Robots in Depth is a new video series featuring interviews with researchers, entrepreneurs, VC investors, and policy makers in robotics, hosted by Per Sjöborg. In this interview, Andra Keay, director of Silicon Valley Robotics, talks about opportunities and challenges for robotics startups and how developments in the agricultural sector can aid consumer robots.

Andra explains how Silicon Valley Robotics formed and what they do, including organising networking events such as the annual Robot Block Party.

She also shares her views on the areas of robotics where we will see significant developments in the near future, including progress in agricultural robotics that could feed into improvements in other industries, such as home robots.

You can support Robots in Depth on Patreon. Check out all the Robots in Depth videos here.

If you liked this article, you may also be interested in:

• Five women robotics experts from Silicon Valley share their stories
• Money continues to flow into robotics startups
• Coming of age: Clearpath’s Ryan Gariepy on growing a robotics startup
• Meet the winners of #RobotLaunch2015

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Is Robot Launchpad an accelerator or a hackerspace? Both. Right now we’re testing the viability of opening a robot hackerspace. Theoretically, this makes a lot of sense. I believe that the hackerspace and maker movement are fueling a resurgence of growth in hardware startups. Chris Anderson’s new book  Makers: The New Industrial Revolution, argues that we are seeing the third wave of the industrial revolution which started back in the 18th century.

“The real revolution here is not in the creation of the technology, but the democratization of the technology. It’s when you basically give it to a huge expanded group of people who come up with new applications, and you harness the ideas and the creativity and the energy of everybody. That’s what really makes a revolution.

…What we’re seeing here with the third industrial revolution is the combination of the two [technology and manufacturing]. It’s the computer meets manufacturing, and it’s at everybody’s desktop.”

This is a logical extension of Anderson’s 2004 book,  The Long Tail, which applied Mandelbrot’s statistical long tail distributions to the worlds of web commerce and manufacturing. Anderson deftly combined Clay Shirky’s 2003 observations that most websites were link poor, following a power law distribution [Power Laws, Weblogs and Inequality] and the observations of researchers, [Brynjolfsson, Yu and Smith 2003] who found that Amazon’s major book sales revenue came from providing small quantities of hard to find books for niche markets, rather than from its ability to undercut traditional brick and mortar bookshops by price lowering popular books.

Although cooperatives and microfinance are far from new concepts, the last decade has seen many online experiments in crowdsourcing finance, with initial success stories like Marillion, ArtistShare, Sellaband, Electric Eel Shock, fundavlog and Jason Kottke, occurring primarily in music and the arts. This was followed by the emergence of Kiva in 2005, and the rise of the ‘multipurpose’ crowdfunding site like IndieGoGo and CreateAFund (noGoFundMe) in 2008, and Kickstarter in 2009.

There are now dozens of crowdfunding sites and the popularity of hardware projects like 3D printers, robots, smartphone connected devices, internet enabled things has generated a small tsunami of press coverage, all talking about a crowdfunding led renaissance in hardware startups. WRONG! Or atleast incomplete. Our cultural habit is to mythologize the lone inventor, the individual, the artist, the entrepreneur. We frequently fail to consider the team or community environment. It may be more accurate to talk about how crowdfunding sites harvest the ripe fruit from the maker/hacker movement.

Creative tinkering has always been popular, as TV shows “How it’s Made” (2001) and “Mythbusters” (2002) demonstrate. But turning tinkering into a recognizable movement has had other tipping points, notably Make Magazine and the hackerspace movement. Make Magazine launched in 2005 and the first Maker Faire was held in 2006. Paul Bohm started Metalab in 2006 and then helped get the hackerspaces.org community started in 2007. Tech Shop opened its first location in 2006. There are now 6 TechShop locations across the US, with more planned for 2013. There are currently an estimated 700 to 1,100 active hackerspaces across the globe.

While there are no hard figures on how many successful startups or crowdfunding projects have come out of hackerspaces, I personally know of plenty. One of the most articulate of success stories has been that of David Lang and Eric Stackpole’s OpenROV, an open source underwater robot which recently raised over $110,000 on Kickstarter. David chronicled his journey “Zero to Maker” on Make Magazine, describing how in 2009 he turned sudden unemployment and zero maker skills into a crash course in how to make stuff and a partnership in the successful startup.

