Caroline Woodhouse’s transition from office manager at a dead-end chiropractic clinic to tech entrepreneur has been rockier than anticipated. Like many non-technical founders, she decided to outsource the development of Where4Events, an event aggregation app, only to end up in a messy court battle, costing her $500,000. However, Woodhouse, based in Melbourne, is no stranger to adversity. Her personal life has also been fraught with challenges. She escaped domestic violence and now supports two children through school as a single mum. But she’s no complainer. Her story is an example of how persistence can overcome resistance.

Woodhouse, who is also a singer, came up with the idea for Where4Events - essentially, the ‘Google for Events’ - a couple of years ago. She was frustrated by the amount of information available on the internet scattered across hundreds of websites. Her startup Where4Events was built to expedite the process of finding events worth attending, as well as sourcing free tickets.

It was all well and good - Woodhouse was set to create Australia’s biggest event aggregator, there was a large market for her solution and a number of promising business models that could be executed - but the process of development didn’t quite go to plan.

The first developer Woodhouse approached wouldn’t develop the app until she was able to provide data, even though they were tasked with creating an algorithm that aggregates data. After six months of collecting data manually, the developer agreed to begin working on the app. But the app they delivered was subpar; it barely functioned at all, let alone the way Woodhouse wanted. She had to outsource product development to another developer who wasn’t any better. That’s two false starts.

Worse, Woodhouse had to take her first developer to court because they were insisting Where4Events was their idea and design. Luckily, Woodhouse had trademarked Where4Events and won that particular court battle, but it didn’t end there. Where4Events was linked to the developer’s iOS account and they wouldn’t take it down from the App Store. Woodhouse couldn’t develop another app in the same name, so she was back in court fighting for her IP.

Then Woodhouse finds out the reason they weren’t handing over the source code was because they had outsourced the development to a firm in India. Essentially, Woodhouse outsourced the development of Where4Events to a development firm that outsources development. At this point, it was unclear who actually developed the app.

“I had a product delivery agreement that said they would be developing [the app] themselves and of course, that didn't happen,” said Woodhouse.

This entire experience cost Woodhouse an eye-watering half a million dollars in lost fees, plus court costs. But she said the lessons she learned from the ordeal has been invaluable: make sure you own your IP/Source code, trademark, business and domain name; find a great IP lawyer; and use your own or register your developer’s account and put the app in your account not the developer’s.

Rather than get discouraged, Woodhouse came to the conclusion that “you can’t always trust developers”.

“Basically, don't trust what they say. Have a fabulous IP solicitor to negotiate with you and the developers on a sound product delivery agreement. Then it doesn't matter which way you go. If they don't deliver or don't give you the source code or don't put it in a GitHub repository, you actually have a legal binding contract in our country to do something about it. I didn't learn all of this until I was in the middle of the debacle,” said Woodhouse.

Thankfully, the tides turned about a year ago. Woodhouse, who is a member of Trans-Tasman Business Circle, was sitting next to Guthrie White, Managing Director of Quantum IT, at an event - a serendipitous seating arrangement. She told him of her recent experiences and he said ‘come and see me for a coffee’. She quickly realised he was from a high-end global IT company and there was no way she could afford his development team. Instead, they came to a partnership agreement. Woodhouse said she paid White a small fee compared to the actual value of the software and gave him equity in the business.

She’s content with the how the product has turned out; and finally things are going well. The app is now on track to become the largest events aggregator in Australia, offering tickets to all kinds of events including sports, live music, cinema and theatre.

The app is conceptually simple. Say you live in Melbourne and you're heading to Sydney for the weekend, you can look up what’s happening in Sydney and purchase tickets to events that interest you. Or if you’re a spontaneous person and want to find out what’s happening near you, you can press ‘near’ and the app will list the events taking place within 2 kilometres, 8 kilometres and 25 kilometres of where you’re standing. Where4Events has also just introduced ticket giveaways, from free cinema tickets to $50 Ticketmaster vouchers, that are open to all users.

