Quantcast

Launch48 -London

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Launch48 -London

Alice
Precisely, Iqbal, now we're getting into the meat of the issues.

So then at the next Launch48 event, maybe you do a presentation on
CASHFLOW and CASHBURN CONSIDERATIONs for start-ups.

Then the UK might move forward on dotcoms that can become
cash-generative and attract investment to cultivate the ecosystem.

:*).







On 6/11/10, iqbalgandham <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi
>
> There is a mis-conception in the industry, that dotcoms can be built for
> free, but alas experience (or track record as you we discussed before) does
> require money, as does writing a business plan, or even putting together a
> strategy. I feel that alot of dotcoms fail not because of the idea, but
> because they mistake bootstrapping for 'cheap/free', and they do not realise
> that bootstrapping comes with pitfalls also, and at one point you will need
> money, no matter how low your operational costs are. The amount of money is
> always up for discussion, and I do realise that some companies waste
> millions, due to lack of experience, but thats another story.
>
> Iqbal
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Dot Alice <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Fri, 11 June, 2010 6:50:54
> Subject: [entrepreneur-1056] Launch48 -London
>
> Ah and although his presentation didn't have the LOL wit of Christian
> and Emi, ALI OF HUDDLE.NET gave a great pragmatic steer about
> monetization approaches.
>
> Some people may have been asleep during that presentation, though, because:
>
> (1.) Only 42voices came up with anything that approached a P+L for 3 years.
>
> (2.) I was told firstly that there are zero sunk costs in forming any
> dot com nowadays and then that user acquisition costs are also zero
> because all it needs is a few tweets or a "Facebook group or two."
>
> Hmmn.......And yet one of Ali's comments wrt his first slides had been
> to point out how much Twitter had to raise to have marketing budget
> for attracting traffic to the site in the first place.
>
> So.......before the chicken + the egg arrive, maybe their ears
> do............... to.........ecoutez bien.
>
> On Thursday, June 10, 2010, Dot Alice <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Well there's only one side I've been interested in all day: what a
>> former Accel Partner, who invested in Playfish, thinks are good cap
>> structures and terms that entrepreneurs should watch out for.
>>
>> Also there was a speaker there who's going to buy a regional US bank
>> and seems interested in turning it into a retail bank that invests in
>> start-ups.
>>
>> Maybe sounds wacky but actually this was proposed almost 18 months ago
>> by an NYU Stern academic and appeared as an article in 'Businessweek'.
>> If he proceeds, it will be interesting. Imagine if Sir Richard did
>> that with his recent ventures into retail banking......
>>
>> Anyway, I managed to monopolize Mr ex-Accel for a few minutes to
>> discuss that term that cropped up @ Launch48: "product-market fit".
>>
>> So aside from iPad's Chinese character recognition mishaps, I'm happy :*).
>>
>> On Thursday, June 10, 2010, iqbalgandham  wrote:
>>> Hey
>>>
>>> I only ever play both sides, until I know which one will win :-)
>>>
>>> I.
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Dot Alice
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Sent: Thu, 10 June, 2010 17:50:32
>>> Subject: Re: [entrepreneur-1056] Launch48 -London
>>>
>>> Also, just in case some lurkers are not picking up the tone of this
>>> thread, it's all in good jousting spirit.
>>>
>>> Everyone's perspective
>>>  has validity at some level because it's
>>> informed by specific experiential distillations.
>>>
>>> Iqbal and I are possibly playing both sides of Devil's Advocate, :*).
>>>
>>> On Thursday, June 10, 2010, Dot Alice  wrote:
>>>> On the move and on iPad (now why don't email mags say "sent from my
>>>> iPad" the way it says "sent from my Bbery"?) and less irked about non
>>>> sequitir Chinese writing on the device, :*).
>>>>
>>>> Hmmm.......alas Synapse WAS looked at years before FB success. It was
>>>> how Zuckerberg was offered substantial contracts to join some of the
>>>> big techco's before he even went to Harvard and then did FB in his
>>>> dorm.
>>>>
>>>> Within the two-ended spectrum that I proposed ("build it and they'll
>>>> come" though to "have some sense of a business model pre-coding")
>>>> there
>>>  are varying investor appetites for risk. Some, as Phillip
>>>> suggested, are less rigorous in due diligence or, at least, their
>>>> criteria are a better fit for some start-ups than others.
>>>>
>>>> As I wrote before, entrepreneurs and investors have to find the right
>>>> fit for their specific ventures.
>>>>
>>>> It gets commented on by angels that sometimes it's "PURE GUT INSTINCT"
>>>> whether they like a team and don't mind that the product's a
>>>> work-in-progress or not more than a germ of an idea.
>>>>
>>>> Incidentally, anyone who started to have doubts when I provided those
>>>> track records may not have what it takes to be an entrepreneur
>>>> because.....the whole entrepreneurial journey is about overcoming the
>>>> odds and absolute conviction.
>>>>
>>>> Hey and instead of quoting antiquated Ari or Confucie, we only need to
>>>> look towards the World Cup and Nelson Mandela: dream and
>>>  dare to reach
>>>> for them.
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, June 10, 2010, iqbalgandham  wrote:
>>>>> Are these really track records, or merely became track records because
>>>>> of today's success. I realise that comment is generic, but come on who
>>>>> would have even looked at Synapse if not for facebook success.
>>>>>
>>>>> Every person on this list I am sure has 5 + startups behind them, few
>>>>> worthy of mention, BUT if they hit the home run with a facebook type of
>>>>> launch, then yes, all of a sudden, those will become track records, and
>>>>> we will all look at how each one provided a learning experience, in
>>>>> order to get them to where they are today.
>>>>>
>>>>> Of course this track record does NOT show the secret of success, and
>>>>> there are millions of failures, and millions of people with 'track
>>>>> records' which have
>>>  nothing to show for it, hence how can a VC look
>>>>>  at a track record and say this will succeed or not. I a



