Ideas are dime in a dozen. It will stay as that unless you get that idea out onto a piece of paper and into something tangible. Simple enough? Not so.

Most of us are plagued by the simple fact that we don't have the desired funds to bankroll those great ideas. Someideas would just not go anywhere until there is sufficient fund to go around. And that is the entrepreneur's dilemma.

There are a variety of funds out there for you to pitch your ideas and get cracking. Do a simple Google/Bing/Yahoo search for grants and funds in Malaysia and you'd find a number – some managed by institutions, some directly by Government bodies and agencies. I'm not going to list them out. That's homework.

So how easy is it to get your hands to these funds? To be honest, I have not tried applying for any so I can't really give you a personal out of this world experience. To date, I've used my own funds in a couple of projects that I've been involved in. So I didn't need to fill stacks of applications, put on my Nostradamus cap and foresee the futurewhere my idea will take me. The downside to self-funding it is that if it fails, I'll be out of cash! But hey, to get to the prize, one needs to take risks.

But this is what I have heard. Fund or Grant Managers may want specifics but I have none. It's all chatter during coffee but here's the common responses:

"Its darn hard", "They (the Fund/Grant Managers) don't understand what we're trying to do" (which basically means, its easy and I am trying to make a difference but they just don't get it)

"It's stack of papers asking for every thing plus more and even before I get called, I've already probably murdered a tree!"

"The budget needed was RM1 million and they only offered to give me RM10K"

Personally, it's the paperwork that gets me. Filling in lines of questions and feedbacks, doing spreadsheets, attaching this and that. Then to top it off, after the documents are printed and bind, some ask that you then burn copies of it into a CD. By the time, the Fund/Grant Managers go through it, you're 6 months into your idea and then you just found out that some person thousands of miles away just got funded millions of dollars on the same idea while you still wait for that elusive email, inviting you to pitch. Granted that entrepreneurs shouldn't wait but more times than often, those ideas need to be funded for it to fly.

Okay, so Fund or Grant Managers will point out that the process is not as painstaking as I've put it. And to be fair, thousands have actually enjoyed thebenefit of being funded from them. But many still have not.

So again. Here's the scenario. You have an idea. A great one obviously and the only other people that believes in you arethose close to you. Great support but they just don't have the cash you require.

So it's back to those darn forms, spreadsheets and copy machines. Not good.

Unless - you could have an audience with a community or village of people that shares your belief and enthusiasm, or better, the world. And they would not mind sending you money –if not all of them, a good number because they so love your idea. That would be awesome.

Enter Kickstarter.com

So what is Kickstarter? As described in the site's FAQ - Kickstarter is a new way to fund creative projects. The folks at Kickstarter believe that a good idea, communicated well, can spread fast and wide and that a large group of people can be a tremendous source of money and encouragement.And why isn't it? If you have a great idea, I'd like a piece of the action too! So if you only need $100,000 and if 5000 people agree with your ideas and decide to pledge $20, you will realize that fund you need. In Kickstarter's model, projects must be fully funded or no money changes hands.

So Kickstarter is simply a crowd sourcing funding method. You pitch to the world. Tell them what your ideas or proposals,how much of a budget that you'd need to realize that great idea that you have. Share it at Kickstarter. Then within a given period of time – it's 1-90 days in Kickstarter, wait for people to be inspired by your idea and they will then open their credit card and pledge an amount. If within the stipulated time period, you don't get that minimum budget that you asked for, money will not change hands and perhaps at the same time, you will probably realize that great idea you have was not that great in the first place. And so you then move to a new idea. But if the budget is met and more, you get to use it to fund your ideas.

I myself have backed two ideas or projects at Kickstarter. First is the PadPivot and the founders were only asking for $10,000. When I pledged, the pledge amount had reached over $100,000,"over pledged" by a good couple of thousands. Fantastic. But most importantly, it's a great product. Have a look at what the good folks of PadPivot are doing - http://kck.st/gmzC2U also pledged money for a short film by Nick Peterson and Jon Heder of Napoleon Dynamite fame. They're still under the minimum requested so we'll see if this project actually gets funded. Check out their idea at http://kck.st/ev3RKN

Kickstarter is opened to anyone with an idea of any sort but to date, from the FAQ, you have to be US based to propose a project. Malaysians too have also applied for funds from the community. And it so happens that two have actually succeeded. Check out what one of the funded project is doing here - http://kck.st/ezmjMB It's not necessarily something I'd backed myself but that's the beauty about the community. The audience is varied and you're pitching to thousands of people who do not happen to be just nerds with a credit card. A short film or documentary or financing your first album? It's all good in Kickstarter. Another Malaysian example that has found funds via Kickstarter - http://kck.st/cY3f2b

Another example of a crowd sourcing funding site is http://www.indiegogo.com

So can we cut the bureaucracy that comes together with managed Funds and Grants in Malaysia, make it open and let the common people in it? Then perhaps Fund or Grant Managers would be better guided to bet on horses that the people themselves are backing. If the people speak with their own cash, it should be a good idea, don't you think?

So anyone interested to start a crowd sourcing fund ala Kickstarter in Malaysia?

Everything begins with an idea.