Although it was only launched at the end of last year after two false starts, Where4Events has gained 20,000 monthly active users organically. It’s also generating revenue, though Woodhouse admitted it was “nothing spectacular”.

She’s negotiated with all of Australia’s major ticket sellers including Ticketmaster, Ticketek, Oztix and Hoyts, as well as small independent players in the cinema and pub scene, and she also receives data from Tourism Data Warehouse.

Although established companies and startups like Eventbrite, Ticketbooth, Thubit, Everfest, Triplify and Fiestafy can be seen as competitors to one degree or another, Woodhouse insisted Where4Events has no competitors.

“I really don't have competitors because of the data feeds I have; there isn't anybody else in the marketplace that could possibly recreate what I've done,” said Woodhouse.

“I have amazing relationships with my data providers. Maria O'Connor (Ticketmaster) is one of my closest mentors and she has been assisting me from day one. She has assured me that we will make Where4Events bigger and better overseas as well. So I think having this relationship with my data providers is the key thing.”

Woodhouse said Where4Events has generated a lot of corporate interest from airlines to media companies looking to utilise the data she's been able obtain.

“They’ve tried to get the data through other ways but they couldn’t do it. But it’s a matter of picking the right company to help us grow,” said Woodhouse.

“I’m not here for the financial gain. I’m more interested in getting the product right for our users. That’s why I started Where4Events in the first place.”

That said, Woodhouse doesn’t deny the importance of having a sustainable business model. After all, Where4Events is a business and would struggle to operate without revenue.

“I think if your passion is there and the product is right, the money follows,” Woodhouse said.

At the moment, Where4Events operates on a clip-of-the-ticket model. The app doesn’t sell tickets directly, instead directing the user to the ticket provider and taking a percentage of each transaction. Where4Events also generates revenue through advertising; and Woodhouse is entertaining the prospect of white labelling data feeds to big corporations.

Although she wasn’t able to provide details, Woodhouse did admit her app caught the attention of Google, though she turned the company down due to “wrong timing”. She denied it being an investment or acquisition offer, saying it was more Google wanting to find out how Where4Events does what it does.

Woodhouse has also been able to bring together a strong advisory board including former Victorian Premier Jeff Kennett, former Melbourne Storm CEO Ron Gauci, Fairfax Events Managing Director and former Tourism Australia Managing Director Andrew McEvoy, Ticketmaster Australasia Managing Director Maria O’Connor, and ANZ NSW chairman Warwick Smith.

She admitted that joining LinkedIn was the catalyst to forming valuable relationships with CEOs, finding the right mentors and unlocking opportunities. Through emails and phone calls, Woodhouse was only able to reach marketing managers who weren’t interested in helping. From this, she learned founders have to be fearless and approach companies at the highest level. She also pointed out that face-to-face networking is the critical next step to connecting online.

However, when it came to face-to-face meetings, sometimes a male mentor or adviser would have to tag along for Woodhouse to be taken seriously.

“I think a lot of people look at you and go ‘Oh you’re a female tech entrepreneur, we’ll see if you survive’,” said Woodhouse.

Although sexism in tech is a perpetual headline-maker in Australia and overseas, Woodhouse hasn’t experienced much of it first hand.

“I don’t really know why people fly that flag … if you have a great product, people will want to speak to you whether you’re male or female,” she said.

It was a turbulent start, but Woodhouse isn’t fazed by challenges. In fact, she attributes her resilience to being a single mum.

“It's just been myself and the kids for 15 years or so, so we've all learnt to keep going and persevere … There are no problems in life. We just need find solutions for them,” said Woodhouse.

“Without these mistakes I would never have learnt how to become successful. I have blind perseverance; giving up is not an option. I am adaptable in any situation and I am always looking for solutions rather than see problems, always have plan B, C, D.

