Ken Hayes

Selling your “baby” is always done with mixed emotions, but in this case, I am excited to finally reveal that the British company Assima Ltd. has purchased IMS Learning A/S as of 1/1/07, the company I co-founded in Copenhagen in 1994 and ran on a daily basis until 2000.  I wanted to mention a few lessons learned along my journey with IMS.

But first, I want give credit to our co-founder and current Managing Director, Søren Sander, and our other Director and Partner, Peter Aarø-Hansen, for making sure the company performed well commercially - which ultimately made it attractive as an acquisition.  I also credit our long-time Chairman and original angel investor, Søren Fogtdal, who has supported us since the beginning.  Sander and Peter will continue with the company, which will benefit both them, our Danish clients, and Assima.  Assima is lucky to have them in the fold.

• Joining a bigger company offers personal growth opportunities for the entrepreneur and senior staff.  New responsibilities, new blood, new ideas, a larger playing field, cross-pollination, synergy, whatever you want to call it.  Rather than confining their attention to Denmark or Scandinavia, my colleagues who remain at IMS now have an international company with global ambitions and resources.  It can be tough for a small regional company to offer greater challenges to its key people.  I don’t think this is a problem for most American companies, but it is pretty typical for Danish companies (whose national market is just 5.5 million people). 
• Small, private companies have poor liquidity for the investors - they can easily fall into a “lifestyle company” model.  By this, I mean the company is successful enough for the top executives to earn great salaries and benefits, but not profitable enough to throw off cash to the investors nor large enough to be an attractive acquisition candidate.  As an entrepreneur, it is attractive and low risk to remain at a comfortable revenue level indefinitely.  Angel investors grapple with this challenge in almost every small company they invest in.  Once invested, angel money is locked up.  Of course, once the VC’s invest, there is much more pressure to push for growth and an exit.  VC’s get at least some power to force development and changes, which guard against this stagnation.  So, first lesson is, if you’ll want liquidity (and you do), make sure such expectations and provisions supporting that are included at the beginning.
• As an entrepreneur, selling your company frees you to do new things.  In 2005, I decided to reduce my involvement and become a relatively passive investor in IMS.  But I found that the company in which I’d spent thousands of hours, years of effort and poured in my heart and soul, still took mind share and conscious effort to track.  My business focus is on the USA now, and I am glad to not have to worry about the guys back in Denmark - and to realize some investment which I believe I can put to better use locally.
• Working with overseas partners is hard, under the best conditions.  When I was on the Board of IMS, we had directors in Monaco, Copenhagen and Los Angeles.  Although we had all known each other for many years, the lack of direct, personal contact made running the business challenging.  Communication was always hard to arrange.  I draw an analogy to the current trend of outsourcing programming to India or Russia:  I have learned that I’d rather have 1-2 expensive, sharp programmers sitting next to me, than a large team of cheaper programmers I can only connect to via e-mail - who might not really understand what I say nor have the connection to customers to really understand the issues.  Don’t underestimate the need for local proximity.
• Finally, good friends are hard to find.  I’m not talking about the friends you made in college.  I mean the business colleagues you work with who become your “professional” friends.  People you can trust to put the interests of the company above their pure selfish interests.  People who don’t cheat the company nor stab you in the back.  People who believe in the mission of the company (but not blindly), who sincerely support one another, and who work to contribute more than they take out.  I have been amazed since returning to the USA how rare such qualities are; I was lucky to find these people in a strange land.  My colleagues at IMS have been the best people I could have worked with, and I congratulate them on starting the next chapter of the company.

Disclosure:  I was a significant shareholder of IMS Learning A/S, and now I’m a relatively insignificant shareholder of Assima.