Some of our Robot Launchpad supporters wanted us to get a space, to incubate their startups, hold classes and generally hack robots. I thought that was a great idea but also maybe not high in priority, given the likely amount of effort involved. I hate saying “no” though, so using lean these days, I say “let’s test” instead. Is there enough interest in having a robot hackerspace for us to make it happen? Is there enough interest for other people to make it happen? How do we test? I started a meetup. I didn’t publicize it. *

“Do you love building robots or want somewhere for your kids to learn robotics? Do you love Maker Faire but hate driving around the Bay Area for techshops, hacker dojos, cowork spaces and other workshops?”

What was the result? Only a few people showed up to our meetup, but they were passionate about wanting a robot hackerspace. In a very short space of time, we’ve moved from meetup to grant application with solid partnerships with local council and major research laboratories. Looks like we might open our doors in a few short months. All the stakeholders believe that a hackerspace operates as an accelerator for innovation; recruits and retains talent for robotics and engineering generally; and promotes STEM curricula (science, technology, engineering and math) to the whole community.

It makes good theoretical sense to use a hackerspace as part of an accelerator. Incubators and accelerators are constantly evolving from models that provide premises, training and funding, that may or may not be part of a larger organization, to models that provide nothing but a cooperative community sharing resources.  Some take equity, some ask for rent. Some take cuts at both ends. Some have sliding payment scales and operate in tranches, others have fixed programs. There are a lot of variations and not all accelerators/incubators deliver value. I’ve tracked more than 200 and put the list on our Robot Launchpad directory. It’s the most comprehensive list I could find anywhere.

Imagine how enormous the list will be with 1000+ hackerspaces added! DIY acceleration.

* I’ll add that the very first thing I did was ask existing organizations (like TechShop) if they were interested in expanding out our way. More efficient that way, even if less fun!

I thought I’d document our somewhat unusual journey through lean startup methodology and robotics. I founded Robot Launchpad almost a year ago to test the assumption that robotics and lean went together, that startups were startups whether they were hardware or software, that Silicon Valley was the place to do it, and that growing my own startup was the best way to test all these assumptions.

Lean refers to the increasingly influential ‘lean startup’ methodology of Eric Ries, that focuses on a fast cycle of ‘build, measure, learn’, using minimum viable products to get to the ‘measure, learn’ stage quickly. The key concept is ‘innovation accounting’ which tries to identify meaningful metrics that may be completely unrelated to anything in a traditional business plan. The key concept is that a startup is “an organization formed to search for a repeatable and scaleable business model”. [Steve Blank 2010] As such, a startup operates under conditions of extreme uncertainty, not having a product/market fit.

I was on the robot conference rounds, finishing my masters thesis in human-robot culture, and a common discussion theme was ‘Why is it so hard to get investment in all these wonderful robot ideas!’ and ‘What is going to be the breakout robot business?’. I’d also just moved to Silicon Valley from Australia with my partner who is running a technology accelerator. The opportunities in Silicon Valley for startups seemed immense compared to the tiny startup ecosystem in Sydney.

In hindsight, I started trying to find something that didn’t exist because of some cultural misapprehensions. To me, ‘Silicon Valley’ was a brand rather than a fixed location and ‘tech’ meant hardware not just software. The more I looked around, the more it seemed that there was very little bridging the thriving startup scenes and the hardware/robotics communities. It looked like people were interested in closing the gap though.

It was comparatively easy to pitch the idea of Robot Launchpad and collect great cofounders and advisors. What was our plan? Test the core assumption – that robotics and startup communities together would produce increased innovation and growth. How? First, to run events, like hackathons but with a business model competition, like a startup weekend but for robots.

We developed our very own ‘robot startup’ competition format but had limited support for something new and untested. We also were being viewed as ‘competition’ by potential partners. Solution? Did we need our own competition or could we test by adding value to other events?

We partnered with a global cloud robotics hackathon, we ran the robot track at Mega Startup Weekend, we had a 2 day roboticists retreat, we ran a robot/hardware track at Google IO afterhack weekend, and quietly infiltrated a number of other events, groups and discussions.

