Task: ...Make a small structure that makes a big point...
seasteading 3 phase plan, seastead size, small beginnings, transition capacity, potential, in a early phase seasteading is marine business, make a small build that makes a big point, avoid large scale pointless experiments, phase 1 is the most critical phase, investor proposal list,
get connected | get started | get a boardroom | Get a Boardroom Here | Capital Yield | What you should know about me | business coordinates |
No investor is interested in financing what is here already – they want to finance things that are new and can be big in a near future (disruptive startup investing). Equally no investor is interested in putting a lot of upfront money into something that might (or might not) bring a return on investment in a couple of decades.
What we aim at in phase 1 is the following conversation with an investor ….
Whisky glass in hand sitting on a 20m sized floating structure - you point over the bay and say – This, my friend, is the floating real estate future of mankind... Today is your opportunity to opt in to get a foothold in ocean colonization.
on planet earth | humanity global transformation
business opportunity | oceanic quest drivers
and opportunities |
Cartagena Skyscraper at night seen from the bay
The bay of Cartagena seen from cerro de la popa
That kind of conversation comes out just ridiculous if you sit on an ordinary house boat, an industrial deckbarge, a rusty ship or something similar...
To have this conversation the minimum requirement is to sit on an "extraordinary floating structure" of some kind.
The base idea of phase 1 is to get enabled to have this kind of conversation with investors, project sceptics, engineers, architects, authorities, developers, reporters, analysts, and generate a positive response instead of a laughstorm.
It is obvous that neither a Tanka float, nor a Richi Sowa float, nor a Floating Neutrino float, will cut it to get you to that "phase 1 conversation"
Once you can make it trough the "phase 1 key conversation it is important to be clear about the following facts:
…the importance of phase1 investor talk …
@spark, the importance of phase 1 investor talk is not in raising a ton of money, it is in “setting the base” to be able to convince people. You will have years and decades of “futile discussion” about what is feasible and what not – once you invite people to sit on it – discussions and “diverging opinions are over”. You will have a very similar talk with the coast guard official who tries to get a picture about the “seaworthyness” of your structure. If you talk about “floating out cinderblocks” or “trash islands” you get a lot of oposition from people that have basicly no idea what you are talking about because they have never seen it. If you ask them aboard of something like poor mans floating island the discussion and the doubths are over. We need to understand that “convincing” is not a thing that can be done on paper and discussion forums, it needs to be done with floating structures.
@ocean, what differs a phase 1 steasteading project from a live aboard houseboat project is the effect that the "key conversation produces"
option A - a Laughstorm -
option B - a willingness to opt in and be part of it.
. To get the right effect you need to introduce great floating shell architecture very early in the project.
Floating out something that will not lead you to a successful phase 1 key conversation is just not worth doing it and throwing any amount of money on it. The Tanka, and Sea Gypsies do it (floating on improvised floating devices) for 1200 years already - why repeate a failed experiment? - they never where seen as "development potential" and floating future of humanity - this is their bottleneck - solving the bottleneck and credibility is key for a successful phase 1. It is not about size not about money it is about CREDIBILITY and POTENTIAL.
After a successful floating key conversation a Investor who is invested in Singapore, or in Dubai sand dredging projects will rethink and re-direct his funds to "seasteading worthy floating structures" as the "better option". This is what we aim for ...
I see the core of phase 1 in "making the point" rather than making a "fully blown seastead". Like in a scientific experiment the size of the experiment matters little, what matters is the size of the point it makes. This is why i am skeptical about intents to make "pointless experiments" like floating out a garden on a industrial deck barge. Or building a container house on a old ship or building a communty on an oil rig - if that where a feasible way to seasteading it would be implemented mainstream by now. Like always it is not really necessary to show the OBVIOUS - things like this...
After having built this relativly small piece of "ultralight floating honeycomb structure" in the bay of Cartagena it is not really necessary anymore to show that we can build that platform to building lot size, and then put this kind of house on top of it. This has just become obvious for everybody.
After having built fully blown working concrete submarines (http://concretesubmarine.com) ...
...it is not really neccessary to show that we can also build a big stationary ocean sphere. It should be obvious for anybody by now.
Ocean sphere from below...
Ocean sphere from above
Only a guy with no idea about the subject would ask for proof of concept, or call it "non feasible" any longer...
It is part of the scientific approach that you basicly do not care about the opinions of the "uninformed public" what matters is what the "informed experts" and your investors think and accept as proof of theory.
Having that kind of "precedent" in your favor talking with an investor about a venture like the one in the picture above is not so hard anymore...
• investment yield |