Invest in Denmark announcement March 7, 2007 (in English):
http://www.investindk.com/visNyhed.asp?artikelID=17043

ComputerWorld March 6, 2007 on the Assima-IMS Learning purchase (in Danish):
http://www.computerworld.dk/art/38257

IMS Learning’s own announcement (in Danish):
http://www.ims.dk/Default.aspx?m=e38be7da-83e7-4214-bc8b-06475dc1a3f6&id=53befa4b-9d87-4618-9ac3-c06cc70dba5b
 

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police, which I’m sure is an effective police force, learned this week that it’s not a very savvy Internet advertiser, despite the force’s good intentions.  I’ll bet they don’t even know why.  Here’s my guess:  they were felled by a concept called “RON” - “Run of Network” ads.

The RCMP ran a new recruiting campaign with banner ads extolling, “Make a Difference. Start Today” with a smiling police officer.  With all good intentions, they turned to online ad network Lycos to place these banners on websites around the Internet, ideally sites targeting young, active people who want to do some good.

Unfortunately, the banners ended up on web sites run by a number of violent gangs, including an infamous LA street gang.  The Canadian Broadcasting Corp discovered this, probably by accident, Reuters sent out an article, and newspapers like the LA Times picked it up.  Yikes.  The ads had to get pulled, the Mounties had egg on their faces, and advertisers who want to be savvy on the web are thinking, “whew, glad it wasn’t me!”

Ad networks do their best to categorize the websites which show their ads.  So ESPN.COM will be under “Sports and Entertainment”, say, and CNN.COM will be under “News”.  Advertisers then pick their desired categories.  But often, websites are hard to categorize, or they slip through the cracks.  An ad network may place ads on 10,000 or even 100,000+ websites - they aren’t all correctly categorized.

“Run of Network” means that your ads will be placed on any or all sites within a network - and they may be displayed on questionable sites which defy categorization.  Advertisers pay lower rates for RON distribution, because it gives more flexibility to the ad network to place the ads.  It’s easier for the advertiser, because the ads get wider distribution.  But there’s a higher risk…

So it’s not surprising the RCMP recruiting banners ended up on a questionable site.  It can also be hard for an ad network to make individual exceptions, when they’re dealing with tens of thousands of websites.  User generated content sites, like MySpace, have this challenge for advertisers, since MySpace does not control the content written on millions of users’ pages.

“Although the Mounties made efforts to ensure the ads did not go on sites that contravene its “core values,” the Internet company Lycos placed the ads by mistake, said a RCMP media spokesman.”

Here’s the wild part:  the RCMP banners were apparently displayed for 46 hours on these sites and viewed about 42,000 times.  I’m impressed that gang sites get so much traffic !?!  And that these gangs might have figured out how to monetize their traffic. 

The question is:  how many times were the ads clicked, and did any of those visitors actually get recruited into the force?  As a brand marketer, I’d hate to see my good name dragged through muddy sites.  But as a performance marketer, I’d provocatively suggest that the value of the campaign lies in the results it generated.

Here’s a similar example from the world I know, education advertising.  Obviously, Capella University and its marketing partners have no idea they’re on badschools.com….  Or maybe these ads really do work for them:

RCMP Internet recruiting press release

Reuters, February 19, 2007:  “Canadian police ads pulled from U.S. gang Web sites” 

L.A. Times, February 20, 2007 “Canadian police pull ads wrongly linked to L.A. gang”

Looks like our Los Angeles Mayor Villaraigosa wants to blanket our city with wireless Internet coverage by 2009 to enable universal access, reported by the LA Times.  Cost is estimated at $54m-$62m, which sounds pretty cheap to me - to cover 10 million residents.  Here’s a radical suggestion:  forget the WiFi, just help make my cell phone signal strong enough that I don’t have to walk out on my patio to receive a call.  And I live only 200 yards from a major freeway.

Universal WiFi sounds good, but I suspect with the technical challenges of providing enough speed, coverage, bandwidth, customer service, etc. that this is an overly ambitious goal.  A noble goal, to be sure.  Some 300 municipalities have tried.

I suggest improving the infrastructure we already have and which supports millions more devices we already rely on:  cell phones.  Cell data speeds are already approaching or exceeding DSL and WiFi anyway.  There are already networks in place and private companies willing to build them out.  What they lack is dense enough coverage.

