I began this analysis with the intention of recommending Ziplet; going so far as to even pilot it in a classroom at my school however, as I dove further and further into what Ziplet was offering and subsequently compared it to what was available on the market now, as well as prospective technologies on the horizon, I could not confidently give the platform a full recommendation.

What Ziplet does, in the form of streamlining the exit ticket and formative assessment process, it does well but a number of factors discussed in the recommendations section would hold me back as an investor. I just struggle to see the long-term viability of the platform as he does not do enough to differentiate itself from the competition nor does it do enough to innovate to secure a foothold in the current space it occupies in the educational marketplace.

The more and more I analyzed the platform, the more and more I grew excited for a different program that was highlighted by Richard Derksen during the Pitch Pool activity: SwiftGrade.

In fact, I already pitched the idea of SwiftGrade to some of the academic leaders in my institution but we have decided to hold off on investing into the program until the iOS compatibility becomes available. We have concluded that it is an avenue we would like to explore more so than Ziplet.

I suppose that is one of the key lessons to learn when approaching a product as a potential investor: begin your analysis without any preestablished biases or expectations in order to get the most well-rounded view of a potential investment. In the case of this assignment, I went in thinking that Ziplet was easily a product worth investing in, but as I delved deeper and deeper, I could not bring myself to justify investing any significant resources.