The United Kingdom is home to over 30 startup accelerators that provide pre-seed funding to entrepreneurs in return for equity. Every year, they attract thousands of applicants from around the world, competing for a handful of positions in each programme.

Many applicants are from outside the European Union. As a non-European entrepreneur you will not only need to beat the competition to get into the accelerator. You'll also need a visa if the accelerator requires you to stay in the UK during the programme.

Here's the thing:

There are five accelerators in the UK that can potentially give you an advantage in the visa process. These accelerators can not only support your application to enter the UK, but will significantly lower the amount of investment funds needed to secure a Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) visa.

The entrepreneur visa normally requires £200,000 in investment funds, but because these accelerators are 'endorsed' by the UK government, the amount drops to £50,000.

The accelerators are:

1. Techstars London

The Techstars London seed investment programme runs out of the Warner Yard co-working space in Clerkenwell. They’ve had 32 startups run through the UK programme with close to 200 alumni in the US. So far, 73 companies have been acquired and over $1.6B raised.

• What's on offer? $18,000 in seed funding, plus $100,000 in convertible debt for 7-10% equity.
• How long? 3 month programme
• Entrepreneur visa used by (example): Print to Peer, Canada

2. Oxygen Accelerator

One of Europe's most established tech accelerators is Oxygen Accelerator. Having accelerated 46 startups both past and present with a 71% funding rate, it runs two programmes a year, in two different locations, usually in Birmingham and in London.

• What's on offer? Oxygen take 8% in equity and invests funds in two batches: 1. A 'founders investment' of up to £18,000; made up of £6,000 per founder, capped at 3 founders. 2. A £15,000 investment for 'programme fees'
• How long? 13 week intensive bootcamp, plus 13 weeks of incubation
• Entrepreneur visa used by (example): Stylect, United States

3. Seedcamp

Seedcamp leads the pack for European accelerators. Running at over 150 pre-seed investments so far, they boast a 91% rate of follow on funding, including Transferwise’s $58m round led by A16Z. Find them in the heart of London's startup cluster at Campus London, Shoreditch.

• What's on offer? Initial investment of €25,000 for 5% equity, followed by an option for a further €50,000 for up to 2% equity (totalling €75,000 for 7%)
• How long? 3 month programme
• Entrepreneur visa used by (example): Wealthkernel, Canada

4. Wayra

Wayra is Telefonica's startup accelerator with programmes in Latin America and Europe. Over the last 3 years, the startups at Wayra UK & Wayra UnLtd (the UK’s first accelerator facility for digital technology social ventures) have raised over $50m. They have 22 startups running in their 2015 cohort and the London workspace is located in trendy Fitzrovia.

• What's on offer? Funding of up to $50,000 for 5-10% equity.
• How long? 6 month programme

5. Collider

On the south bank of the River Thames near Waterloo station, you'll find Collider - an accelerator that focuses on marketing and advertising (AKA MadTech) startups and brands. They’ve invested almost $4m into 27 startups and accelerated 42 brands.

• What's on offer? 1. A straight-up £50,000 investment for 11% equity for an initial 4 months (£10,000 of this is a 'programme fee' charged by Collider) 2. After 4 months, half of the cohort will receive £100,000 for a further 11% equity (another £10,000 is charged for 8 months support)
• Entrepreneur visa used by (example): Perceptiv, Canada

Locations

Things to look out for

Covering the shortfall

Note that the investment amounts currently offered by Oxygen Accelerator (up to £33,000 if there are three founders) and Wayra ($50,000) are less than the £50,000 threshold for the entrepreneur visa.

If you’re applying for these accelerators (or any in this list for that matter) you could still come to the UK as a ‘prospective entrepreneur’ on a six month, Standard Visitor visa. Then later - provided you meet the investment conditions - switch into an entrepreneur visa. Make sure you raise your visa status with them up front and find out exactly what your options are.