Why is it, that I can travel to Europe, use my American cell phone in some parking garage basement and get good coverage, but I can’t get the same sitting in my living room in LA?  How many times have you told a caller, “wait, can I call you back on a landline?”  Either I’m too far from an antenna, or the power is too low.  Should be fixable.

The City of LA proposes using city buildings, light poles and other city-owned structures for the antennas.  Fine - let’s use those for more cell phone antennas instead.  In my neighborhood, residents occasionally complain about unsightly cell antennas - let’s figure out a way to build them on the visual blight we already have (e.g. light poles), rather than make more structures.

Anyway, enough rant.  I have to return my calls, but I’ll have to go outside.  Thankfully, it’s 80 degrees and sunny here in February…  Can’t beat that in a euro parking garage!

Los Angeles Times, February 14, 2007
“L.A. mayor wants citywide wireless access”

Everyone knows my son is hooked on World of Warcraft; I’m still deciding if this is really a problem or not.  At least he could have a new job opportunity:  “power leveling consultant”.  If you don’t spend at least 10 hours a week in an online game, you won’t have any idea what this is.

WOW, like many multiplayer online games, enables a player’s character to accumulate digital tools, skills and higher “levels” within the game based on how one plays and for how long.  This keeps the game interesting and perpetual.

It’s estimated that it takes a new player a minimum 768 hours of play(!) to reach the top Level 70 in World of Warcraft.  If you’re an ordinary guy working a full-time job, and you still need to sleep, but you’re willing to eat while playing, you can accomplish this in perhaps 30 weeks, or in just 16 weeks if you also play 12 hours every Saturday and Sunday.  Too long in today’s ADD society…

E-bay recently banned sales of “virtual” digital assets and characters on its site, and in fact such transactions usually violate the terms of use of the games themselves.  So you can’t just buy someone else’s character any more.

Enter a new service industry:  power-levelers.  These people, expert players, for a fee, take over your account and play on your behalf until they reach your goals.  One company charges $556 to reach level 70.  That works out to 72 cents per hour.  You can also hire them for $1.30 per hour, to work during the night while you’re sleeping.

Power-levels.com has been around since October 2004, and they’ll start working on your account within 30 minutes of payment.  There is no postal address on the website, although the domain is registered in China, which may explain why their rates are so low.

To be clear, I don’t condone these services at all — you’re cheating to get ahead, you’re violating the games’ rules, and you’re missing out on the fun of the game.

On the other hand, how else could my kid earn $500 bucks doing what he loves?  Does he have to speak Chinese to get this job?  Now, if I could only hire a power-leveler to do my exercise workouts, lose my extra pounds and earn my salary in the real world…

Outsourcing your ‘Warcraft’ skills

Web authors have long dreamed of making money from nothing, or in this case, the content they generate.  It’s rare to make a living from your articles; face it, most stuff isn’t very good.  Popular websites, like YouTube, MySpace, Wikipedia and weHow.com, have so far relied on freely-donated content generated by their users.  But as these sites gain in popularity and value, will users continue to donate their content for free?  How much did contributors gain from YouTube’s $1.65 BILLION purchase from Google?

In the past couple years, niche website owners and bloggers have taken advantage of Google’s AdSense program, which places ads on their website based on the text articles displayed, and then pays the website owner a split of the advertising revenues.  But in reality, most websites do not garner enough traffic to generate substantial revenues.  And video websites have had no such arrangement, except for www.Revver.com, which has not gained the traction of YouTube.

The tide may be changing.  YouTube’s co-founder announced Saturday (at the World Economic Forum in Davos, no less) that YouTube would soon share revenue with the contributors of the 70 million videos viewed daily.  This makes sense, given Google owns YouTube, that they would figure out a way to track both impressions, clicks and ads spread across thousands of videos contributed by thousands of amateur contributors. 

