Apple launched last week its new and long coming iPhone6, as well as the Apple Watch (aka, not iWatch).

Apple Watch is a $350-$1000 or so hardware that can tell time, as well as connect via bluetooth to your iPhone to become smarter. It can show text messages with inteligente predictive replying mechanism, take a call or see who is around you. As Apple says – an entire new kind of conversation.

If you search for news about Apple Watch, there are few interesting threads going on. One of them discusses Apple-Watch going into the Wearables market, dangering Jawbone and Fitbit. There is another thread discussing Apple going after the growing smart watches market. There are many others.

Here is an hypothesis. Apple Watch price is now kind of stuck between the luxury watch line of Omega, Rolex, IWC which is $1k+ to the popular watch lines, the likes of Swatch and Seiko, going for the $100-$200 range usually.

If I had to guess, early adopters of people buying the Apple-Watch will be mainly people that would buy new things Apple launches whether they need it or not. But long term, I don’t really think Apple cares to define itself as a leader in the Wearable Smart Watches; I think they’ll try to redefine the watches industry as a whole, and build an ecosystem around it.

Rolex will always stay Rolex, but over time, in a world where price goes down, becoming more affordable and Apple Watch goes for $150 a pop, if you’re a kid in school, you want to be cool, you may even have an iPhone — and you can get a Swatch or you can get an Apple Watch, same price – which is it?

Swatch’s annual revenue alone is over $8B while Jawbone is valued over $3B, so Apple’s potential is to go after the way most of us get the time, using every day watches. There were times when we actually used CDs to listen to music, and physical buttons to type an email on our mobile phone. These things happened, and Apple changed that.

Today we won’t consider a mobile device just for the purpose of talking, that would be weird.

5 years from now we may forget a watch once just told the time.

If that has any merit, then people who get meaningful distribution on our future phone-screen may become the future victors of our TV screen.

I then started thinking it would be rather great if our phone could broadcast itself to any type of screen, not only TV, perhaps there is some new Apple ISO broadcasting protocol for glass manufacturers in 2020, which says that any glass supporting this ISO can receive Apple Broadcast from any iPhone. As if that manufactured glass had Apple-TV pre-integrated into it. Wouldn’t that be cool?

Let’s think of some examples to such glasses where it would be super cool to broadcast our iPhone into and run an App: our window. Instead of buying a big screen TV we broadcast Netflix into our window and watch it there, it can be any window, at our house, when we travel at a hotel room, at a friend’s house; let’s take another example – at our car, we broadcast Waze into the car screen and can finally navigate with a proper navigation system and not with something that was pre-installed and last updated with maps from 2012, at work, we continue an email we started on our iPhone in a cab on our desk screen using the same email App, or even at an airport clothing store’s fitting room mirror – we broadcast Tripit to check our flight status while trying a shirt.

Then I thought, what if Apple went even further and didn’t count on ISO protocol to make the glass support its broadcasting, and integrated some sort of projector into the iPhone itself, or perhaps sold it separately as something we put on our shirt, our glass (wink @Google), or something like that. At that point, anywhere we go we can broadcast an App at whatever is in front of us.

Holding a piece of paper, and broadcasting Candy-Crush into it to kill some time while waiting for the doctor, or being at your friends house and broadcasting YouTube unto the wall to watch some movies, etc.

So what if Google-Glass, who’s vision is bringing the physical world into the digital world, is completely wrong, and the direction is the opposite. What if the future direction is bringing the digital world into the physical world, wherever we are.

Introducing “Apple-Glass” – a combination of ISO broadcasting protocol to any glass supporting it with a projector broadcasting our phone into anything.

Enjoy the video

Thumbnail credit link.

For entrepreneurs, one of the constant concerns is about funding.

How to get it, how much, who to get it from, how long will it take, are they strategic, will they help when needed, are they pro-founders or pro-share-holders, does it matter if they are nearby, or is it ok if they are on the other coast, and many more questions.

A few months ago, I had a catch up session with one of our managers, and we talked about the importance of managers knowing the job, just as good as they know how to manage. That’s why people that become managers from the ground-up, first doing, then doing a bit more, manage one person and then manage a few – have a meaningful advantage. Nobody they’ll hire will ever wonder how they got the job, and those managers will have the resilience of being there first, breaking the glass ceiling, and selling that first deal.

Do I think managers can just manage? could be, but I’ve never met a (good) manager like that yet. In my humble opinion, managers that are not personal ninja contributors, or cannot demonstrate an ability to be one if needed, will have a real challenge growing a strong team under them. There is a reason why in war, the commander is first in line, not last — leading by example and not by rank. It’s ok if the head of R&D won’t write the best or most code in the company, and it’s completely ok that the head of sales is not making most of the sales. But it’s a risk if as managers, most of what they do is behind the scenes including emails, meetings, and strategy. Commanders need to know how to fire and hit, and build a culture of “doers.”