Entrepreneur teams

In most cases, founders will apply to an accelerator as a team. The entrepreneur visa lets you share the same investment funds with up to one other entrepreneur visa applicant.

This works well for two co-founders, but might cause issues for teams of three or more founders if they all need a visa. Again, flag the issue up front so you know where you stand.

Find the right expert

The UK visa process is difficult even for the most sophisticated entrepreneurs. Not only are the rules complex (and ever changing), you'll need to supply a vast amount of documents and evidence to support your application.

Accelerators will often recommend or partner with immigration lawyer who can help you through the process. But remember, immigration law spans everything from Tier 1 visas to asylum cases - the best lawyers focus on particular niches.

If you’re introduced to an immigration lawyer, ask them:

• How many Tier 1 (Entrepreneur) visas have they done for startups?
• Which startups, accelerators and investors have they worked with?
• What contacts have they developed at the Home Office?
• What’s the current time frame for processing applications (e.g. how long did their last application take)?
• Regarding costs: what’s the government fee (currently between £944 - £1,180) and how much is their professional fee? (Ask for fixed fees, not hourly rates)
• Does their fee include ongoing advice and work after submitting the application?

Many lawyers are happy to do a free initial call or consultation for you to ask these questions. So shop around. They’ll need a solid understanding of your circumstances to give you a fixed quote, so expect them (in fact, demand of them) to ask you questions.

Once you’re feeling reassured and confident in their expertise, then perhaps you’ve found the right match. But don’t be afraid to get a second opinion. It’ll take a little more time, but when it comes to visa applications, there’s a lot at stake.

---

David Bushby is Head of Operations at Lexoo - a service that handpicks specialist lawyers to give you multiple, fixed-fee quotes based on your particular circumstances. 

In a blog post, Waddle explains, "Truly valuable lending add-ons will keep business owners engaged in cloud accounting platforms, driving uptake to get access to new financing options that offer frustration free ways to raise working capital against their on-going receivables, close cash flow gaps from late paying customers and drive growth."

In regards to government policy, Moskovitz says that some of the areas that need to be looked at from a national perspective include making it easier for entrepreneurs to move around between countries - that's both in and out of New Zealand. Such initiatives are already being worked on, including similar legislation around making it easier for investors to do the same.

The other area that the entire community needs to become better at is telling their story to a global audience.

"As a startup, every week that you spend focusing on a market of 4 million people is a week that you're wasting not chasing a market of 7 billion people," says Moskovitz.

It's clear that for New Zealand to be a global startup competitor, founders need to attract offshore users and customers as quickly as possible, It's easy in the short term to focus on being local, however it is critical to the success of the ecosystem for founders to recognise and focus on the global opportunity as a priority.

One thing Moskovitz believes needs to stop though is the idea of "Making Wellington the next Silicon Valley" - a thought process that seems to continue to appear in almost every city across the globe, except for Silicon Valley itself.

"I don't want Wellington to be the next Silicon Valley," says Moskovitz. "I want Wellington to be the next Wellington. If I wanted to be in Silicon Valley I'd move there."

In her article on replicating Silicon Valley's culture in Australia, Australia vs. Silicon Valley: Replicating a culture of innovation, Startup Daily Editor, Tasnuva Bindi makes a great point about the impossibility of replicating a culture that has at least 50 years head start on ecosystems like Australia and New Zealand.

While we can try to copy Silicon Valley, it’s very unlikely that we will be able to successfully replicate the culture – because there’s at least half a century’s worth of effort that makes the Valley what it is today. We would need to have the same series of events occur in the same chronological order with the same people for us to be anything like the region. We would need history to repeat itself in an entirely different location.

---

Featured Image: Hannah Thomson uses MedAdvisor for her son Vincent and for herself. Source: Canberra Times. Photo credit: Jamila Toderas.