It’ll be interesting to see how the details shake out.  If I “copy” a segment of a TV show, and post it on YouTube, can I earn fees during the period before they take it down for copyright violation?  If I make a video and set it to music of an established artist, do I have to share my revenue with the artist?  If my kid uploads a funny video of himself and his buddies, does he have to pay income taxes on that revenue?

I predict that YouTube will open a real can of worms, once real money gets passed back to contributors — since tv, movie and record companies will definitely try to get a piece of that cashflow!

More interesting to me is Demand Media, a start-up Internet media company founded by Richard Rosenblatt (former CEO of MySpace/Intermix) and funded with $220m by VC’s.  Richard spoke at a panel discussion “The Changing Face of the Media Business” at a USC-sponsored LA County Tech Week event last week.

Richard revealed that Demand Media plans to announce revenue-sharing arrangements for content producers of their niche websites.  Given that Demand Media operates quietly, and very little is revealed publicly, this was quite a revelation.  Richard is a super-smart guy, and he was a sharp panelist.  Demand’s content strategy seems to be to start a large number of niche-oriented websites (say, for bird watchers), try out a number of revenue models (subscription, advertising, e-commerce), and then see which ones stick and gain user traction.

He announced that contributors would be paid on a yet-to-be determined formula based on page views, keywords and “other factors”.  Usually, advertising networks like Google AdSense will not reveal how much revenue a given article/page on a website generates, but if you’re large enough, says Richard, you can get that data.  Well, $220m in start-up funding should get Google’s attention.

I think the effect of these moves will be to enable better contributors to bubble up to the top, and soon there will be a number of major websites which will facilitate that movement.  Conceivably, good “amateur” content producers will give the “pros” a run for their money.

The rest of us will always be free to generate our own content, we just (still…) won’t get paid for it!

Had a chance to tour USC’s Integrated Media Systems Center (IMSC) as part of the LA County Technology Week.  Saw demos of some spectacular 3D imaging systems which make today’s Google Maps seem rather “flat”.  Two striking observations:  foreign nationals (primarily Asian) are doing the cutting edge research, and I predict Google will benefit hugely by this - but will the rest of us?

Established 10 years ago, IMSC is part of University of Southern California’s Viterbi School of Engineering and has the motto “Sensing the Edge - Serving a Need.”  They do graduate research in the areas of immersive sound, user interfaces, peer-to-peer video, virtual environments, etc.

The demo I witnessed was of the “Augmented Virtual Environment” (AVE), which combines 3D mapping data of a location, say, a city block, with real-time video images seamlessly superimposed across a large scene, say, people walking down the block.  If you’ve watched “24″, you’ll recognize this technology.  Absolutely awesome, technically.  A bit scary, if you’re nervous about “Big Brother”…

What struck me, in particular after asking around, was that 70-80% of the researchers in this graduate school are foreign nationals.  They are the brightest technically-minded people on the planet, and they have come to LA to do their work.  This is apparently not unusual at other American research schools.  Why is it that American citizens (even of Asian ancestory, for example), are not doing this research?  Are they not smart enough?  I hope not.  Do schools systematically favor foreigners?  I doubt it.  Is the work too difficult, and Americans would rather do marketing and business subjects?  This is my guess.

Now, I’m an internationalist, almost by definition, having lived abroad 13 years and in fact studied abroad.  So I’m actually quite proud that these young researchers believe that they can do their best work in the US, and ultimately, the world will benefit from their inventions.  I would hope that they in fact remain in the US, so that our economy can benefit from the fruits of their labors.  And we can learn from them.  If they move back to their home countries and work for a foreign company, all the expenses and profits of their future ventures will be spent abroad; not much direct gain to our economy.

Although perhaps their employers won’t be foreign.  Interestingly, Google has partly funded the AVE project with no strings attached.  This could have great commercial benefit for Google to learn about new technologies, even though the company has no prior claim to these, and the dollar amounts are pretty small. 