--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([hidden email])
http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/
This message was sent by Dot Alice ([hidden email]) from London OpenCoffee Meetup.
To learn more about Dot Alice, visit his/her member profile: http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/members/12085487/
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here: http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/settings/
Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668 | [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Launch48 -London

Alice
My suggestion contingent, obviously, on Adil and Ian deciding it would
add value to their baby naturally.

On Friday, June 11, 2010, Dot Alice <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Precisely, Iqbal, now we're getting into the meat of the issues.
>
> So then at the next Launch48 event, maybe you do a presentation on
> CASHFLOW and CASHBURN CONSIDERATIONs for start-ups.
>
> Then the UK might move forward on dotcoms that can become
> cash-generative and attract investment to cultivate the ecosystem.
>
> :*).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 6/11/10, iqbalgandham <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> There is a mis-conception in the industry, that dotcoms can be built for
>> free, but alas experience (or track record as you we discussed before) does
>> require money, as does writing a business plan, or even putting together a
>> strategy. I feel that alot of dotcoms fail not because of the idea, but
>> because they mistake bootstrapping for 'cheap/free', and they do not realise
>> that bootstrapping comes with pitfalls also, and at one point you will need
>> money, no matter how low your operational costs are. The amount of money is
>> always up for discussion, and I do realise that some companies waste
>> millions, due to lack of experience, but thats another story.
>>
>> Iqbal
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Dot Alice <[hidden email]>
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Sent: Fri, 11 June, 2010 6:50:54
>> Subject: [entrepreneur-1056] Launch48 -London
>>
>> Ah and although his presentation didn't have the LOL wit of Christian
>> and Emi, ALI OF HUDDLE.NET gave a great pragmatic steer about
>> monetization approaches.
>>
>> Some people may have been asleep during that presentation, though, because:
>>
>> (1.) Only 42voices came up with anything that approached a P+L for 3 years.
>>
>> (2.) I was told firstly that there are zero sunk costs in forming any
>> dot com nowadays and then that user acquisition costs are also zero
>> because all it needs is a few tweets or a "Facebook group or two."
>>
>> Hmmn.......And yet one of Ali's comments wrt his first slides had been
>> to point out how much Twitter had to raise to have marketing budget
>> for attracting traffic to the site in the first place.
>>
>> So.......before the chicken + the egg arrive, maybe their ears
>> do............... to.........ecoutez bien.
>>
>> On Thursday, June 10, 2010, Dot Alice <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Well there's only one side I've been interested in all day: what a
>>> former Accel Partner, who invested in Playfish, thinks are good cap
>>> structures and terms that entrepreneurs should watch out for.
>>>
>>> Also there was a speaker there who's going to buy a regional US bank
>>> and seems interested in turning it into a retail bank that invests in
>>> start-ups.
>>>
>>> Maybe sounds wacky but actually this was proposed almost 18 months ago
>>> by an NYU Stern academic and appeared as an article in 'Businessweek'.
>>> If he proceeds, it will be interesting. Imagine if Sir Richard did
>>> that with his recent ventures into retail banking......
>>>
>>> Anyway, I managed to monopolize Mr ex-Accel for a few minutes to
>>> discuss that term that cropped up @ Launch48: "product-market fit".
>>>
>>> So aside from iPad's Chinese character recognition mishaps, I'm happy :*).
>>>
>>> On Thursday, June 10, 2010, iqbalgandham  wrote:
>>>> Hey
>>>>
>>>> I only ever play both sides, until I know which one will win :-)
>>>>
>>>> I.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Dot Alice
>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>> Sent: Thu, 10 June, 2010 17:50:32
>>>> Subject: Re: [entrepreneur-1056] Launch48 -London
>>>>
>>>> Also, just in case some lurkers are not picking up the tone of this
>>>> thread, it's all in good jousting spirit.
>>>>
>>>> Everyone's perspective
>>>>  has validity at some level because it's
>>>> informed by specific experiential distillations.
>>>>
>>>> Iqbal and I are possibly playing both sides of Devil's Advocate, :*).
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, June 10, 2010, Dot Alice  wrote:
>>>>> On the move and on iPad (now why don't email mags say "sent from my
>>>>> iPad" the way it says



