How can we fix the Market for Solutions?

What if we had a “US Department of Experiments” with the power to grant temporary waivers from Federal, State, and City laws — when safe and ethical to do so — for the purposes of learning what policy interventions actually work?

What if investors could directly fund product R&D within existing companies, taking risk in exchange for a future share of revenue?

For example, say you’re building a product for a niche market worth “only” $50 million. Who will invest in you?- VCs won’t touch you because the math doesn’t work out — they need investments that have a shot at returning the portfolio.- Banks won’t touch you because they only know how to underwrite going concerns — businesses with operating history... See more

Programs like Pathstream help upskill people into tech jobs. OnDeck is building an onramp for entrepreneurs to find cofounders, fund themselves, and even obtain healthcare while they build. ISAs are nudging the putrescent education establishment towards positive ROIs for students.

How many would-be innovators stay out of the Market for Solutions because the right risk financing doesn’t exist for them?

How many highly-educated, ambitious college grads and FAANG alumni start companies chasing low-value problems, because finding the high-value ones is too hard?

-What if we had a “US Department of Experiments” with the power to grant temporary waivers from Federal, State, and City laws — when safe and ethical to do so — for the purposes of learning what policy interventions actually work?

-What if there were incentives — or requirements — for large institutions to create sandboxes where authorized Builders can access real problems and testbed ideas?

-Why aren’t there more Kaggle-like marketplaces where specialists can solve specific problems for enterprises?