Startup Australia

http://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20130314130000-921366-startup-australia

by dtalic • 13 years ago

71 91 13 years ago

You tell 'em Barrie.

hoodoof• 13 years ago

Surely this guy doesn't think the answer is to vote in the liberals who will shut down the fibre to the home goal of the NBN? Is that really a good way to advance Australia's startups?

dr1337• 13 years ago

That's besides the point. FTTH is overkill and is absolutely not a requirement to build a technology industry.

How is fibre going to a small town like Burnie in the middle of Tasmania going to encourage the creation of technology startups when its users are going to be technologically uneducated in the first place? What will most likely happen is all that bandwidth (paid by taxpayers) will most likely be used for Torrenting music, warez, movies and porn.

As a pragmatist, the NBN rollout should have been targeted firstly for areas of high concentration of startup activity. That way, users most likely to benefit and create wealth from the increase of bandwidth will have first dibs that will eventually trickle down to the rest of the system. Unfortunately, for most short-sighted politicians, the main agenda of the NBN is to buy votes from rural and marginal electorates.

angusscown• 13 years ago

I'd rather more of my potential customers get NBN. Startups hubs tend to already have the broadband required. 'wealth' will be created by capturing a larger user base for new broadband/low latency applications.

kerno5• 13 years ago

I think that people in Burnie in the middle of Tasmania would probably receive the greatest benefits from having fast and reliable internet access. With online education and MOOCs opening up education to those who want it, giving isolated and rural communities access increases the opportunities available to them at a far greater rate than giving the innner city the same benefit.

Volpe3• 13 years ago

Tasmania is used for a testcase because it is a great 'micro-version' of Australia. So potential issues that arise can be dealt with at a scale of 500,000 rather than 20,000,000.

> Burnie in the middle of Tasmania going to encourage the creation of technology startups when its users are going to be technologically uneducated in the first place? What will most likely happen is all that bandwidth (paid by taxpayers) will most likely be used for Torrenting music, warez, movies and porn.

I'll paraphrase your words: Poor/socio-economically disadvantaged people don't deserve nice things, because they are too poor to understand them. Politicians are short sighted for ignoring the rich middle class.

You're view point is exactly WHY the NBN should be rolled out.

taligent3• 13 years ago

I don't say this lightly but you really are an idiot.

The idea that innovation can only come from certain areas is completely baseless. The idea that people in countries towns like Burnie have no use for NBN other than music, warez, porn is offensive. And your concept of wealth "trickling down" has been shown time and time again to never happen.

And the NBN is being rolled out everywhere so not sure where you get this ridiculous vote buying concept from.

stephen_g2• 13 years ago

I really hope that sanity will prevail there when they get in (but by Abbot and Turnbul's comments, it may not be likely)... I mean, a big part of their plan is to not do anything in areas that have HFC currently, even though that cable is so over-subscribed that you don't get decent speeds in peak hour, and many apartment blocks just don't have access to it. So under the Coalition's plan, most people won't get even slightly better internet. How is that OK?

Then, rolling out an inferior tech (compared to fibre) that is only marginally better to current ADSL to the rest which is going to run over an aging copper network that will require billions of dollars of maintenance over the years? All while maintaining the current telco monopoly...

Really, their only selling point is the cost, but I haven't actually been able to find any evidence that the plan is actually costed - every reference to it being cheap is just based on rollouts in other countries with very different geography, population density and existing infrastructure. If they actually costed it, and then took running costs into account, I doubt it would actually be cheaper. And the current, superior NBN isn't even a cost to the taxpayer - it's an investment that will eventually pay itself back with a small profit.

I think the biggest thing though is that even if it were double the price and didn't pay itself back, the economic benefits of having fibre generally available to businesses and homes, as well as having a network which provides open access to suppliers (instead of having to go through the Telstra monopoly) would make it worthwhile.

lubos2• 13 years ago

Could you please explain how NBN will pay for itself?

Not to mention, NBN Corp. will not be any different monopoly from Telstra Wholesale.

And regarding speeds, how is NBN going to solve that? Australia doesn't even have enough international throughput in the current network. NBN will make speeds even worst as the demand will only increase. The bottleneck here is not copper, it is international capacity. What's the point of replacing copper if the weakest link of the network remains.

ghiculescu2• 13 years ago

Barrie is arguing that the Gillard government is increasingly going to restrict an Australian startup's ability to hire the people it needs to succeed.