--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([hidden email])
http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/
This message was sent by Dot Alice ([hidden email]) from London OpenCoffee Meetup.
To learn more about Dot Alice, visit his/her member profile: http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/members/12085487/
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here: http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/settings/
Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668 | [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Launch48 -London

FTired
Administrator
In reply to this post by Alice
I would be very surprised if a presentation on cashflow is actually needed. I would be amazed if people did not know that

cash out > cash in = bad :-)

I.



From: Dot Alice <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Sent: Fri, 11 June, 2010 18:52:56
Subject: Re: [entrepreneur-1056] Launch48 -London

My suggestion contingent, obviously, on Adil and Ian deciding it would
add value to their baby naturally.

On Friday, June 11, 2010, Dot Alice <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Precisely, Iqbal, now we're getting into the meat of the issues.
>
> So then at the next Launch48 event, maybe you do a presentation on
> CASHFLOW and CASHBURN CONSIDERATIONs for start-ups.
>
> Then the UK might move forward on dotcoms that can become
> cash-generative and attract investment to cultivate the ecosystem.
>
> :*).
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 6/11/10, iqbalgandham <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> There is a mis-conception in the industry, that dotcoms can be built for
>> free, but alas experience (or track record as you we discussed before) does
>> require money, as does writing a business plan, or even putting together a
>> strategy. I feel that alot of dotcoms fail not because of the idea, but
>> because they mistake bootstrapping for 'cheap/free', and they do not realise
>> that bootstrapping comes with pitfalls also, and at one point you will need
>> money, no matter how low your operational costs are. The amount of money is
>> always up for discussion, and I do realise that some companies waste
>> millions, due to lack of experience, but thats another story.
>>
>> Iqbal
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Dot Alice <[hidden email]>
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Sent: Fri, 11 June, 2010 6:50:54
>> Subject: [entrepreneur-1056] Launch48 -London
>>
>> Ah and although his presentation didn't have the LOL wit of Christian
>> and Emi, ALI OF HUDDLE.NET gave a great pragmatic steer about
>> monetization approaches.
>>
>> Some people may have been asleep during that presentation, though, because:
>>
>> (1.) Only 42voices came up with anything that approached a P+L for 3 years.
>>
>> (2.) I was told firstly that there are zero sunk costs in forming any
>> dot com nowadays and then that user acquisition costs are also zero
>> because all it needs is a few tweets or a "Facebook group or two."
>>
>> Hmmn.......And yet one of Ali's comments wrt his first slides had been
>> to point out how much Twitter had to raise to have marketing budget
>> for attracting traffic to the site in the first place.
>>
>> So.......before the chicken + the egg arrive, maybe their ears
>> do............... to.........ecoutez bien.
>>
>> On Thursday, June 10, 2010, Dot Alice <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Well there's only one side I've been interested in all day: what a
>>> former Accel Partner, who invested in Playfish, thinks are good cap
>>> structures and terms that entrepreneurs should watch out for.
>>>
>>> Also there was a speaker there who's going to buy a regional US bank
>>> and seems interested in turning it into a retail bank that invests in
>>> start-ups.
>>>
>>> Maybe sounds wacky but actually this was proposed almost 18 months ago
>>> by an NYU Stern academic and appeared as an article in 'Businessweek'.
>>> If he proceeds, it will be interesting. Imagine if Sir Richard did
>>> that with his recent ventures into retail banking......
>>>
>>> Anyway, I managed to monopolize Mr ex-Accel for a few minutes to
>>> discuss that term that cropped up @ Launch48: "product-market fit".
>>>
>>> So aside from iPad's Chinese character recognition mishaps, I'm happy :*).
>>>
>>> On Thursday, June 10, 2010, iqbalgandham  wrote:
>>>> Hey
>>>>
>>>> I only ever play both sides, until I know which one will win :-)
>>>>
>>>> I.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> From: Dot Alice
>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>> Sent: Thu, 10 June, 2010 17:50:32
>>>> Subject: Re: [entrepreneur-1056] Launch48 -London
>>>>
>>>> Also, just in case some lurkers are not picking up the tone of this
>>>> thread, it's all in good jousting spirit.
>>>>
>>>> Everyone's perspective
>>>>  has validity at some level because it's
>>>> informed by specific experiential distillations.
>>>>
>>>> Iqbal and I are possibly playing both sides of Devil's Advocate, :*).
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, June 10, 2010, Dot Alice  wrote:
>>>>> On the move and on iPad (now why don't email mags say "sent from my
>>>>> iPad" the way it says