My assertion is that Google is essentially tapping into the well of the smartest people in the world.  Google needs to make sure they attract the best and remain the hippest place to work for the smartest people.  Much like Microsoft was through the 80’s and 90’s.  I believe Google funds research projects to hire future employees.  I even feel sorry for Microsoft…

Of course, other companies have done this for years, and even today, companies like Honeywell and Chevron fund projects at IMSC.  But none of them are as “sexy” as Google.  Google will be poised to profit from these smart employees, no matter where they choose to live.  So if they don’t remain in the USA, at least the rest of us can own Google stock and reap some benefit of their work.

If you’re American or British, you have almost certainly never seen the English-language TV program which holds the Guinness Record for most all-time broadcasts.  “Dinner For One” was recorded in Germany in 1963 and has been broadcast New Year’s Eve just about every year since.  I experienced it while living in Denmark - Danes watch this 18 minute program religiously every New Years - and they roll on the floor in laughter.  The party literally stops to watch this black-and-white sketch on TV.

The first time I watched it, my European friends were astonished that I had never seen it before.  On par with Monty Python, Mr. Bean and all that other British-style humor, they said.  Nearly half of the German population watches it every year.  How could Brits and Americans not know this program?  Danes actually thought it was a favorite in England.

Danes I know can quote the entire program, including the famous lines by the butler, “Same procedure as last year, Miss Sophie?”, “Same procedure as every year, James.”

Google Video - the original version

My (Danish) wife reminded me the other day that this is a key part of New Year’s Eve she misses from the Old Country.  Lo and behold, a freelance writer living in Berlin wrote a brief piece about it in the LA Times today, prompting me to speculate why this cult phenomenon, which is in English, after all, never made it to the US?

We watch Dick Clark and that silly ball from Times Square, and that’s a fine enough tradition.  Why do so many more Europeans watch this program?  They could care less about Times Square, which I can relate from experience (ok, it also takes place 6 hours later, when Europeans have all passed out…)

Maybe “Dinner for One” will never be shown on American broadcast television, but thanks to YouTube and Google Video, we can all experience this cult classic tradition.  I promise to do my part to bring this piece of English humor to the American audience.  And win points with my wife.  One piece of advice - watch it with friends, learn the lines, and drink a lot.  Whatever you do, stick around for the punchline at the end.

Happy New Year to all!

Google video - a shorter version filmed in Switzerland
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8908622153579785434&pr=goog-sl

BBC article - although they have apparently never shown it in the UK:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A2207288

Wikipedia: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinner_for_One

Heard about the hackers who made off with personal data of 800,000 people connected to UCLA?  It’s big news here in Los Angeles.  Included names, Social Security numbers, birthdays and even home addresses of students, alumni, faculty, staff, etc.  Although UCLA says there is no evidence the data has been misused, the fact that it was deliberately hacked indicates that the hacker knew what they were doing, and I’m sure he or she has plans for that data.  (If I were them, I’d lay low for a while until this news blows over).

My mother studied at UCLA; so did an uncle.  My sister earned her masters at UCLA.  Even I took a few classes while in high school.  Great!  Our entire family is now at risk from a single hacking incident.  Thankfully, that hasn’t happened yet.  But who knows?

This just reinforces my argument that we each need to assume our Social Security number and birth date is publicly known.  Since we don’t know who has it, and cannot control it anyway, then we must take steps to prevent misuse - on the assumption it can be widely discovered.

UCLA, by the way, to their credit, has posted some concise, understandable steps to take to put a fraud alert and/or security freeze on your credit reports.  See the FAQ on www.identityalert.ucla.edu.  Why not make this the default status of consumer credit, and give each consumer the automatic right to control who gains access to that data and who may establish a new account or loan?

(Hint why it won’t happen:  this would severely cramp the direct marketing advertisers who rely on that data and easy credit approval, like Experian with their unit Experian Interactive.)

