Infurious at SXSW

Infurious is the only Northern Ireland company attending SXSWi and we’re doing it out of our pocket and without any support from our local economic development agencies. Phil has been partying with the other revelers and marvelling at some of the technologies he’s seeing – real cutting edge stuff …you should see the great stuff … Continue reading “Infurious at SXSW”

Infurious is the only Northern Ireland company attending SXSWi and we’re doing it out of our pocket and without any support from our local economic development agencies. Phil has been partying with the other revelers and marvelling at some of the technologies he’s seeing – real cutting edge stuff

…you should see the great stuff being done in HTML 5.0 and CSS. The amount of people doing web apps are unreal, even Photoshop style applications in HTML and only HTML.
…
All so nice and fluid, and best about it, there all using Macs.

On top of that, he was interviewed by the BBC and has a feature on their web site

Infurious developed a Comic Reader application that uses the iPhone’s familiar touch interface to navigate between different panes of a comic.
The Comics Engine can also layer audio on to comic pages, embed movies and links to YouTube.
The reader also features multi-layered content pages so readers can find bonus artwork, footnotes and explainers.

As we speak, a dozen or more bands and musicians are heading out to SXSW for the week of music supported by Belfast City Council, the Creative Industries Innovation Fund and Invest Northern Ireland.

Related posts:

  1. “Music: an aperitif for the maw of Digital”
  2. The Broadband Blueprint (re DETI Telecoms Consultation)
  3. i am jack’s frustrated creativity
  4. MMXINI? SXSW? #tweetni Lolwhut?

0 thoughts on “Infurious at SXSW”

  1. ummmm. Two mimosas into my Sunday
    and I’m wondering if the iPhone hasn’t
    created a new genre of venture investing

    MicroVC, based on an individual app or
    game, not a company Like investing in an individual movie, not the movie
    Studio?

    I’d be interested in exploring that concept

  2. Certainly we’re encouraged to chase public funding on a ‘per project’ basis – not that there’s anything in Northern Ireland for funding.

    To me it makes more sense. Look at the pressures of proper VC schemes. I was told of a recent (3 years ago) example where $15 million was pumped in and the principals were buying Aeron chairs and everything because they had the money. Or look at Cambrian House – a large and expensive failure that burned through VC money buying pizza for Google and hosting massive mentos-diet coke fountains.

    You have to ask yourself why Smule needs $3.8 million for their iPhone apps from the iFund and how much ngmoco got from it for development of their games. Mobile game assets are much smaller therefore needing less time and storage – they should be cheaper to assemble. But it’s a gold rush, a bubble of it’s own,

    The parallel to movies is well made – funding is made to the SPV which contains the movie. And when done, everyone takes their share.

  3. No need for public money at all. iPhone development can be virtual, no need for
    costly infrastructure. You’re funding an
    app not a company. Pull in talent as needed
    like the cast of a movie.

    Everything about iPhone moves far to fast
    for public money or traditional VC. Let’s
    discuss more fully tomorrow.

  4. I’ve given up on public money – it’s a mirage – one that you have to fight for.

    Is this kind of thing not what the whole point of NISIN is about? You’re contracting for a product – you don’t care about the process, as long as it delivers?

    I’m a little hacked off tonight – tomorrow will be better.

  5. I think there is room for multiple approaches to financing – why not have it as diverse as the rest of the world!

    Project financing is a staple of the film & TV business – many go into Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) that exist to own and exploit the rights connected with the project. NI Screen and Invest NI now have a lot of experience in this. (As do many producers).

    In film/TV terms there are (at least) two types of return – % of revenues and/or % of remaining revenues after other funders paid off. The first is generally pro-rata to the agreed investment. The second is what’s left after all the rest of the funders have been paid their share – and it is often where the producer sees their return (or not!) This model is pretty easy to grasp, but with the weight of bureaucracy, entrenched thinking and inertia, it’ll find a job to gain traction in other areas unless it is led by private finance IMHO.

    I think the reality is that it needs flexible, experienced and smart people to make something like that happen. Take Y-Combinator. It took a few rich savvy VCs to think differently about equity funding to make it a reality. Now it’s perceived to be a great success. Same with things like Grameen in other contexts – microfinance to those without access to traditional finance.

  6. Surely the SPVs are just limited companies/partnerships that just exist for the duration of the project – so you are financing a company?

    It’s plain to see however that no-one recommends going the Public Money route.

Leave a Reply