--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([hidden email])
http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/
This message was sent by Dot Alice ([hidden email]) from London OpenCoffee Meetup.
To learn more about Dot Alice, visit his/her member profile: http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/members/12085487/
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here: http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/settings/
Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668 | [hidden email]





--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([hidden email])
This message was sent by iqbalgandham ([hidden email]) from London OpenCoffee Meetup.
To learn more about iqbalgandham, visit his/her member profile
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here

Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668 | [hidden email]
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Launch48 -London

Imran Ghory
In reply to this post by Alice
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 11:31 PM, iqbalgandham <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I would be very surprised if a presentation on cashflow is actually needed.
> I would be amazed if people did not know that

I think what would be useful for people would be a more practical
tutorial on how to do financial projections, cost of customer
acquisition vs revenue modelling, etc.

I was one of the 42Voices team members who worked on the financial
projections (I did the initial version and Michal reworked them) and
we had several people (both from our team and for other teams) coming
over being interested in learning how we did them, and I definitely
learnt a lot from Michal's rework of my initial projections.

So I think there's definitely a knowledge gap in this area which could
be improved, although having a practical "how to model" tutorial
doesn't seem to really fit in with the style of the launch48 talks,
but I'm not sure what other venue/event would be appropriate for that
kind of tutorial either.

I think several of the other teams did have feasible income streams,
taxi square with their subscription fee and reciply selling the rights
to "default brands" for generic products, but perhaps didn't go all
the way in showing they could build a viable business model based on
those income streams (possibly due to lack of expertise in
modelling/projection).

Imran
--
http://blog.awesomezombie.com/
http://twitter.com/xtt




--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([hidden email])
http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/
This message was sent by Imran ([hidden email]) from London OpenCoffee Meetup.
To learn more about Imran, visit his/her member profile: http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/members/7011119/
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here: http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/settings/
Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668 | [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Launch48 -London

Alice
In reply to this post by Alice
"There is a mis-conception in the industry, that dotcoms can be built
for free,....I do realise that some companies waste millions, due to
lack of experience, but thats another story." (cite: IG).


So, obviously, people do not know "cash out > cash in = bad :-)" (cite: IG)

Also if they did they wouldn't go around thinking, "Cash out for
customer acquisition = 0 and cash in is any imaginary number I like
from any number of unlimited customers."

There's no expectation or need for any of the entrepreneurs @Launch48
to produce the types of revenue models, customer
acquisition-retention-engagement or financial projections that would
require an MBA / get them to International GAAP level / comfortable
before the Head of Equity Research at major bank / VCs..........

However, 15 minutes of focussed guidance in a presentation on:

(1.) Do your market sizing using referenced sources.

(2.) Don't assume zero sunk costs, even registering your company name
and getting a domain hosting provider will cost something.

(3.) Customer marketing is not 100% free.


Might prevent this persistent misconception in the UK that since the
cost base = 0, it's all cash in, pure profit and zero-risk.