Summary? Core assumption valid, but customer segment and business model still missing. We’ve been wildly successful at creating excitement about robotics at startup events, and vice versa. We’ve inspired other events. We’ve followed up with the people who’ve produced robot business ideas and watched their journey.

Success, in so far as we’ve thrown down a bunch of fertilizer and watched things grow; lovely weed choked uncultivated robot startups. Business model? Everyone wants robots or robot tracks at their events/conferences. Do we want to become event managers or a PR firm? Not really, I want to find structural elements in the situation that can get a global solution, positioning as a potential high growth startup not a service.

Business model? Customer segment? Early stage startups need the most assistance and are least able to afford it. We’ve been exploring offering tailored events or classes in business model generation, customer segmentation, innovation accounting etc. to early stage startups. Something class, web or group based that is affordable, repeatable and ideally scaleable.

Test? Advertized several workshops on our growing newsletter and new website. Result: very little interest. Followed up with interviews with robot startups about what they need/want? Most robot startups just want publicity leading to more customers and better access to VC funding. The startups that recognize a need for advanced coaching/advice also know that it’s available directly from lean startup circles, workshops, classes and books by Steve Blank, Eric Ries, Alexander Osterwalder, Trevor Owens, Patrick Vlasqovits, Brant Cooper etc. Or these resources are available in accelerators, something robot startups would like to join.

Partway through the year we realize that we have moved from running events and growing a robot startup community to being an accelerator. We’re still partnering with lean startup groups on robot specific issues. We also see value in developing a quality assurance checklist specific to robot startups. This is a potential business model.

Test? Startups sign up. We interview them, explore the gaps and look for opportunities, we make introductions. Success, but slow. Startups are interested but given the overall numbers, the variation in verticals and growth stages, it’s difficult to have a ‘cohort’. Or to see measurable results yet. We hope to have a couple of high profile robot startups talk about how we helped, when their funding rounds are finished. We’d love to manage a fund or partner with a fund. That’s under discussion.

But the reality is robotics is currently small, rapidly growing and hugely prone to being absorbed into other verticals. Hardware specific funds and accelerators like PCH International, HAXLR8R, Lemnos Labs and Grishin Robotics exist or have formed recently, and existing funds, like Y Combinator, are accepting more robotic startups. Investors may be our real customer, but the market is already responding to the need.

Not all accelerators offer seed funding, some offer connections, some offer resources, some offer facilities. Some of the robot startups in Silicon Valley wanted a space. Kind of like a tech shop or hackerspace. I don’t see this as a viable business model. I don’t think it’s my priority. In fact, I don’t think this is going to work at all, but why not test it? (Remember, we’re a boot strapping startup. We don’t know what our business model is or our product/market fit. We’re using lean startup methodology. We’re going to test everything!)

…to be continued…

Claire Delauney’s Botiful Kickstarter campaign is in its last hours and as she crosses the funded line, Claire shares with us some of her strategies and insights into running a successful Kickstarter. (SF Bay Area Robotics Meetup) No, it isn’t always easy or #botiful, but Claire’s tips include:

• Have a captivating video with a clear message in the opening seconds.
• Engage with audience via updates – extend your story.
• Conversion rates are very low, so you have to reach beyond your own channels.
• It takes 100s of attempts to get media/blog interest.
• Be full time on your campaign, and in hindsight, also engage a PR specialist.

Jeremy Conrad, from Lemnos Labs, had some price point insights:

• Add 40% margin to your max cost estimate to protect against unforeseen.

This is a great tip because many campaigns that I’ve seen operate on a “we only charge what we’ll need to manufacture”. Firstly, this doesn’t leave you with any margin when shit does happen, and potentially leaves you out of pocket or your backers without any rewards. Secondly, unless you only want to make one batch of your robot, how are you going to distribute in future?

Distributors need to have a margin on top of manufacture and if you set the public expectation of your price point below the final market price, then you aren’t an attractive distribution prospect. It’s not enough to think about how to fund the project. You have to think about how to manufacture and distribute afterwards, including packaging and branding, so that future products have some tie in.

