“When ideas are worth something” or what if the scheme is “flipped”?

One day, someone said: "The idea is worth nothing." And he was probably right somewhere. At least, in the scheme of interaction between “start-ups” and “investors” that existed at that time, there was no room for a person who had only the idea of ​​an Internet project in baggage.

Many times we have heard venture capital investors say: “We have thousands of ideas, but there is no one to implement them, so we need a 'team + idea', and better - a 'team + prototype', and even better - a 'prototype with an audience, and bringing at least some profit. ”

In this topic, I want to talk about a new mutually beneficial model of interaction between three participants:
• the author of the idea
• investor,
• development teams

---

Recently, a topic of Arkady Moreynis appeared on Habré, in which he wrote that he was ready to invest in startups with the minimum required set (that is, “team + idea”). Yes, the conditions are sparing enough for startups, however, the “authors of ideas” were again deprived of attention. Often, very often investors are not ready to invest in great ideas just because they do not see a ready-made group of developers who are ready to implement it (the idea).
')
Let's try to understand the motivation and the main fears of each of the participants of the scheme (I suggest that all of them be treated as completely independent units).

So, the author of the idea , as expected, fears two things more than anything else:
• The idea will be stolen from him and the project will be implemented without him.
• If they give him money, he will not be able to correctly dispose of them (to organize a team, a plan for promotion, etc.)

In turn, the investor is afraid of:
• Spending money on those who cannot make a project
• Reputational loss

Well, the development team is afraid of this:
• Spend your time = money on an unviable idea
• Problems at the site promotion stage

Usually the interaction diagram looks like this:
Idea -> Team Search -> Investor Search => Implementation

And what if you try to flip the interaction scheme? What would have happened like this:
Author of the idea -> Investor search -> Team search => Implementation

If you describe this chain in more detail, you will get this:
... The author of the idea goes to the venture fund, and gives him the business concept of his super-ideas. The venture investor examines it, and finding it suitable, puts it in a thick folder called “Good Ideas.” Then the venture investor puts up advertisements on the fence in the spirit of: “Share a great idea, and give money for its implementation, and add a% of profit.” Earlier, the investor complained that he did not see the development teams - now there will be more than enough of them, with such and such conditions.
Then the development team (a web studio, or a group of freelance outsourcers, or simply colleagues who have a lot of free time) communicates with a venture investor, and after signing a simple NDA, they get acquainted with a list of ideas for which they are potentially qualified. If the development team likes some idea, they say “we will do it in a couple of months, and in six months it will bring net profit!”. The investor says: "Great, I will give you this much money every month, and an option for 30% of the profits, and you are only expected to comply with the schedule."

You ask, and how to be the author of the idea, what is the profit? There are three ways:
• Payment of a small lump-sum monetary reward to the author of the idea before the first round of financing (hereinafter he releases the “idea”).
• Payment of remuneration after the start of the project.
• The entry of an author of an idea into a group of developers (if he has any necessary competence: for example, he is well able to write texts, or be creative, or program, or draw).

Thus, mutual profit is obtained:
- the author of the idea is not afraid to communicate the idea to the investor, and disclaims responsibility for its implementation (if he wants to), and if the idea is implemented anyway, he will get something from it anyway.
- the investor can choose from the best teams and offer them to implement the best ideas, which increases the probability of success; In addition, he may offer development teams an option for a smaller amount (for example, 30%, not 50%, as if the idea came from the team).
- developers get a ready-made idea and a business concept, already approved by the investor, as well as money for the implementation of this project and mentoring support.

What do you think, if you approach the matter with the head, “take off” or “not take off”?