On 6/11/10, iqbalgandham <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I would be very surprised if a presentation on cashflow is actually needed.
> I would be amazed if people did not know that
>
> cash out > cash in = bad :-)
>
> I.
>
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Dot Alice <[hidden email]>
> To: [hidden email]
> Sent: Fri, 11 June, 2010 18:52:56
> Subject: Re: [entrepreneur-1056] Launch48 -London
>
> My suggestion contingent, obviously, on Adil and Ian deciding it would
> add value to their baby naturally.
>
> On Friday, June 11, 2010, Dot Alice <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Precisely, Iqbal, now we're getting into the meat of the issues.
>>
>> So then at the next Launch48 event, maybe you do a presentation on
>> CASHFLOW and CASHBURN CONSIDERATIONs for start-ups.
>>
>> Then the UK might move forward on dotcoms that can become
>> cash-generative and attract investment to cultivate the ecosystem.
>>
>> :*).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/11/10, iqbalgandham <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> There is a mis-conception in the industry, that dotcoms can be built for
>>> free, but alas experience (or track record as you we discussed before)
>>> does
>>> require money, as does writing a business plan, or even putting together
>>> a
>>> strategy. I feel that alot of dotcoms fail not because of the idea, but
>>> because they mistake bootstrapping for 'cheap/free', and they do not
>>> realise
>>> that bootstrapping comes with pitfalls also, and at one point you will
>>> need
>>> money, no matter how low your operational costs are. The amount of money
>>> is
>>> always up for discussion, and I do realise that some companies waste
>>> millions, due to lack of experience, but thats another story.
>>>
>>> Iqbal
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ________________________________
>>> From: Dot Alice <[hidden email]>
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Sent: Fri, 11 June, 2010 6:50:54
>>> Subject: [entrepreneur-1056] Launch48 -London
>>>
>>> Ah and although his presentation didn't have the LOL wit of Christian
>>> and Emi, ALI OF HUDDLE.NET gave a great pragmatic steer about
>>> monetization approaches.
>>>
>>> Some people may have been asleep during that presentation, though,
>>> because:
>>>
>>> (1.) Only 42voices came up with anything that approached a P+L for 3
>>> years.
>>>
>>> (2.) I was told firstly that there are zero sunk costs in forming any
>>> dot com nowadays and then that user acquisition costs are also zero
>>> because all it needs is a few tweets or a "Facebook group or two."
>>>
>>> Hmmn.......And yet one of Ali's comments wrt his first slides had been
>>> to point out how much Twitter had to raise to have marketing budget
>>> for attracting traffic to the site in the first place.
>>>
>>> So.......before the chicken + the egg arrive, maybe their ears
>>> do............... to.........ecoutez bien.
>>>
>>> On Thursday, June 10, 2010, Dot Alice <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> Well there's only one side I've been interested in all day: what a
>>>> former Accel Partner, who invested in Playfish, thinks are good cap
>>>> structures and terms that entrepreneurs should watch out for.
>>>>
>>>> Also there was a speaker there who's going to buy a regional US bank
>>>> and seems interested in turning it into a retail bank that invests in
>>>> start-ups.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe sounds wacky but actually this was proposed almost 18 months ago
>>>> by an NYU Stern academic and appeared as an article in 'Businessweek'.
>>>> If he proceeds, it will be interesting. Imagine if Sir Richard did
>>>> that with his recent ventures into retail banking......
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, I managed to monopolize Mr ex-Accel for a few minutes to
>>>> discuss that term that cropped up @ Launch48: "product-market fit".
>>>>
>>>> So aside from iPad's Chinese character recognition mishaps, I'm happy
>>>> :*).
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, June 10, 2010, iqbalgandham  wrote:
>>>>> Hey
>>>>>
>>>>> I only ever play both sides, until I know which one will win :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> I.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Dot Alice
>>>>> To: [hidden email]
>>>>> Sent: Thu, 10 June, 2010 17:50:32
>>>>> Subject: Re: [entrepreneur-1056] Launch48 -London
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, just in case some lurkers are not picking up the tone of this
>>>>> thread, it's all in good jousting spirit.
>>>>>
>>>>> Everyone's perspective
>>>>>  has validity at some level because it's
>>>>> informed by specific experiential distillations.
>>>>>
>>>>> Iqbal and I are possibly playing both sides of Devil's Advocate, :*).
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thursday, June 10, 2010, Dot Alice  wrote:
>>>>>> On the move and on iPad (now why don't email mags say "sent from my
>>>>>> iPad" the way it says
>
>
>
> --
> Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on
> this mailing list ([hidden email])
> http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/
> This message was sent by Dot Alice ([hidden email]) from London
> OpenCoffee Meetup.
> To learn more about Dot Alice, visit his/her member profile:
> http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/members/12085487/
> To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here:
> http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/settings/
> Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668 |
> [hidden email]



--
Please Note: If you hit "REPLY", your message will be sent to everyone on this mailing list ([hidden email])
http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/
This message was sent by Dot Alice ([hidden email]) from London OpenCoffee Meetup.
To learn more about Dot Alice, visit his/her member profile: http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/members/12085487/
To unsubscribe or to update your mailing list settings, click here: http://www.meetup.com/londonocc/settings/
Meetup, PO Box 4668 #37895 New York, New York 10163-4668 | [hidden email]

Loading...