Why do the material possessions of people we admire pique our interest? It may seem superficial, but our possessions become extensions of ourselves. Our material possessions signal who we want to be and where we want to belong. Our curiosity with other people’s possessions demonstrates our longing to know more about them, especially when it’s celebrities, renowned individuals and public figures. We only know them from a distance.

Minimums, a product of Need/Want, allows users to get to know interesting people not just through their possessions, but also through the stories behind each of their featured possessions. The site features people like Noah Kagan, founder of AppSumo and SumoMe; product designer Marc Hemeon, who co-founded North and formerly worked at YouTube and Google; actor-comedian Jeff Cannata, who currently hosts the podcast series /Filmcast; and many more.

Minimums was founded by Marshall Haas, Jon Wheatley, and David Myers, who have also launched other products through their parent company Need/Want including Second, a text-based smart assistant; Mod Notebooks, a service that scans and digitises paper notebooks; and SmartBedding, which sells smartly designed manchester that eliminates the need to fix beds in the morning.

Haas, Wheatley and Myers, who moved from San Francisco to St Louis, were already looking to launch a media play before the idea for Minimums popped up internally.

“For a long time we've wanted to try our hand at a media company - this was finally the idea that stuck internally,” said Haas.

“The idea is simple: what are the most interesting possessions of the world's most interesting people? Each post features someone at the top of their industry, and then we use a professional photographer that shoots them inside their home or office. The posts are very rich with beautiful photography and stories.”

Haas identified Every Day Carry as Minimums’ closest competitor, however stresses that unlike Every Day Carry, Minimums does not allow just anyone to set up a profile and list their belongings.

“We seek out only the most interesting people [around the world], and then convince them to let us feature them. I’d also say the story behind each item featured by a particular person is what’s most interesting … and great photography,” he said.

Haas admitted that connecting with these people is always going to be Minimums’ biggest challenge, but this will get easier as Minimums builds itself up as a strong media brand.

At the moment, Minimums’ ecommerce arm operates on an affiliate model. Every time a customer purchases an item featured on the site that is sold via Amazon, Minimums receives an affiliate cut. Interestingly, Minimums is also being used as a vehicle to advertise its parent company’s products, like its super thin iPhone case brand, Peel.

It won’t be surprising to see partnerships being formed - both on an advertising and affiliate front - between Minimums and other ecommerce companies in the upcoming months.

Minimum’s strongest point at the moment is its sleek design. You see photos of people tiled on the front page and very little text accompanying it: minimalism at its best. The candid photos immediately draw you in even if you’re not familiar with the people being featured. When you click on one of the tiles, you’re brought to a mini biography of that person, followed by their beloved possessions, and a more in-depth look at each of the items, including the personal stories behind them.

Image: Francis Vierboom, co-founder, Propeller Aerobotics. Source: 1776.

Sydney-based startup Zeetings is looking to change the way participants and presenters think about online presentations. The startup, founded by Tony Surtees, Neill Miller, Robert Kawalsky and Adam Schuck, wants to enable users to turn a one-way presentation into a two-way conversation.

Zeetings claims to be tackling a couple of problems that exist within current day solutions. The first is the idea that standing in front of a room and talking at a group of people with a monologue is ineffective and no longer reflects the way people are used to interacting with each other. We live in a world where we are constantly connected and people are accustomed to and expect to have their voices heard.

Zeetings allows users to participate in a dialogue rather than just be talked at. Given these interactions are all happening through a device, it also means everything can be tracked.

"It actually allows the presenter to really understand what their audiences are thinking," says Kawalsky. "So examples are through a series of analytics including active data gathering techniques like polling and more passive techniques like seeing how long people spend on slides as well as what questions they're asking and comments they're providing."

This trackable data starts to present a really in-depth picture of what parts of a presentation are really resonating with an audience. The interesting thing about engagement and analytics is that the more ways you interact and the more engaging you are, the more analytics you can actually develop with that audience.