When that happens, what good will faster internet in rural areas do?

Volpe3• 13 years ago

How is your statement related to your question?

jfoster2• 13 years ago

The NBN will probably make little difference to startups. Not that the NBN isn't a good thing for Australia, but most Australian startups are likely targeting a global market, which Australia is only a tiny portion of.

D_Alex2• 13 years ago

So very true... Australia desperately needs a startup scene for stuff other than the resources industry.

Having said that - the LinkedIn article does not actually say much about what Startup Australia actually is. A google search brought me to this: http://www.startup-australia.org/ . The first thing that hit my eyes was a large advert asking if I want to date mature women.... seriously, get some class! Do you really need to fund this with cringeworthy advertising?

The rest of the site is underwhelming, maybe great startup some web design company could take a shot at making it look good.

mattbarrie5• 13 years ago

That's not the site. The industry action group was formed over the last two days at a design forum that consisted of entrepreneurs, startups, venture capitalists, educators and so forth.

willix• 13 years ago

Alex,

I think startup-australia.org is completely different entity from what Matt is talking about

D_Alex2• 13 years ago

Oh. Thank goodness. But what is all this about then, is there anything available now beyond the Linkedin post?

edhooper2• 13 years ago

The temporary site for the group can be found here: https://sites.google.com/site/siliconbeachproject/

It includes access to the data used during the workshop

kerno5• 13 years ago

Coming back to Oz from London put into perspective how far behind we are. With HN London now attracting so many people they've had to start charging a fee to get in, and the community built around Silicon Roundabout, it is very sad to come back home and see the fragmented efforts to build a startup group in Australia.

With Silicon Beach on and off, Startup Grind, lots of small meetups, and Fishburners in Sydney, there are certainly groups to build this community around but I still think we are years behind the critical mass of something like HN London. And that's just to talk about forums for people to gather in - it says nothing about our skills shortage.

I agree with Matt's points regarding our reliance on the resources industry. So many people head off to the mines on a fly-in-fly-out basis, and make incredible coin - but it won't last long-term and then our skill base will be incompatible with value-adding services industries.

However, I think we need successes before a great weight of people will shift towards STEM disciplines, in the same way that the dot-com frenzy saw Web Development course demand explode.

jacques_chester10• 13 years ago

Nitpick: labour isn't a homogenous, fungible good.

People who are good at trades are not 1-to-1 exchangeable with people who are good at STEM subjects.

kerno5• 13 years ago

No, probably not 1-to-1.

However, before the industrial revolution we were all toiling in fields, so I think perhaps labour is more fungible that you give it credit.

StuieK• 13 years ago

There is some hope: http://blackbird.vc/

Smerity• 13 years ago

To expand on one of the points in the article, let's expand venture capital raised per capita[1]... Israel: $170 per capita, USA: $75 per capita, Australia: $4.09 per capita.

Austrlaia literally spend more on a single day of gambling (Melbourne Cup: $7.27 per capita) than we do in our entire venture capital industry.

The government have also decided we're betraying the country by "abusing" a visa program to get more skilled programmers here. Of our 12,000 IT graduates, 8,000 of them are from overseas. 4,000 graduates doesn't go very far... Many of the 457 visas would also likely be programmers from international companies staying in Sydney: Atlassian and Google have numerous offices abroad and commonly allow programmers to travel around. The Australian government have no clue what's going on.

Mike Cannon-Brookes, founder of Atlassian, just tweeted "How can you say IT is the future of the country, then complain when we import skilled labour to help us?!"[2]

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venture_capital

[2] https://twitter.com/mcannonbrookes/status/312033343988449280

wluu• 13 years ago

I heard Mike on radio yesterday, here's his interview with Radio National Drive - http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/drive/it-indust...

mattbarrie5• 13 years ago

It would be 4,000 local IT graduates per year spread across our 1,500 startups, multinationals like Google and the corporate sector like banking & finance. It's not enough by any stretch.