Sheesh, today the LA Times reported that Boeing just lost a laptop with Social Security numbers and names of 382,000 current and former employees.  Worse for me, as a contractor to Boeing in early 2001, I had to report my SSN to them, too…

Angel funding for growing companies is a mysterious process to most entrepreneurs.  Somewhere between hitting up your rich uncle and begging for a loan at the bank, a professional angel group can provide $250,000 to $1.5m in equity funds to accelerate growth and make it attractive to later stage investors.

Realistically, getting a group of angels behind you is a lot like herding cats.  Angel groups are voluntary, consensus-driven organizations, and decision-making is not the quickest.  Angels invest as individuals, not as a fund (like a VC).  On the other hand, you can get some very high-level people excited about your venture, and they will contribute not just cash, but advice, contacts and mentorship.  Angels want to be on the entrepreneur’s side.

Our executive team at the Pasadena Angels presented a detailed workshop a few days ago, and I thought I’d offer my explanation of the process.  Here’s how to avoid the herding cats scenario:

Steps in Angel Funding:

1. Origination / Screening
2. Evaluation / Due Diligence
3. Risk Assessment / Valuation
4. Structuring / Negotiation
5. Documentation / Closing
6. Representation / Tracking

I’ll deal with each of these briefly below and in later posts.

1. Origination / Screening
All angel groups have a funnel or pipeline of new projects.  Pasadena Angels are merit-based, in that all deals properly submitted to the website are considered by at least one Angel.  You don’t have to be a friend of an angel, but the more contacts you cultivate, the better.  We find deals when attending conferences, networking events and even from ideas germinated by our members.

Once a deal is submitted, it goes through a screening process.  An angel reads through the documents, determines if the deal fits within the angels’ “sweet spot”, and typically speaks with or meets the entrepreneur once or twice.  If the company is out of the area, or asking for more than $1.5m or thinks they’re already worth more than $5m, then they typically will be dinged right away…  Those that get through are asked to present to a larger screening committee.

2. Evaluation / Due Diligence
The few companies which get past the screening process (perhaps 2-3 per month), and which draw the interest of, say, 10 or more Angels, will begin a more formalized evaluation process.  This is a phase where prospective investors check out an entrepreneur’s references, verify that the books are in order, validate the product and commercial market, etc.  An angel group is typically a forum to learn about new deals and exchange information; the group itself does not invest.  So, it is up to each angel to do their individual due diligence to satisfy their personal criteria whether to invest or not.  Being in a group makes this process more efficient, both for the investors and the entrepreneur.

3. Risk Assessment / Valuation
Assuming the evaluation goes well, the angels and/or entrepreneur will draft a Term Sheet and determine a “pre-money” valuation of the company.  This is the value of the company before an investment is made.  Entrepreneurs come up with fancy justifications for why they’re worth $10m to $100m - while looking for a $500k investment.  It won’t work.  Ultimately, angels make a personal risk assessment of the opportunity and assign a valuation based on that.  It’s as much art as science.  What’s your company’s pre-money valuation?  That’s a book in itself; I’ll clarify later.

4. Structuring / Negotiation
A “term sheet” defines the structure of a deal, and this would include, among many other provisions, how much cash is invested, whether that is for preferred stock (equity) or a convertible note (debt), how dividends would accumulate and be paid out, expectations for the entrepreneur and management team, composition of the board of directors, etc.  Both investors and the entrepreneur will be represented by lawyers.  If you’re an entrepreneur, be sure you have a lawyer skilled and experienced in small-company angel financing, otherwise, they will inadvertently sabotage your deal.  An entrepreneur who lets the angels draft the term sheet (but of course negotiates the terms) will definitely get a deal done more quickly.  The key is to keep it simple.

5. Documentation / Closing
Once a term sheet has been agreed by both sides, the complete deal is presented to the whole angel membership.  At that point, it’s put up or shut up, and the angels begin writing checks.  Even more thorough documents are drafted (basically, advanced legalese of the term sheet).  If a minimum amount of funds are raised, then the deal can close.  At that moment, the company gets the money.  End of story, right?

