So why real estate?

Posted by nithi.vivatrat on April 10, 2009

When I tell people who knew me from my tech sector days that I’ve launched a new venture, I’m often asked, “Another tech company, right?” When I answer, “Actually, I’m launching a new type of real estate brokerage firm,” the response I usually get is “Really?”

Of the handful of business ideas I considered for “the next thing,” why did I choose real estate? Leaving aside the reasons I have already given as to why I thought this was perfect timing to start a company, let me explain why I focused on this particular industry.

First, the real estate brokerage industry is way overdue for evolution. Despite all of the technological advancements affecting this industry (internet-based information sources, mapping platforms, and others) over the past decade, the fundamental business process has not changed. Innovation is the exciting part of business.

In addition and related to overdue innovation, this industry has very entrenched incumbent players that have always resisted change (see the Justice Department Antitrust Division’s intervention regarding internet-based brokers, or virtual office websites). Poking a stick at it sounded like my idea of fun — I love a good challenge.

Finally, of all the business plans I considered, this one was in an industry where I could directly impact individual consumers. My last company provided consulting services to large corporations as well as government agencies; there, the projects I enjoyed the most were those I felt had a direct impact on individuals, such as our work in education analytics. This time around, I wanted to work in an area where people could easily relate to what I did and how my business could impact them.

That has been the best part of launching SmithAdams. While I always had to explain what data warehousing was, I never have to define real estate brokerage to people. Many folks have their war stories about good and bad experiences with real estate transactions. So I get to focus on explaining how SmithAdams is different and how we help the consumer save money and improve the overall experience for real people. I love this job.

Friedman: The Open-Door Bailout

Posted by nithi.vivatrat on February 11, 2009

Tom Friedman’s column yesterday opens with an interesting (only partially tongue-in-cheek) suggestion to solve our financial (and housing) crisis: open the door to more immigrants who will buy subprime homes, work hard to pay for them, improve the savings rate, and create new jobs.

As I have told some of you, I believe we do two things better than any other country: entertain (culture as export) and innovate. But we are at risk of being surpassed in the latter area.  China and India are producing far more college graduates, especially in math, science, and engineering, than we are.  Soon, those countries will be able to throw more intellectual muscle behind innovation than we can.  Further, the issues in our public school system will exacerbate the situation (which is why we have to invest heavily in education).

In all areas of trade, protectionist policies might make us feel better (briefly), but they undermine us for the long term. This is especially true when it comes to intellectual talent.  We have to grow, invent, and innovate our way out of this mess — we can’t just hide behind walls and wait for it to get better.  If we deprive ourselves of necessary scientific and engineering resources, then we make it that much harder on ourselves.

I’ll close with my favorite section of the column:

“Dear America, please remember how you got to be the wealthiest country in history. It wasn’t through protectionism, or state-owned banks or fearing free trade. No, the formula was very simple: build this really flexible, really open economy, tolerate creative destruction so dead capital is quickly redeployed to better ideas and companies, pour into it the most diverse, smart and energetic immigrants from every corner of the world and then stir and repeat, stir and repeat, stir and repeat, stir and repeat.”