Also that's not saying that all those 4,000 are good graduates. A top tier institution like the University of Sydney might graduate 100 per year. If you look at Sydney city, there might be the same from UNSW, UTS, UWS, Macquarie etc. That leaves it pretty thin on the ground.

matthewsinclair• 13 years ago

At least part of the problem is AUS is that we really don't have VCs. We have companies masquerading as VCs, but they're more like mezzanine financiers than VCs. They want an established market, established customers, protected IP, massive sweat and real-equity from founders, and they want a controlling interest for their investment.

They generally have no capacity for risk whatsoever, and unless you're digging stuff out of the ground and razing the environment, there's very little on offer from the Government, either.

So I can see why a lot of tech startups kick-off here and then go offshore because the economic environment is just not conducive to startups (at least in general).

Given how many people small business employs in this country (from memory, its the single largest employer, unlike mining, which only directly employes a low, single digit % of workers despite the mindshare it has) we should be doing everything we can to give people a leg up to start a business.

For example, something like Jon Stewart's proposal for a 'softer cushion for failure' would be a great start. We could do a lot worse here in Australia that institute something like this: http://boss.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/18/jon-stewart-propose...

mattbarrie5• 13 years ago

There are only a few that have managed to get funds off the ground. The core problem is that VCs have trouble getting a second fund off the ground because they can't show a good return on the first.

feint2• 13 years ago

This article is absolutely spot on.

I often get asked why I chose to incorporate in the U.S and take investor money from U.S based investors and not from Australians. This is article explains why.

There is a lot of talk in Australia but very little action - a lot of people calling themselves Angels, VC's, incubators etc. without actually funding any companies, or any decent companies.

toast76• 13 years ago

You need money in the system to fund quality startups. But you need quality startups to get money in the first place.

The problem is that we lack a lot in both areas. Chicken/Egg.

feint2• 13 years ago

Agreed - but I know of many quality startups that have moved to the U.S from Australia (including mine). I think the bigger problem is lack of quality Angel investors, VC's and incubators. The largest angel network in Australia still has a ridiculous and immoral pay-to-pitch flow. They simply just don't get it. And the VC situation is even worse.

joonix5• 13 years ago

Lack of enrollment in IT and entrepreneurship is a symptom of the culture, really. You've got tall poppy syndrome combined with protectionism that makes shooting for the easy low-risk stuff desirable... trades pay insanely well due to strong unions and tight immigration policy, for example.

te_chris• 13 years ago

Are you saying trades paying well is a bad thing? I'd argue that's a great thing for entrepreneurs who are willing to take risks because then you have strong, cash-rich people who can stimulate demand in the economy.

bwb• 13 years ago

I think its gotten a bit overboard on pay. There is nothing wrong with that, but it will reduce innovation and risk taking. Especially with such a high minimum wage, people cost is so high that it's reducing innovation/entrepreneurship. I think this is their style but its gone too far in the last 5 years.

The USA is a bit overboard on under paying. Minimum wage needs to go up + tied to cpi + fix health care to find a happier medium and build out a strong middle class. This might be our personal style though, but I think its gotten out of hand. I don't want to be Australia.

I think Australia has gone a bit far and the USA not far enough. Somewhere in between is a sweet zone.

josephagoss3• 13 years ago

IT is not a admirable career here at all, Medicine, Law and Engineering are the good careers that pay well and are generally respected, but IT is looked down upon big time over here. Its a shame really, but to most IT is tech support (I know many computer science grads who are on minimium wage tech support)

chucknthem• 13 years ago

There's a huge difference between IT and software engineering, and using IT as the umbrella term is really doing us a disservice.

taligent3• 13 years ago

> but to most IT is tech support

I don't know where you get this ridiculous idea from. Most IT in Australia is actually in software engineering and testing for banks, media, mining etc. Most of the tech support I am aware of is slowly being outsourced.

boyter5• 13 years ago

Not so sure if I agree with the comment about not being able to hire developers. I think it could be better said "We are unable to hire developers for the price we want to pay".

I am going to take up the offer to email and see how it goes... but I would be surprised if I get an offer which pays enough to actually live in Sydney.

I recently went hunting for jobs and my experience was less then stellar. Many companies didn't even bother sending feedback to coding tests, and one expected me to pay for the Yahoo Boss API and violate Google's terms of service for a test. I will say I had an excellent experience with Hotels Combined though despite declining their offer for personal reasons.