Peter Drucker once said that successful leaders don’t start out by asking, “What do I want to do?” But they ask. “What needs to be done?” And then they will ask, “Of those things that would make a difference, which are right for me?” They make sure other necessities get done, but not by them.

Unless one lived under a rock the last few days (or probably not give a hoot about smart phones OS, hardware and market shares – and there are many), Stephen Elop, Nokia’s CEO memo on “burning platforms” looked and sounded like a rally to his Nokia troops to step up and be counted, heralding in a new chapter for the proud folks in Finland. It probably came as a shock that the memo turned out to be a precursor to what became literally, Elop burning the platform that had served Nokia well albeit current times, followed by the introduction of Windows Phone 7 as Nokia’s new platform.
Symbian will be put to sleep.

Long live Windows Phone 7.

Like all marriages, this has a 50-50 chance of succeeding. Deciding to start new with an OS that has yet to prove its mettle in the market, requires balls, to say the least. I don’t envy his position. With Nokia’s market shrinking and with no plans in sight to stop the slide, he chose the Redmond mammoth that have for long not innovated until Windows Phone 7 as a live-in partner. Unfortunately, not a very inspiring decision.

The happier partner is obviously Microsoft. It now expects a good bite of that smartphone pie - hoping that it’s rabid fans (you have to be a rabid fan to love Windows Mobile) plus loyal fans of the Nokia brand to weather this out and emerge with some respective percentage. Nokia however will lose that status as a main player and now relegated to be just another hardware player. I don’t really buy the argument that Nokia’s experience in hardware will be a differentiating factor. Apple won’t be where it is now if the game was only about awesome shiny machines.

So, do I think the decision to cohabitate with Microsoft the saving grace for the falling giant? To answer that question, first what has Nokia traded this marriage for? A lot I think and importantly, Nokia will not be in a position to decide on those big questions. Don’t try to do any soul searching after this. There is none.

An argument put forward by a lot of commentators is that Nokia should’ve chosen Android as it’s new platform. Numbers don’t lie and in a few years, Android will be the dominant OS. But  I’d argue that if everyone went Android, where then is the differentiation factor. Hardware? Probably but Nokia will be just another player. Not a position for a company that has been sitting pretty high before Apple flipped the industry. If numbers is of concern and yes, it should be. Numbers do make or break any company, then Android was the easier choice. A ready eco-system and Nokia probably only need to show up to the party. But I suspect Nokia doesn’t want to be a bit player in a field of pretenders. And so, Elop’s hedging its bet with Balmer’s best.

Having said all that, I would say that if Nokia wanted to really slug it out, they should have done it on their own terms and turf. Nokia is no slouch. They produce mobile devices for every major market segment and protocol. It offers a variety of Internet services – applications, games, music, maps, media and messaging via its Ovi platform. It has its own digital map and navigation services. A great platform for any eco-system. So why throw the towel?

It’s no secret that Nokia was struggling with Symbian. The OS was nowhere near its competitors, iOS and Android. The two were pulling away at incredible speed, eating away Nokia’s portion of the pie. Then you’ve got RIM to contend, the “4th wheel” in the race of 3 if you want to believe what Elop thinks it will be.

I am pretty sure the folks responsible for Symbian and especially the thousands plus strong people in R & D was pinning for Elop to announce a total revamp of Symbian – announcing a total makeover to square off with the folks at Cupertino and Mountain View. Okay, it’ll take time for it to be anywhere near the best. But I am not a fan of throwing in the towel altogether. Put Nokia’s best people and get new ones in a room, throw away the key and only let them out once they get Symbian to speed. Effectively, the decision to use Windows Phone 7 means that they’ve surrendered Nokia’s position and I suspect even the value of its brand. It will now battle, starting out behind its competitors lining up with mainly hardware players. A strange position to be when even during its worst time, it still command the larger share of the cake – hardware and OS.

And how has the market reacted to the news? Not good. Nokia's share price fell about 14%, its biggest drop since July 2009.

Interesting days ahead for armchair observers like me. Seeing how all this will pan out. The new Nokia phones with Windows Phone 7 will only be ready, earliest in late Quarter 4 of 2011. A better bet, probably in 2012. Apple will undoubtedly lead innovation with its hardware and iOS. Android too. It has a full eco-system that caters for developers and consumers. What is missing in the Nokia/Microsoft marriage is that eco-system that developers and consumers pin for. It’s an Apps world. Apple has more than 350,000 and Android has 100,000 plus. And it’s growing. Developers are doing well with the 2 platforms. A great eco-system, eyeballs with purchasing power is a recipe for success in the smart phone contest. Nokia had that, granted not as successful as iOS or Android. It’s called Ovi and it started a good 1-year before the iPhone App Store opened its doors. I’d argue that it was never too late. Any difference where Nokia is now with Windows Phone 7? At least then Nokia had the ability to decide it’s own fate.

And now with Nokia dropping Symbian, that 37% that was Symbian’s is now left wide open for pickings by iOS, Android, RIM and not to mention, other pretenders, WebOS for one.

Time is really the key here. This partnership will obviously take time to implement and deliver. This is what may burn Nokia. By that time, there will be no platform to stand at all and the Battle of Evermore will be effectively lost.