I provided an introduction to the Meetup with some Kickstarter “robot” project statistics, which I’ve scraped from their site. I’ll share a full post later on but in brief:

• 50% projects are unsuccessful
• Kickstarter is a long tail business – drop off in $ raised from 1st to 10th is huge.
• Majority of projects are about $3000-$4000
• Average pledge is $80ish but median pledge is closer to $30

• Claire Delauney (Botiful) – Botiful campaign (video & updates)
• Elad Inbar (Robot App Store) – Botiful/RAS blog dialogues
• Saurabh Palan (iRoboticist) – most number of #botiful shares (twitter, facebook and face to face)
• Jeremy Conrad (Lemnos Labs) – promoting and supporting robot startups & events generally

One thing to consider before crowdfunding your robot startup, is that around half of all projects don’t get funded. Also, some crowdfunding platforms specialize in creative projects or projects with a lower average target than a hardware startup. Those 6 figure success stories are unusual if you look closely at the data. I’m currently drafting up a deeper look at crowdfunding data vis robots (or product based projects). Crowdfunding can be an amazing tool for launching your robot startup but too many good robots are missing their target due to lack of marketing. Not only is hardware more expensive to launch than an album or even a short film, but we often also lack the fan base.

But at Robot Launchpad, a problem is just an opportunity we haven’t seized yet. We’re going to launch the Launchies! Let’s see who the social network sharp shooters are! The Launchies are awards for robot startup marketing. First topic – Botiful (or #botiful) – Claire Delauney’s ‘Botiful’ kickstarter campaign closes on Wednesday August 22nd and is 75% 80% funded. We should all be backers because Botiful is beautiful, but we want everyone to test their market channels.

• Best/funniest share of video (check out Elad’s entry already at Robot App Store!)
• Best/funniest share of picture
• Best/funniest share of text (tweet or blog)
• Most number of times #botiful is shared
• and overall Biggest Social Badass award

plus most creative use of ANY/ALL social networks – not just internet ones!

Don’t make us search for you – send us a link! Awards winners will be announced on Tuesday 21st August at the SF Bay Area Robotics Meetup. There will be trophies and prizes! There will be glory!

Robots Podcast is the place to hear the latest well informed news and views on robotics. I’m honored to have been interviewed about Robot Launchpad for the July 13 2012 podcast. Robots is a non-profit association dedicated to providing free, high quality, educational information for the robotics community and the general public, based in Switzerland but with global tendencies and they’ve been producing great podcasts since 2006. New episodes are released every two weeks, on Fridays at 9am GMT.

In addition to insights from high-profile professionals, Robots will take you for a ride through the world’s research labs, robotics companies and their latest innovations. I’m afraid I was on vacation when the Robot Launchpad podcast was released so I didn’t publicize it very well, but the whole list of podcasts HERE is great listening.

Robots: Launching Startups – mp3

Link to audio file (40:32)

Today we talk with Andra Keay, founder of Robot Launch Pad, robotics startup accelerator based in Silicon Valley, about latest events, lean startup methodology, funding, and gender.

Andra Keay

Andra Keay is a Robot Startup Evangelist passionate about growing robotics, one startup at a time. Supported by key actors in the field including Erin Rapacki and Ryan Calo, Robot Launch Pad aims to bridge the software, web and mobile startup worlds of Silicon Valley and San Francisco with the robotics community and the flourishing local maker sphere. In this interview, Keay tells us about the excellent startup events organized by Robot Launch Pad in April including the Robot Retreat, the Robot Block Party, Mega Startup Weekend and a Cloud Robotics Hackathon. She brings us into her world of lean startup methodology, minimum viable products and tells us about the importance of women in science.

Before launching Robot Launch Pad, Keay completed her Master of Digital Cultures in the area of Human-Robot Interactions at the University of Sydney. Her project on “the Naming of Robots” explored how roboticists express identity and gender through their technology. Passionate about robotics for a long time, she has also been running science and robot workshops for children since 1995, including coaching competition teams in Moonbots, First Lego League and RoboCup Jnr.

Finally, don’t miss Andra Keay’s other blogs, Robot State and Andragy.

Links:

• Download mp3 (23.6MB)
• Subscribe to Robots using iTunes
• Subscribe to Robots using RSS
• Robot Launch Pad’s Homepage