EDIT - Emailed then, and got a response within 1 minute. I will say this for Matt he's very responsive.

josephagoss3• 13 years ago

Interesting, I know a basic php dev in Perth working for 75k a year, and many IT contractors are pulling in 200K. The thing is most of our grads end up in tech support on 40k. And that's why we are getting in many overseas IT people to actually code (The majority of my computer science class dislikes code)

boyter5• 13 years ago

75k isn't a great salary in Sydney (not sure about Perth) and I have seen more basic PHP dev jobs offering 55k then 75k. Contractors always pull in large amounts of cash, but that's usually not what these places are looking for.

Agree that most grads seem to want to avoid coding. Out of my class I think only 1 or 2 actually ended up coding for a living. Not sure why that is in Australia but it seems fairly common.

mattbarrie5• 13 years ago

I have ads looking for great javascript developers for 100k+ and I am getting zero applicants. Zero.

coopdog2• 13 years ago

The pay is actually pretty great in Australia (living costs are also high though).

I think another problem is that there's no one with the -exact- skillset they're after. Why take a chance on a local person that would take a couple of weeks to get up to speed when a foreigner has the exact skillset you're after. Not that I'm against foreign visas, but they do let industry off the hook on the whole training thing to a degree.

boyter5• 13 years ago

That's one of my other complaints. If you are hiring someone for a full-time position if they are anyway decent they can learn whatever skills are required. Im sick of being overlooked for jobs because I know CodeIgniter rather then Cake or am more familiar with MySQL then Oracle.

lessnonymous3• 13 years ago

"... for the price we want to pay" isn't accurate.

I have an advert out at the moment for PHP dev in Melbourne that clearly states we want to pay top dollar.

I'm still only getting applications from web developers who happen to know enough PHP to make them dangerous.

Of the applicants, only four are reasonably interesting.

Three of them are here on 457s.

boyter5• 13 years ago

What figure would you put as "top dollar"? Your opinion of top dollar and mine might be totally different.

Trezoid• 13 years ago

Any reason why you need PHP devs specifically?

jacques_chester10• 13 years ago

If you're in Perth: http://www.morningstartup.com/

I've only been able to get to one, but it's already given me useful feedback and I met some great people.

jacques_chester10• 13 years ago

A lot of the VC funds that have launched in the past few years are actually seeded by government funds. Not a model that lends itself to genuine risk taking.

Just imagine the headlines:

    TEN MILLION WASTED ON PHONE APPS

I live in Perth. Fellow ex-UWA folks of my acquaintance have the same complaint as me, which is as follows:

Perth has buckets and buckets of capital. This town is stupidly flush with cash. And Perth's taste for risk is much higher than the rest of country. You can raise tens of millions of dollars for high-risk, high-reward ventures in a relatively short time.

But there's a catch: this only applies if your proposal is to take some geologists and a drilling crew for mineral exploration.

The lifecycle for startups is ostensibly quite similar, but ... no dosh. The local investors don't really want to know about it.

edit:

That said, I wonder if Australia's intelligentsia will ever get over fetishising whatever industry and country which happens to be in the news a lot. I remember endless song and dance about Japanese cars. Now it's Silicon Valley.

Eventually it will be, I dunno, rockets and jetpacks. From Montenegro.

Meanwhile Australia is one of only 3 countries left with AAA rating and is the only country in the world that has had a growing economy for umpteen years. You can go a long way with sensible, basic policy settings.

jfoster2• 13 years ago

Why should they? It's not what they know. People who have big wins in tech startups generally don't invest in mining ventures for the same reason.

jacques_chester10• 13 years ago

Because I have the primeval Australian political instinct:

Somebody has lots of money, they bloody well ought give me some!

jbarham2• 13 years ago

> You can go a long way with sensible, basic policy settings.

A pity then that Australia's federal and state government policies (negative gearing, first home buyers grants, interest only mortgages for investors etc. etc.) have done so much to pump up the real estate market into such a huge speculative bubble than will do untold damage when it finally pops.

It's insane what Australians are expected to pay for basic housing in one of the world's most lightly populated countries/continents. Here's an example picked at random: http://www.realestate.com.au/property-house-vic-north+melbou.... 3 bedroom terrace house (i.e., no windows in side walls) in North Melbourne, 1 bathroom, no parking, all yours for a mere $775k at 6.5% mortgage rates.

jacques_chester10• 13 years ago

I agree that this is one policy subject where Australia flatly gets it wrong.

I was thinking of other things though: floating dollar, low tariffs, relatively light regulation of many subjects compared to world averages, somewhat predictable inflation targeting policy of the RBA and so on and so forth. We get a lot of things more or less right.

sien• 13 years ago

Many other countries have laws that allow negative gearing. The US has substantially cheaper housing (even at the height of the bubble in much of the country) and there you can deduct the interest on your own house against your income and get a 30 year fixed loan, something you haven't been able to do in Australia since the 1980s.

Australia has pretty tight land release laws.

If we had more cities with decent jobs you might see housing prices go down or at least go flat.

It's also worth noting that Australian housing was fairly cheap until the early 2000s (excluding Sydney)

joonix5• 13 years ago

You forgot to mention housing (property) investment. Australians worship real estate investment above all things. Most think property will still double every few years even though they are already at insanely high levels.

vtjendra• 13 years ago

AUS image = mining. USA image = tech innovation.

Many Australians talented developer and computer engineers have been flocking to USA for mainly two reasons:

1. They are rewarded more in USA, both socially and financially. Who doesn't want to be in the middle of global innovation among other great people?

2. It is much more prestigious and hard to resist. Many US-based companies have been actively recruiting Australians, for example Amazon.com.

This leave Australia with limited local talents and therefore comes up with need to employ overseas eng-IT professionals. Note that 457 are neither cheap nor simple to lodge and employ. We are currently at a phase where it is necessary to keep feeding our demand of technical professionals to keep the growth of Australia tech industry.

nikcub2• 13 years ago

There are two distinct points here that are being a bit muddled. The first is the 457 visa issue. For those that don't know, it is a skilled immigration visa, similar to the H1B in the United States. Australia is coming up to an election in September where the sitting center-left Prime Minister is very likely to lose her Prime Ministership to the center-right party.

To sure up her base on the left yesterday she came out and attacked the 457 visa and said that they needed to be more tightly regulated, since they are being exploited by some and are taking jobs away from Australians.

Prominent Australian entrepreneurs came out in support of the visa, and argued that you can't grow a new information economy without the importation of skilled labour to make up for the shortfall in local skills. This was the biggest national news item yesterday.

As an analogy, imagine if Obama came out in support of lowering H1B visa's or restricting their use, and the shit that would cause.

The second issue here, which Matt also takes on by attaching it to the first, is what a lot of people in the startup world feel is a disadvantage that the Australian startup ecosystem has over its US, Israeli etc. counterparts. This argument has been playing out for years now, to not a lot of effect.

I think there is a contradiction in this argument, when you combine the two together. On the one hand you are asking the government to leave you alone and let you import labour, but on the other hand you are asking them to do something about the lack of venture investment, the lack of skills, university places, etc.

I think the later argument of asking the government to do something to assist startups stems from a misunderstanding of how silicon valley works and why it became successful. This misidentification leads to a feeling that with one or two changes you could 'clone' what has made silicon valley a success, which is not true.

The attitude in Silicon Valley has always been to be left alone by the government. The tech industry in the USA is grossly underrepresented in Washington lobby groups (only recently have Google, Apple and Microsoft invested more in lobbying as their businesses broaden and intersect areas where government has more control, such as spectrum).

Further to that, Australia ranks well in most global indicies for business startup, running a business and open markets. We actually outrank the USA in ability to start a company, and we rank about even in other business friendliness metrics[0].

I think Australia's major problem is cultural. We have a fear of failure, a lack of entrepreneurial spirit, and a severe tall poppy syndrome (all of which I have experienced first hand - ironically from some of the very people who are most vocal about wanting to make Australia more like Silicon Valley).

These should be a clear indication that the "problem" with the Australian startup scene (if there is one, I don't think there is) is not the cause or fault of the government.

I think Matt would have been better served here to focus his argument on the 457 issue, using the same arguments he has (such as Australia won't always have things to dig out of the ground), but leaving the other issues alone for now.

[0] http://www.gfmag.com/tools/global-database/economic-data/118...

ShardPhoenix• 13 years ago

Having good ease of doing business in general doesn't mean that Australia doesn't have a specific problem with startup equity and tax.

nikcub2• 13 years ago

My only requests would be to ask the government to strip away barriers and to step further away. The only real issue I can think of is tax on stock options, and there are two ways to get around that, both of which I have used and both of which are in active use today with startups in Australia.

