/12
to sh-hac...@googlegroups.com
On 09/07/2012 07:04, Dominic Cleal wrote:
> I don't think the charity status is required, we could continue to go at
> it via the current setup, but I thought the approach and description was
> an interesting way to unlock doors (rather than the babble about hacking).
Another idea would be to approach the community officers to see if there are
> I don't think the charity status is required, we could continue to go at
> it via the current setup, but I thought the approach and description was
> an interesting way to unlock doors (rather than the babble about hacking).
any others out there approaching the council for places/funding/... I know they
will hide behind DPA but we could ask the officer to pass our details onto them.
IMHO a shared space with say theatre arts groups **could** work well.
And I agree that sticking our head above the parapet re funding without carefull
planning could wreck "first impression" etc.
Jacqui
Ben Walsh
Jul 10, 2012, 9:19:03 AM7/10/12
to sh-hac...@googlegroups.com
Sounds like a worthwhile line of enquiry.
Paul Hegarty
Jul 10, 2012, 3:49:30 PM7/10/12
to sh-hac...@googlegroups.com
Might be worth keeping it low key with the council people for a month. Most of the ones we will want to deal with will be busy with Olympic stuff. If you catch them at the right time they will be helpful, push them when they are stressed, and anything could happen! :)
Paul
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages