Archive for the ‘Startups’ Category

All posts in Startups category.

Posted: by chrisshipley on March 25th, 2010 | 1 Comment »

Categorized: Chris Shipley, Entrepreneurship, Observations, Startups

Now that health insurance reform is out of the way (sort of), our employees in Washington (that is, Congressional reps and Senators) will surely turn their attention (if not their bipartisan cooperation) to economic stimulus and finance industry reform (get ready for Obstructionist Politics: Round 2).

Among the bits of joy in the financial reform bill proposed by the Senate Banking Committee are new guidelines for individual investors and the startups they support, guidelines that significantly and negatively impact the seed funding ecosystem.

The proposed legislation doubles the measure of net worth or income  required for an individual angel investor to be accredited, and nascent companies would be required to climb a mountain of paperwork with the Securities and Exchange Commission then wait up to 120 days for the SEC to review it.

These proposed rule changes throw sand into the gears of entrepreneurship and for what purpose?  If capital is not already difficult to come by for startups, this financial reform would effectively evaporate the pool of angel investment.  And while the SEC plods its way through filing reviews, time will be killing young businesses.

There are enough laws, regulations, and daily shenanigans to demonstrate that Congress hasn’t a clue about entrepreneurship.

So let’s be clear: entrepreneurship is, and always has been, the driver of the  economy.  Risk-taking individuals start new businesses, hire employees, create opportunities and build wealth that is often re-invested in local communities. Rather than imposing new regulation that makes these companies stillborn, Congress should be removing obstacles to capital.

Instead, Congress focuses on mega-banks and Fortune 500 companies, unwilling to let these leviathans of business falter.  They need to shift their attention and their policy initiatives to the Fortune 500,000 companies that are too small to be allowed to fail.  These companies employ more than 100 million people in the U.S. and earn upwards of $22T in revenue each year. Numbers, by the way, that stack up very favorably against the Fortune 500′s worldwide performance data of 24M employees and $9T in revenue).

We rarely use the Guidewire Group pulpit to incite political action, but if you’ve ever cared about an entrepreneur or imagine you might one day start a company of your own, now is the time to reach out to your elected officials and demand these onerous “reforms” be removed from the forthcoming legislation.

Posted: by carlacthompson on March 5th, 2010 | No Comments »

Categorized: Carla Thompson, Events, Startups

**Update: Check out Mashable’s screenshots of the upcoming Foursquare app update for next week. Could possibly alter your vote.

MG Siegler posited last week that location apps are going to be the big bang at SXSW this year, achieving Twitter-like buzz level. This seems a pretty safe bet; as I’ve mentioned before, location apps are without a doubt the sector to watch in 2010.

As I was checking in this morning at Galaxy Cafe [sidenote: love this place. Please patronize them, Austin folk.], it occurred to me that the buzz-worthy question next week won’t be if you’re checking in, but how. Are you going Foursquare all the way, using their rumored shiny new update? Or will you stick local, checking in on Austin-based Gowalla? Or will you quicken your – and your friends’ – path to insanity by checking in on both?

I conducted a head-to-head of the services a while back and seemed to settle on Foursquare as my app of choice. But here am I still using Gowalla. I just can’t decide. Gowalla has a better – much better – UI. Foursquare has more of my friends signed up. Gowalla has items to collect, a feature that’s grown on me. Foursquare has the game as more of a centerpiece, an appeal to my competitive side. I could go on. But I won’t.

Why does this even matter? Because checking in at SXSW is going to be more important than normal. Attendees’ schedules are much more organic and evolving than at standard tech conferences. In short, one wanders where the day takes you. So word about a panel that’s turned feisty or a party that’s packed bring more people to the scene. This was achieved with Twitter in the past, a method that seems a little antiquated in the face of location apps. This year, not only will you need to know which parties to attend but which app to use to find out about those parties. Could SXSW crown a location app winner through sheer popularity this year?

Let’s see what the early buzz is. If you’re going to SXSW next week, which app will you use to check in?

Which app will you use to check in at sites during SXSW?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Tagged: , ,

Posted: by chrisshipley on February 24th, 2010 | No Comments »

Categorized: G/Score, Startups

Over the past month, we’ve been rolling out the G/Score framework with partners, training G/Score assessors, and introducing entrepreneurs to the concept of a standardized, objective, transparent assessment methodology.  The feedback from literally hundreds of conversations has been gratifying and tremendously helpful as we work to make the G/Score a useful and prescriptive tool for entrepreneurs and a valuable vetting mechanism for large organizations seeking to work more effectively with early stage companies.

And then, we got this question on our blog:

“Has the G/Score framework been evaluated against actual outcomes to determine how well it predicts the success/failure of early stage companies?”

When we parse the question, it’s clear that there are really two question on the table:

  1. “Can we use the G/Score to pick winners?” – Where ‘winner’ is a company that will receive venture funding and go on to generate outsized investor returns.
  2. “Can we rely on the G/Score to accurately assess a startup’s strengths and weaknesses?”

Candidly, the answer to the first question is “no.”

But then, that not what the G/Score is meant to do. The G/Score is a measure of a company’s potential and traction at a point in time. While a score might note significant market opportunity and a smart product offering, it is execution over time that drives to a successful outcome.

The G/Score’s seven factors, each rated on a four-point scale, work in combination to articulate a company’s achievement, potential and viability. No factor is weighted more heavily than another in the total scale. That weighting is left largely up to those who incorporate the G/Score into their own evaluations.

For example, a company seeking to acquire a technology may weight delivery of product to market more highly than business model, knowing that upon acquisition the technology will be integrated into the acquirer’s selling and pricing models. A serial startup executive may weight market opportunity most heavily, while looking for low-scoring teams who need the executive’s execution expertise.

By contrast, the answer to the second question is an enthusiastic, though anecdotal, “yes!” The G/Score measures where a company is today, against a clearly articulated ladder of achievement. And our observations of the more than 20,000 companies we’ve interviewed over the last 20 years indicates that if a company scores low and does nothing to address its weaknesses, it will most likely fail. But if a company works to address its weaknesses and improve its score, it dramatically increases its chance of not just surviving, but thriving.

The point is this: the G/Score doesn’t serve as a substitute for your own diligence, instincts or gap-fit analysis. It’s not intended identify a “good chemistry” between startup and investor, partner, or customer. It is, at its core, a uniform filter, a tool, that allows the individuals and organizations that work with startups to do that work more efficiently by helping them to quickly hone in on companies that meet their specific performance criteria.

We describe the G/Score as prescriptive for the entrepreneur because never has it been more clear what a company can do to move the needle on execution.  By clearly articulating the achievement required to score at each level in the four-point scale, the entrepreneur can immediately see the work ahead of him to improve his G/Score and advance his business.

Along the way, the G/Score had another interesting affect on the startup ecosystem. Because it normalizes the way we look at startup businesses and provides a common language to talk about companies, it changes the dialog in the market. Already we’ve found that the conversation between a company and an assessor hones in on issues that matter to the execution and performance of a business. Hard to articulate gut instincts – and worse, feedback as public performance – are replaced by serious questions about business execution and market potential. An entrepreneur’s defensiveness is replaced by desire for constructive feedback. The conversation is qualitatively more useful to everyone.

Every organization working with startups is likely to have a set of guidelines to help them evaluate early stage companies and match them to their specific interests. The G/Score is another tool in that arsenal, one that is open, transparent, and objective, and designed to be as helpful to the entrepreneur as to the company doing the evaluation.

Tagged:

Posted: by carlacthompson on February 11th, 2010 | 1 Comment »

Categorized: Events, Innovate!Europe, Startups

Guidewire Group is looking for early-stage companies that have what it takes to be named one of the world’s most promising startups. Our Innovate!2010 global competition will consist of Pitch Slams around the world, kicking off March 1st in Barcelona.

The top 100 companies chosen from these Pitch Slams will be featured in a prestigious list known as the Innovate!100 – and the best of the best will receive a share of prizes valued at nearly $250,000. In addition, every startup that applies will receive promotional exposure and free training designed to improve their chances of success.

We have scheduled Innovate!2010 Pitch Slams in a dozen European cities between March 1 and March 29, and additional events will be held in the US in the coming months. There will also be an online evaluation process for finalists that are not able to attend in person.

More information about how startups can enter the competition is available at Innovate100.com. We’re also accepting applications from qualified individuals who are interested in volunteering to judge, and registration is open if you’d like to sign up to attend a Pitch Slam so you can meet and mingle with the finalists.

Help us spread the word! You can find us on Twitter at @innovate100, as well as our Facebook and LinkedIn groups.

Posted: by chrisshipley on January 15th, 2010 | No Comments »

Categorized: G/Score, Startups

Founded originally to develop project management software, New Zealand-based Aptimize discovered the need for Web page delivery acceleration when its own product was painfully unresponsive.  The Aptimize optimization scheme turns “chatty pages into chunky pages” by concatenating images and JavaScript, recompiling and compressing them on the fly. In one example with its own product, Aptimize reduced load time from 30 seconds to 4.  Consistently, server calls are reduced by 50% or more.  Sharepoint sites see reduced load times by 33 – 75%, according to the company.

Launched from New Zealand in late 2008, the product is best deployed by content-management-driven sites such as e-commerce and catalog sites.  The company has 100 customers including Raytheon, Fidelity, and Microsoft.com.  The company is currently working to expand its footprint in the U.S. and  the U.K.

Aptimize has protected its IP in New Zealand and has filed for expedited examination  in the U.S. and Canada. The company believes that several companies – including StrangeLoop Networks, Argon Networks, and FasterWeb, may be infringing on its patent.

With large companies like Akamai beating the drum for faster page loads, Aptimize comes to the U.S. with good timing and a smart product to seize leadership in this emerging market.

Aptimize Scorecard

G/Score Explained

Posted: by carlacthompson on December 22nd, 2009 | 7 Comments »

Categorized: Carla Thompson, Startups

Originally published on Austin Startup

Since I moved to Austin in October, Foursquare’s game of location-based tag has held my interest, allowing me to familiarize myself with the town a bit better and connect quicker with people in the tech scene. I hadn’t yet experienced the a-ha with it though. So when I heard of Austin-based competitor Gowalla, I was willing to give it a shot. Even more so when news hit of its $8.4M funding round; if investors on the level of Greylock are handing it money, something’s afoot in this sector.

The two services are virtually identical, asking users to check in via their cell phone at spots around town. Foursquare awards mayor-ships and badges for frequent use, while Gowalla scatters pins and offers items to drop at locations. (For a closer look at feature sets, check out Josh’s recent post.)

Why would one do this? Well, it’s a bit like Twitter, in that you don’t get it until you’ve tried it. But the overall philosophy is to create a network of known places in a town, allowing users to find each other on the fly and leave tips and deals about certain spots.

To conduct my due diligence, I reasoned that a thorough test over the holidays made sense. I’d be in several different cities and could put both services through the ringer. I lasted one weekend. The comic effect of sitting in my car everywhere I went, bringing up two apps and going through the steps to check in, was simply too much. And I’m positive it was annoying for those who are friends with me on both services.

On Saturday afternoon, I took my daughter to The Nutcracker at the Long Center. Gowalla couldn’t find my “passport” (user account) as I sat in the parking garage so I abandoned the pursuit; my 4-year-old was protesting, “Mommy, what are you doing? Let’s go!” During intermission I tried again, this time with success. After checking in, the service asked me to “drop” something. Drop something? What the hell does that mean? Who’s going to pick it up? I chose a Beatnik Poet, clicked the ‘notify Facebook’ option and moved on. No idea what happened to the poet; hope an item with disparate philosophies isn’t harassing him.

The rest of the weekend went about the same, with Foursquare getting the bulk of the check-ins. Only when I had a bit of downtime did I use Gowalla. I simply didn’t see the point. I have more friends on Foursquare, know the interface better and get the rules of the game. In this regard, Foursquare wins hands-down; it’s easier to get going and immediately understand. Gowalla features several catchwords that I haven’t parsed yet: pins, stamps, item drops, etc. If it’s going to spread effectively to consumers, the service needs to be easier to jump into cold.

Foursquare has its negatives of course. An annoying Twitter/Bit.ly conversion bug results in the posting of mayors’ pictures on my Facebook page. So when I’m having coffee with a friend at Once Over, the accompanying image in my newsfeed is of a random stranger. (Foursquare is aware of this, but blame Twitter and say they can’t fix it.) Adding a Facebook notification feature would partially solve this problem. And its process for adding new locations is unnecessarily complex. Seems to me it would be easy enough to pull addresses from Yelp or a similar service so that you’re not required to input all the data on your own.

But at the end of the day, I’m sticking with Foursquare. It simply has the leg up. Not fair perhaps, but until Gowalla tempts me with particularly engaging and notable features, I don’t have a compelling reason to shift all my friends and energies.

And here’s the thing: this is a space that is going to merit our energies in the coming months. Take a look at these two recent posts and note the common thread: Yelp. The primary competitor for Foursquare and Gowalla isn’t necessarily each other; it’s Yelp. And Om is right on the money that Yelp should be worried.

Yelp is currently my yellow pages. I use it in place of Google for all local business searches. But its personal reviews and ratings lose any attraction if I have a catalog of recommendations from trusted friends on an alternate service. And that’s where Foursquare/Gowalla/Bobs Yer Uncle is going to win. Did Yelp walk away from Google because they’re smart enough to recognize this? Are they planning their own acquisition? Or were they foolhardy, thinking they’ve got a lock on a market that is sliding out from under them?

I’ve had pneumonia the past month so haven’t been much for drinking. When friends came over this weekend, we joked about when I would start testing my liver again for the holidays. Finding myself at Chuy’s last night with my family, I did a quick check-in on Foursquare. Five minutes later, that friend texted me, telling me that Chuy’s mojitos were excellent and a perfect way to inaugurate my holiday imbibing. (She was quite right.)

I suppose I could’ve powered up the Yelp app at the table, searched for Chuy’s and paged through the reviews to find drink recommendations. But no one on there knew my background, my drink tastes, my prior conversations. The power of linking businesses to personal networks, and exploiting those personal connections without being intrusive, has been a nut that’s needed cracking for some time now. Foursquare and Gowalla have cracked it. Whether the market is big enough to hold both of them remains to be seen.

Posted: by chrisshipley on December 20th, 2009 | 8 Comments »

Categorized: Chris Shipley, Entrepreneurship, Observations, Startups

In October, I spoke at Startup Camp Montreal5 about the 10 Stupid Things Entrepreneurs Do to Mess Up Their Businesses, and alluded to that talk again recently at the Forum for Entrepreneurs and Executives conference on entrepreneurship.  It came up in conversation again on Friday so it seems high time I actually post the notes from the talk on our blog.

I hope by pointing out common blunders, I can help entrepreneurs avoid a few of the dumb mistakes that (almost) every startup makes.  I also hope that some of you who have tripped into these potholes of entrepreneurship might come forward as case studies for a collection of essays that I’m compiling.  If you have a story that serves as object lesson to fellow entrepreneurs, I’d love to talk to you about it.  I promise to protect identities (where necessary and/or requested) and to be gentle with you.  The goal of the book is to help new entrepreneurs learn from those who have gone before.   If you’re interested in sharing a story, contact me via email.

Now, on to the list of 10 Stupid Things Entrepreneurs Do To Mess up Their Businesses*

1.  Think Like a Guppy

Okay, so you’re a small company.  Maybe it’s just you and a couple of co-founders. Hell, maybe it really is just you. That’s cause to be judicious with your resources, but it’s no reason to whine.

Somehow in the past few years, it’s become popular to put startups in some sort of protected charitable class.  You’re not a charity, you’re a business and if you want to be a big business, you have to think like one.  Manage your resources, posture, negotiate,  demand performance, deal.

You’re not a little fish; you’re a whale that has a long way to grow. Think like a small business and you’ll stay a small business. Think like a big business and you are more likely to become one.

2. Confuse Vision and Focus

Any business worth doing starts with a big, clear vision, that usually has something to do with owning a market, solving a giant problem, saving the world, or simply total world domination.

Still, there is a giant difference between vision and focus.  Vision is the audacious objective, the big game of entrepreneurship. It is what the business looks like when you’ve achieved your goals.

Focus is how you get there.

Focus is critical because it provides the actionable steps to make a vision a reality.  Focus prevents companies from running off course, or worse, chasing after the shiny objects that pose as opportunity. As importantly, focus provides a measure of progress and keeps ambitious entrepreneurs from becoming overwhelmed by their big vision.

Smart entrepreneurs dream big, but focus tightly. You can eat an elephant, but you have to do it one day at a time.

3.  Confuse activity for focus

There are no idle entrepreneurs.  Indeed, time is the enemy of startups, and every founder is busy, busy, busy building the business.  Or so it seems.

Lots of activity doesn’t necessarily mean lots of progress. If you’re unfocused and doing the wrong things, you can be mighty busy doing little of value.   When you’re lost, don’t just drive faster.  Stop.  Breathe. Assess. Focus.  And maybe even ask for directions.

4. Fall in Love with Technology

Of course you love your technology; every entrepreneur does.  It’s the product, after all, that people will buy. So you give it all your attention, defend it when criticized, convince your self that your baby can’t be ugly.

While dedication to technical excellence is admirable, in  a startup it’s the wrong target for your affection.  Instead, fall in love with your customers. They will tell you what to make.

5.  Focus on Fund Raising Instead of Building a Business

I know.  You need capital to build your company and venture capital is the fastest path to cash in the bank.  Or it used to be.

While few VCs will openly admit that they have much worry, truth is that the venture capital industry is in upheaval.  The perfect storm of the residual dot-com mega-funds, cash-efficient business creation models of the Web 2.0 cycle, and a global economic meltdown leave most funds with capital they can’t invest, capital calls they can’t make, or new funds they can’t raise. VCs are trying to re-engineer (and, in many instances, simply save) their businesses.  And while they may be saying something different, they really aren’t spending as much time thinking about how to invest in yours.

But even in the best of times, the best way to raise capital to build your business is to build and sell products and services that people want to buy.  In fact, nothing catches the interest of VCs like money coming into the company.

Consider that raising venture capital is a time-consuming activity.  Consider how you might otherwise use your time.  Developing a product?  Talking to customers?  Building strong channel partners?  Then consider this: what brings more value to your company: building PowerPoint presentations for Sand Hill Road or building your company?

6. Fail To Measure

Young companies run fast, but not every startup is clear on where they’re going or what it will look like when they arrive.  No doubt there will be plenty of turns along the way, but if you don’t lay down some milestones, you’ll have no way of knowing whether you’re on track or on time.

Companies of all sizes do what they measure, so measure what matters.  Determine by what metrics you will evaluate your progress and by which you will be evaluated by others.  Whether its development deadlines, page views, sign ups, downloads, or whatever – figure out what measurable metrics demonstrate growth and potential for your business.

Include in your metrics the sub-measures that affect the whole.  For example, if the measure is a sales goal, also measure marketing and development activity that contributes to achieving that goal.  That way, you have a clearer view sooner of what is going right, and possibly wrong.

Communicate those metrics to your team so they understand what they are and why they are important.  Then measure and report in meaningful and actionable increments.

7.  Ignore Yellow Lights

Optimism is a critical requirement for entrepreneurs. You have to believe that you can do the impossible while constrained in every possible way.

Still, your optimism can not be allowed to trump your reality.

That’s why metrics and measurement are so important to young companies.   It’s important to set those milestones while everything remains possible and reason rules your business planning.

As you march on, you’ll no doubt miss a milestone or fall short of some measure.  Pay attention. Take time to analyze the shortfall, learn from it and make course corrections as needed.

And, most importantly, listen for that little voice that urges you to press on even when all the warning signs point to another course of action.  Listen for it, not to it.

8. Hire Good People

Smart founders hire great people. Period.

You’ve got more work than you can do alone, your small team can’t move fast enough, and you’ve got the resources to bring in more people.  Hiring fast may seem like the answer.  It rarely is.

As much as founders need people to help build the business, people can be a time sink for founders.  The wrong person in the wrong job will bury you in management hassles, and they can do more to destroy team morale than a weeks of all-nighters.

As counter intuitive as it may seem, it is far better to take time to fill a position with the absolute best hire, than to burn time managing your way out of a bad hire.

9. Neglect the Details

An entrepreneur I know calls the details of budgeting and bookkeeping, employee contracts, stock agreements, and the myriad other details of business life “administrivia.”  It’s a fun word, but there is nothing trivial about business management.

In the earliest days, when you’re working on handshakes and shoestrings, there’s little need for over the top business administration, but that doesn’t obviate the need for some reasonable care.  That care (or lack thereof) will set the tone for your business as it grows.

A little time and a few dollars spent with a bookkeeper and lawyer in your earliest days will save a lot more time and money later when you need clean books and protected IP to make your case to investors, customers, and partners.   Forensic accounting and documentation is very expensive.  You can pay me now, or pay me a lot more later.

10. Lose Site of Your Values

Every company has a culture.  It’s either accidental or deliberate.

An accidental culture grows as people come on to the team, decisions are made, customs established, crises arise, pressures build and release, new challenges and opportunities preset themselves.  How founders act as the business unfolds sets the tone and establishes precedent.  Precedent, re-enacted time and again, grows into corporate culture.

In my experience, most accidental cultures are toxic, not unlike mold growing in a refrigerator; all the best ingredients are there, but having gone ignored or uncared for, they go to waste.

Deliberate cultures aren’t necessarily complex and they don’t require management consultants or self-help books.  They simply require awareness.  What do you believe and value?  If this company is your legacy, how do you want to be known?  How do you want your company to be perceived by its employees, customers, and community?

Let the awareness of and commitment to those values drive your business dealings and decisions. Be consistent with your values, make them part of the company, and demand that those around you do the same.

* with apologies to Dr. Laura Schlessinger for riffing on her popular book titles.


You’re not a little fish; you’re a whale that’s not yet gotten big.

Posted: by chrisshipley on December 15th, 2009 | 1 Comment »

Categorized: Chris Shipley, Entrepreneurship, Observations, Startups, Uncategorized

I admit I’m a bit behind in my reading amidst end of year planning and all this holiday hoopla, so I’m just getting around to reading Sunday’s Wall Street Journal post asking “Should Start-Up Founders Forget About Business Plans?”

The post quotes HubSpot founder and CEO Brian Halligan saying that creating a business plan is a “fool’s errand,” noting that he has raised some $30million in investment capital without a formal business plan.  He added, “No venture capitalist actually asked us for a business plan.”

There’s long been a debate about the value of a documented business plan in fundraising.  VCs might ask for one, but really (and usually said with a wink and a snicker), we all know they never actually read them. In other words, as Halligan put it, business plans are “a waste of time.”

As business professors everywhere grab their pearls at the thought, let me jump in here and say that Halligan is right – and completely wrong.

A fully-documented, prose-polished, perfect-bound business plan adds little real value to a startup company. But that’s really not the point.

A documented business plan doesn’t simply appear, created from golden cloth as if by some Rumplestilskin-like magic.  Indeed, to say that a business plan is a fool’s errand is missing entirely the nature of the errand itself.  The thinking, measuring, investigating, validating, and actual planning that enables one to write a business plan is what matters.

Halligan goes on to say that startups need only three documents with which to raise money: a PowerPoint presentation, a one-page executive summary, and a “fictitious” pro forma income statement.  All of which, he stresses, are “simple.”

Let’s assume for a moment that Halligan is right.  The subtext of his comments presented at the Puerto Rico Venture Forum, is that the venture guys are kind of superficial and so you, dear entrepreneur, can be, too. Throw together some slides, whip up a couple of paragraphs, invent some numbers. Bob’s your uncle.

I dare you to build a business on that soft foundation. While business plans find their way to the dust bin of history, business planning is critical to the formation and growth of any company.  I’m not talking about lock-yourself-in-a-room-subsist-on-pizza-and-Red-Bull-ignore-incoming-calls-figure-out-every-nuance planning. I’m talking about common sense testing of assumptions, laying out a strategy, idenfitying tactics, and understanding milestones. It shouldn’t take weeks, but it ought to take days.

Without this level of planning, you can’t articulate your business in the infamous 10-slide deck or quick and dirty executive summary.  More importantly, you can’t articulate your business to your team, your potential hires, contractors, and others who will actually help you execute on the business.

It takes time – thoughtful, focused time – to plan a business, but so much less time than tacking from one spaghetti-against-the-wall experiment to the next.

Do I read massive business plans?  No.  Do I expect the companies who seek my help to have planned? Yes!

So while Mr. Halligan may be right that no one reads a business plan, you’ll be dead in the water if you interpret his remarks to mean you needn’t plan at all.

Social Media Campaign managed by Spredfast

Posted: by chrisshipley on November 4th, 2009 | 1 Comment »

Categorized: Business Models, Chris Shipley, Startups

In a post written a couple days ago, I took a poke at “free” business models and cited the success of WatchDox launching its  secure file-sharing service with a premium price tag.

In that post, I wrote:

At best, free is a marketing strategy, although typically not a well understood one.

Having said that, I thought it reasonable that I give an example where I think “free” makes a lot of business sense. That example came to me as I was working with Guidewire Group client MyOwnRealEstate.com on its pricing model.

For those of you who missed the company’s product launch at DEMOfall, MyOwnRealEstate is a property management and tenant communications platform offered as a Web-based service.  The product is aimed at the sweet spot of professional rental property owners with 3 to 50 units under management.  For those customers, M.O.R.E. charges a modest per-unit-per-month price that is easily absorbed into the monthly rent.

But what about the million-plus property owners who are renting the other side of their duplex or leasing a second home?  They account for a significant portion of America’s housing stock, but frankly they are the hard-to-find customers who would cost so much to reach that they’d not prove profitable until well into the second or third year of service, a contract term they’d not likely sign on to.

My advice to the company was a seeming contradiction to my “free isn’t a business model” campaign: give them the software for free.  If you own or manage two or fewer rental units, you can use myownrealestate.com at no cost.

The reasoning: While some of these customers might pay – if you could find and market to them, most would not.  However, each of these units touches a few tenants who will be introduced to the product and who may begin to ask about it when they move on to their next rental.  It’s a slow word of mouth campaign, but it is some value exchange.  Moreover, real estate professionals talk and a few champions using the service will begin to lift page rankings and otherwise build awareness of the service within the real estate community.  And, once in a while, little real estate moguls become bigger real estate tycoons, taking their practices and tools along with them.

It’s small stakes, to be sure, but stakes easily given away because the marginal cost of serving these customers is very low and the price of capturing them is extraordinarily high.

Meanwhile, the customers with the incentive and the cash to pay for the service receive the equivalent of a modest discount (first two units manged are free).  It’s a win all the way around.

Posted: by chrisshipley on November 3rd, 2009 | No Comments »

Categorized: Chris Shipley, Observations, Startups

I started my day at SAP Labs in Palo Alto moderating a panel discussion about “Enabling Innovation: How does it happen? What’s the secret sauce?”  The room was filled with the managing directors of SAP Labs worldwide and their invited guests, the vast majority of them representing multi-billion dollar global businesses that are challenged, presumably, by the task of continual innovation.

The panel was representative of the of the Silicon Valley ecosystem:

  • Kimber Lockhart and Jeff Seibert, co-founders of Increo Solutions (the entrepreneurs)
  • Mark Radcliffe, partner at DLA Piper (the lawyer)
  • Dan Pistone, SR VP for tech banking at Bridge Bank (the banker)
  • Gamiel Gran, VP Business Development at Sierra Ventures (the VC)
  • and me (the analyst)

We started the conversation by level setting around the idea of innovation itself.  I usually argue that the word “innovation” is so easily tossed off that it has lost its meaning.  Everybody is “innovative,” even when we can’t be sure how or why.   I contend that innovation is what someone will buy.  Jeff’s definition is even better:  “delivering creativity to end users.”

As this part of the conversation unfolded, though, it became clear that innovation isn’t  a thing; it’s a process. Innovation doesn’t just happen.  It’s exercised and deliberate.  And it that regard, it also may well be a culture, a state of mind, a core value of an individual or organization.

So what marks an innovative company?  Surely, the list is longer than that which we discussed in 45 minutes this morning  (and I invite your additions to the list in the comments, please).  Our conversation kept coming back to these four ideas:

  1. Vet ideas early and often. Jeff and Kimber told the story of founding Increo as a process of testing ideas.  Did they dig the idea?  Did it resonate after the initial excitement wore off?  Did other people see value in it?  Brain storming twice a week helped the vet countless “incredibly great bad ideas.”
  2. Try something. Feedback is critical and there’s no better way to get feedback than to put something – anything – out for response. Again from the Increo founding story: “We weren’t coming up with any great ideas for a business, so we decided to just build an idea sharing site,” Jeff said.  The site morphed into an enterprise idea bank which morphed again into the Increo document collaboration platform, acquired by Box.net in August.
  3. Embrace failure, fail fast. Mark Radcliff was quick to point out that Silicon Valley is distinct from other technology ecosystems in its acceptance of failure, almost as a price of entry for innovation.  You can imagine that a roomful of corporate lieutenants would be loathe to celebrate failure with their management.  And frankly, I think “fail fast” is one of those Valley pablums that lose their meaning in bad practice.  Rather than failing fast, companies need to learn to fail smart.  They need to understand what went wrong and why, do it quickly, reset, and try again.
  4. Balance innovation and invention. As “delivered creativity,” Innovation implies an immediacy with the customer.  That’s great for solving today’s business problems, but may leave a large company like SAP flat footed in the long term if they don’t also engage in primary research on the path to invention.