Australia is too closely ranked to other countries with successful startup ecosystems in the major market and freedom indicies. The USA is now going through the long-term capital gains issue, and nobody has suggested that less startups would be founded, or that there would be less innovation because of it. As Warren Buffet says, he has never known an investor to turn down an investment opportunity because taxes are too high.

joonix5• 13 years ago

Yes, just take a look at Australia's capital gains taxation to see where their priorities are.

In fact, there is no capital gains tax. It's all taxed as income. There is no incentive to sweat it out for years building equity because once you exit, you will give an enormous chunk to the government because you are suddenly in a $1M+ tax bracket for that year only.

Their bankruptcy laws also don't reward risk taking as well as the US either.

mattbarrie5• 13 years ago

Actually the 457 issue is the side issue. The key issue for me really is there are not enough people in the industry due to declining enrollments in STEM. We need to fix our education system and build awareness of the industry with high school students, parents, educators and the government. The whole system here is setup so that law and medicine are the pinnacle professions. STEM in this country is rotting. There are some chances underway with the national curriculum through ACARA, and where you can help is to make a submission by May 10th.

http://consultation.australiancurriculum.edu.au/

quadhome• 13 years ago

The biggest "barrier," if you can call it that, to solving the IT skills gap is the E-3 visa program:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-3_visa

It's a reciprocal visa program between Australia and the United States. Australia offers Americans the friendly 457 visa and the US offers Australians the friendly E-3 visa. It's an independent and generous quota compared to the H-1B visa.

It's surreal to me reading people weighing in so heavily about the difficulty in hiring Australians and ignoring the elephant in the room.

If you are a decently skilled Australian in IT, you get up and move to Silicon Valley. Why?

* More money.

* More respect.

* In the center of your industry.

* Paid travel!

This is the same complaint New Zealand has had about Australia for years too. Kiwis move to Australia for the similar reasons.

Background: I've been on a 457 for two and a half years.

Everyone I know from the US or Europe on a 457 is in Australia for the "lifestyle." The rest are people who came to Australia to study or work from place like India/China/Philippines[1], converted to a 457, and are working their way to permanent residence and finally citizenship.

And you'd be unsurprised how many move to work in the US or Europe after earning their Australian citizenship.

[1] http://www.immi.gov.au/media/statistics/pdf/457-state-territ...

jcampbell1• 13 years ago

The author is indirectly describing what is known as "Dutch disease".

When a country is rich in natural resources, smart and enterprising people specialize in learning to extract natural resources. This damages the technology sector because talent gravitates todward money in market economies.

Also, the first paragraph of wikipedia's article on dutch disease is flawed. Dutch disease is used by economists to describe when a domestic comparative advantage crowds out another industry. It has nothing to do with manufacturing. The first paragraph incorrectly implies that it has something to do with the manufacturing sector.

jacques_chester10• 13 years ago

> The first paragraph incorrectly implies that it has something to do with the manufacturing sector.

Because historically it's been the manufacturing and trades sectors that get crowded out; they are the industries most directly competing with mining for skills and equipment inputs.

jedmeyers• 13 years ago

I am originally from Eastern Europe. I have got an Australian permanent residence visa but decided not to move there at least for now. I feel much better in Silicon Valley on a work visa, where my salary is higher, my work is more meaningful, prices are MUCH lower and my wife found a job in a reasonable time, also in software engineering. I was shocked that you cannot find half-sized shoes in Sydney's stores, and this is considering that their price was 2.5 times higher than the price on Zappos. Australia has to wake up and deal with their protectionist policies regarding local businesses. By giving them protection from external markets they might survive for a while, but this definitely won't last long. No competition means no innovation and high prices for consumers.

joonix5• 13 years ago

Protectionist is exactly right. But things are quickly changing, at least when it comes to local retail. The incumbent bloated chains like Meyer are being disrupted rapidly by overseas online retailers as well as shrewd foreign retailers like Zara setting up in Australia. It's a good thing, too, because the duopolies in Australian retail deserve to be disrupted. They have coasted for far too long providing mediocre value to the customer.

Startup Australia

Related Stories