When you have an abundance of analytics and insights, it allows the user to be more engaging and effective - creating a virtuous cycle where ultimately you have a platform that is helping to create well-rounded effective presenters.

It's worth noting though that the Zeetings platform is currently only visual - there is no audio function built into it. To do a presentation for multiple people remotely at the same time, the platform will need to be paired with an audio tool. 

This could present an early stage bump in the road for Zeetings, especially when targeting small to medium businesses; an all-in-one solution is always a preferred option when it comes to the B2B space.

Missing features like audio might make potential users question the value of the product, however this is somewhat overshadowed by the interactivity features that already exist. For starters, users can implement live polling within their webinars, meaning that as a presenter, you can gain insight about your audience while you are still presenting to them.

Also, the audience can continue to come back and visit a Zeetings presentation long after it has been given. This allows audiences to ask further questions and continue to engage with some of the other "feedback" style features like the live questioning and comment feed - pretty handy when you think about the nature of a Skype call or Go-To-Meeting, where the presentation usually disappears never to be seen again after the event.

Right now, Zeetings is free for all users, and the current version of the application will always remain that way, according to Kawalsky. However, in the first quarter of 2016 the team plans to release a premium version. This will work as a typical SaaS model product with a monthly subscription.

The major selling points behind a premium version of the product would be deeper levels of insights, which would come about from adding even more interactive features to the platform so that users can engage their audiences.

To date, over 55,000 people have attended a 'Zeeting' and the startup has only just come out of private BETA. The startup has received a small round of seed funding from about a dozen angel investors, however the founders would not disclose the names of those investors or the amount that was invested.

What Startup Daily does know is that at least two to three of them have been heavily involved in the Startmate program, and one used to sit on the board of Commercialisation Australia. Our estimate is that the seed round was between $600,000 and $1 million.

According to Kawalsky, the intention is to follow a similar model to that of Canva: spend the next little while focusing on building the product and the user base and then potentially raise a couple of seed rounds close together.

Image: Palette's co-founders Paul Peng, Djordje Dikic, and Rocky Liang.

Stuart Stoyan is urging fintech startups in Melbourne to complete a non-invasive 17-question survey as part of a broader initiative aimed at establishing a collective voice and creating better support mechanisms for Melbourne’s fintech community. Information gathered from the survey will be used to propose support from government, both at local and state levels, as well as corporates.

Launched last Wednesday, the Fintech Census is the first step towards the development of a comprehensive fintech vision and strategy for Melbourne. Stoyan, who founded the initiative, is adamant there are great fintech innovations coming out of Melbourne, but is concerned the city is falling behind due to lack of coordination. Although there are emerging success stories such as Moula, MoneyPlace, Coinjar, and Square’s recent decision to be based out of Melbourne, at the moment there is no clear indication of the size or depth of the fintech community in Melbourne. In fact, all we know is that Melbourne’s Fintech Meetup group has about 700 members.

As such, the survey seeks to find out how many fintech startups there are in Melbourne, what subsector they operate in (e.g. lending, payments, cryptocurrency, insurance, etc.), what internal and external challenges they are facing, what kind of support they need, and other key pieces of information needed to create an initial plan of action.

“It’s become really hard to articulate what Melbourne’s fintech community was about. This is the first step towards coordination … It's a bit of rallying cry to say 'let's consolidate ourselves' so we can then represent who we are, what we’re about and what we need,” said Stoyan, who is also the founder of peer-to-peer and online lending startup MoneyPlace.

Over the past few years, Sydney has been strengthening its position as Australia’s financial services powerhouse, with the emergence of fintech-focused coworking hubs like Stone & Chalk and Tyro, as well as fintech-focused venture capital firms like Reinventure and AWI Ventures. According to a study commissioned by KPMG, Sydney’s financial services sector produces 5 percent of Australia’s GDP - that’s more than half of Australia’s financial services industry as a whole, which contributes the highest share of sector value to the national economy (9 percent GDP). Interestingly, though, in the early decades of the 20th century, Melbourne was Australia’s financial services capital.