Today I’m excited to share that a good friend of mine, David Hirsch, launched his 2nd fund at Metamorphic. I met David last year for the first time where he was introduced to me as a “very early Googler who became a VC” in New York. I thought that was an interesting way of describing somebody. We met and the description made sense. David is probably one of the most unconventional VC you’d ever meet. He wears t-shirts and jeans and speaks as fast as he thinks. He remembers the day he joined Google (with AOL’s current CEO and Chairman – Tim Armstrong) to launch Google’s NY office, and when their annual revenues were $2M (which is about 30 minutes’ worth of revenue for Google today)

David wanted to help entrepreneurs to build great companies, but his approach was a tad different. Instead of going to find traditional Limited Partners for a fund, he first wanted to test a concept and started with some of his old buddies. Imagine having a large group of top executives who are now, few years later working for Google, Twitter, Facebook, eBay, AOL, Amazon, and others just ready to answer your questions and help. How can we build enterprise sales organizations that scale? No problem, let’s connect you with a Google VP from the DoubleClick team…, you need to ask Twitter about their sponsored content model? No problem, one of the LPs is actually working in that department. You’re looking to hire a CTO? Let us connect you with someone from PayPal to see if she can help; she’s an investor at the fund. These are the types of answers David had hoped to answer for founders, and his goal was not to ask for favors necessarily, instead, create a foundation of an alumni-like network of LPs that have current jobs in places where entrepreneurs need an “in” or a piece of advice. It doesn’t hurt that David himself spent nearly a decade at Google during a time when everybody in the world wanted to do business with them, and that his ex-manager now runs AOL.

I wish David the best of luck building a VC that “can manage, but not just manage.” For founders like myself out there, having folks like David deciding to commit himself to helping fund our next dream is a real plus.

When a StartupMan starts a VC.

Recently, there is a lot of buzz, noise, and people questioning this. Is NY the right place for entrepreneurs to be, and if so, what type of companies should be here? Is there enough capital, access to customers/business, technologists?

I thought I’ll write my personal take on this, being here over a year.

NY is amazing. And this is why you want to be here (and in my humble opinion, only here):

(1) It’s really fun. Manhattan has this rare global combination of great business, culture, and social life. I like to think that “work hard/play hard” is important. Have fun while working your ass off. Your colleagues, employees, and people you work with will notice that you’re enjoying yourself. People like to work with people they like. “There is nothing you can’t do”.

(2) it’s cost effective. If you’re here, it’s highly likely that most of your prospects, customers, and in general people you’d love to have coffee with — will pass by Manhattan in a similar frequency to the one you desire. Btw, if they never come here, not sure you really want to meet them. As you probably care for expense, traveling, etc – that’s just great deal. You just need to be available, and here.

(3) Capital is in good shape with really good early stage investors like Fred Wilson orChris Dixon and a lot of good east coast VCs looking to invest (like Spark capital, Bessemer, Venrock and others). So anything from early seeds to A, and B rounds

(4) Great startup community to share ideas, circulate data, and learn from each other’s mistakes (companies like Blip.tv, AnyClip, hunch, 5min, Foresquare, Boxee, Wix, GameGround, Outbrain, Etsy, Tremor, Howcast and many others)

(5) if your business generate revenue like ours from advertising, it’s too obvious why you want to be here, so I’m just moving to (6)

(6) Lots of media, and local business you can tap into and introduce your ideas and products (Time Warner, Turner, MSNBC..)

(7) if by any chance, you have an Israeli office in tandem – it’s better to have 7 hours time difference than the west coast which is 10 hours. Harder

Why I think you shouldn’t start here, and come when you can and it’s the right time:

(1) it’s expensive. Not necessarily much more than other places (for instance, engineer in Israel cost similarly to one here in NY). But in general, Manhattan is no cheap place to do anything which puts a big-question on us trying to be frugal

(2) Leverage your competitive advantage. Many entrepreneurs come from different background. Some come from technology, some from sales, some marketing. if you have an advantage elsewhere, in my mind you should heavily consider starting there, or at least have a branch there. For instance, we have serious team of top-class Mathematicians working in our Israeli office on our video recommendation algorithms, and we all started together in the early days, scratching our head – how the hell you predict what people want to watch next. it was really important to have that team, and build the product’s first version together. Not that I think it’s impossible to find good folks at Stanford, only for us it was easier to access the top/of-the-top guys in Israel given we grew up there, and spent many years in the army with each other.

I hope this helps. Feel free to comment about anything if you agree/disagree.

“now you’re in New York!!!
These streets will make you feel brand new,
the lights will inspire you,
Let’s hear it for New York, New York, New York