6. Representation / Tracking
Through the years, angels have been burned by investing their good money in entrepreneurs who then proceeded to do whatever they wanted.  Nowadays, with more organized angel groups, angels expect seats on the board of directors (representation), demand to know what’s going on in the company and reserve the right to change course, if the entrepreneur heads in a bad direction.  To avoid that unfortunate scenario, angels track their investments and expect the company to provide ongoing reports.  This could be a monthly status, quarterly financials, conference call updates, etc.  From my own experience, this is a great discipline to have.  The more open an entrepreneur is, the greater cooperation they will receive from angels.

Many entrepreneurs hope for “dumb money” angels — someone who throws in their money and otherwise doesn’t bother the entrepreneur.  If you can find dumb money, go for it - but it really won’t grow your business.  It may even scare off later investors.  Angels want to be involved in a positive way.  They don’t want to meddle; they’d rather be advisors and mentors. 

Having angels in your company is like having the toughest professor at college:  the course was a b*tch, but afterwards, you realize you learned more than in any other course.  Ultimately, it will lead to higher rewards - both for the entrepreneur and the investors.

More resources for Entrepreneurs and prospective angels:
www.PasadenaAngels.com
www.TechCoastAngels.com
www.angelcapitaleducation.org

Finally, the ancient Greek astronomical gizmo, the Antikythera Machine, made it to the front page of the world’s press.  This bronze and iron gear “calculator” was built around 2,100 years ago, found in a shipwreck in 1901, and just recently decoded by researchers who discovered it to be a highly complex and accurate predictor of the position of the planets, sun, moon, eclipses, etc.  Even more amazing, this technology was lost, and gear-wheel clock mechanisms did not reappear, in a cruder form, until the 14th century!

Here’s a case of Technology Transfer gone wrong - can we learn anything by it?  “Technology transfer,” as used by Angels and other investors, relates to technologies invented by scientific research which are then financed to be commercially introduced and widely adopted.  Xerox PARC is a modern example which invented Graphical User Interfaces, the Ethernet, and laser printing.

The Antikythera Machine was clearly invented and used by the Greeks, but apparently it didn’t become widely adopted, or there would be artifacts found throughout the ages.  Now that we’ve discovered it again, it’s probably more well known today than ever before.  How’s that happen?

Top 5 Points:

1.  We’ve had mass media for a while, and I’ll admit, it was an article in the LA Times which piqued my interest:  “Greeks Owned the Skies” .  I wouldn’t have heard about this story otherwise.  I love stumbling across new information like this.  This is a pretty random method to learn about new technology, though…

2.  An obscure story like this gets picked up instantly by a huge variety and spectrum of media outlets.  I can’t even be sure that it was the LA Times which broke this story.  Just search Google News for “antikythera” today, and you’ll see links to 113+ news articles published within the last 24 hours.  Even HP is promoting that they provided the technology to decode the machine.  At least our media promotes the spread of this news, quickly.

3.  Anyone searching for “Antikythera Mechanism” in Google will find over 139,000 links - and this is just in English!  Clearly, the knowledge is out there.  Yet there are only 320 references in Greek.  Unfortunately, for the Greeks, their dominance in ancient times has not continued into the Internet age…  So far, Google is the tool to widely disseminate knowledge of such a technology.

4.  Marketers are already all over this.  Even eBay advertises on AdWords for “Antikythera Mechanism - Looking for Antikythera Mechanism?  Find exactly what you want today. eBay.com“  Okay, this is an inside joke to Internet marketers - is there a term eBay doesn’t purchase??  At least I know where to go to buy one.

5.  How many more technological items were invented and lost, which could have had a huge impact on civilization, had they been more widely disseminated?  Check out these real, totally absurd inventions.

It just took the brilliant Antikythera Mechanism 2,100 years to reach the front page, although it was still not the most viewed article in today’s LA Times - that distinction went to “Britney’s upskirt pix take Web by storm”!  I’m not even going to give you the link to that one.  Yikes.