Although Stoyan is worried that Melbourne is lagging behind Sydney, he pointed out that the big four banks are split between Sydney and Melbourne: “It’s not about competition. Sydney’s got more capital markets, but Melbourne’s got a bigger superannuation industry.”

However, being based in Melbourne, it’s understandable that Stoyan’s first focus is promoting more favourable conditions for fintech startups in Melbourne. As the founder of a fintech startup himself, he’s quite familiar with the unique challenges fintech startups face, especially those based in Melbourne. He said that although there are great coworking spaces in Melbourne like York Butter Factory, The Hub and The Cluster, fintech startups have slightly different needs to other startups. For example, working in an open plan environment is not necessarily appropriate for fintech startups that have to take customer privacy into account.

“There are privacy considerations for fintechs. If you’ve got customer data, that’s confidential, so working in a completely open plan environment is not appropriate,” said Stoyan.

He added that fintech startups also need access to networks that are fintech focused: “This could be introduction to partners from financial institutions; it could be access to accounting or legal professionals that specialise in getting financial services licenses which is very complex process. The ability to have specific advice around fintech and being able to talk to other startups who have gone through that experience is important … At the moment, support infrastructure is not there for fintechs in Melbourne.”

Stoyan also pointed out that fintech businesses typically take longer to set up due to regulatory and structural complexities.

“Licensing takes a significant period of time. What fintechs are looking for is support through that process to make that process as efficient as possible, and also support in getting to that process. For example, having corporate partners or a government partner that provides a free coworking space would mean fintechs don't incur costs while waiting for a license. Initiatives like that is more likely to encourage people to make the jump from a corporate role into fintech,” he said.

Stoyan did however praise ASIC’s John Price, Mark Adams and Deborah Ralston and their efforts towards creating an online hub with tailored content for fintech businesses.

“[ASIC] recognises that as a regulator they need to engage differently with fintechs because they’re a different type of entity. The [Innovation Hub] has become a great way to accelerate fintechs to market, but once you’re in market, how do you form partnerships? There needs to be a way to make it easier to engage with somebody in one of the big four banks. There are 30,000 people working in the banks, so how are you to know who to speak to?” said Stoyan.

“It’s not just about making it easier for fintechs, it’s also about making it easier for corporates and government to engage with fintechs as well.”

Earlier this year, the Victorian government announced that it had allocated $60 million for startups in the State, however, there is yet to be any indication as how the funds will be used.

“Part of the reason why the government has not been able to act is because they're not clear about who they're acting for,” said Stoyan, who added that the initiative will help government understand who they're representing.

When it comes to startups, including fintech startups, part of the problem could be that no-one can predict which specific technologies and business models will be winners in the long run. The only thing that is certain at the moment is that the traditional financial services landscape is being disrupted by new entrants leveraging technology to deliver new and existing services in smarter and more convenient ways to consumers and businesses. It is for this reason, Stoyan pointed out, that governments, corporates, regulators and other industry stakeholders need to support fintech through a strong alignment of activity and investment.

While the initial survey questions are basic and non-invasive, Stoyan said he would be looking to create a more detailed survey in the future to better understand what innovations, policies or tools are required across the public and private sectors to help grow the capacity and economic impact of Melbourne’s, and more broadly, Australia’s fintech sector. It’s still very early days, but Stoyan is open to the prospect of growing the initiative into a fintech-focused industry association that gives the sector a unified public voice.

The survey can be accessed via fintechcensus.com. Stoyan is keen to hear from everybody in fintech, whether they’re an established team, a local offshoot of a global business or just one person sitting in a cubicle at a major financial institution thinking about pursuing an idea.

Featured Image: Stuart Stoyan, Founder of MoneyPlace and FinTech Census. Source: Provided.