RSS Feed

December, 2009

  1. New Device Desirable, Old Device Undesirable | The Onion – America’s Finest News Source

    December 28, 2009 by Matt Mireles

    "The new device is an improvement over the old device, making it more attractive for purchase by all Americans," said Thomas Wakefield, a spokesperson for the large conglomerate that manufactures the new device. "The old device is no longer sufficient. Consumers should no longer have any use or longing for the old device."

    Added Wakefield, "The new device will retail for $395."

    Able to remain operational for longer periods of time and occupy a demonstrably smaller three-dimensional space, the new device is so advanced when compared to the old device that it makes the old device appear much older than it actually is. However, the new device is reportedly not so radically different as to cause confusion or unwanted anxiety among those familiar with the feel of the old device.

    "Its higher price indicates to me that it is superior, and that not everyone will be able to afford it, which only makes me want to possess it more," said Tim Sturges, owner of the old device, which he obtained 18 months ago when it was still the new device. "I feel a strong urge to purchase the new device. Owning the new device will please me and improve my daily life."

    "It's difficult to remember how I ever found enjoyment in my old device," Sturges continued. "It is no longer appealing to the eye."

    via www.theonion.com

    The Onion is genuinely brilliant.


  2. Company Math vs VC Math

    December 28, 2009 by Matt Mireles

    It is the same "VC math" which drives a VC to seek to deploy a larger amount of capital into a company.  (Often taking a capital efficient company and helping it become capital inefficient).  And it is the same math which sometimes creates a lack of alignment between a founder and a VC around exit opportunities.  I have previously written these issues when I discussed the "unwritten terms on a term sheet". 

    A company's outcome should drive VC returns.  When VC's required returns drive company's outcomes, it's a recipe for trouble.

    via redeye.firstround.com

    Ahh, the downsides of raising VC.


  3. Online Payments, Friction and the Downside of Diversity

    December 27, 2009 by Matt Mireles

    My homeboy Chris Dixon wrote a thoughtful post entitled: "Are people more willing to pay for digital goods on mobile devices?" The heart of his argument: 

    I think we are in the AOL “walled garden” days of the mobile internet. Demand is far outpacing supply, so consumers are paying for digital goods. I don’t pay for news or simple games on the desktop internet because there are so many substitutes that my willingness to pay is driven down to zero.

    On this point regarding the walled garden days, he may in fact be correct. However, this walled garden has some lessons to teach us. In the comments, someone brought up the point that making purchases in the iPhone garden is just a helluva lot easier than making them on the desktop web. Chris replied and so did I

    chris dixon 24 minutes ago in reply to petekazanjy

    I agree making payment more convenient helps. Its no coincidence the biggest mobile content sellers also have credit card #'s on file (carriers, Apple, Amazon).

    But do you think the (desktop) NYTimes could save themselves by adding a "Pay by iTunes/Amazon/Apple" button? Fundamentally the problem is too many alternatives.

    Matt Mireles 9 minutes ago in reply to chris dixon

    Obviously product differentiation matters too. NYT still runs a lot o
    f generic legacy newspaper type news, so they're not a good example. But let's take TechCrunch––would you pay for a TechCrunch Pro product if all it took was two clicks? Step 1) Initiate purchase, Step 2) Confirm Purchase. I sure as hell would.

    But see, even this pay by iTunes/Amazon/Apple option involves the friction of having to remember then type your login info and password. 

    What the world needs is a web browser that interfaces with a standard payment system. That's how you really get to frictionless two-click purchasing. [I compressed 2 comments into one here, just fyi]

    Think about it. Imagine how your purchasing behavior would change and how your purchasing threshold would go up if in the offline world each purchase required you to manually input then confirm your credit card number, first and last name, address, expiration date and secret code instead of just swiping your card or paying cash? Transactional friction would skyrocket and you'd think a lot harder making a purchase. In fact, I think impulse purchases would simply dry up as a category. And lets face it, media is often an impulse purchase (that's why they put magazines at the checkout counter). This nightmare scenario is how the desktop internet currently operates.

    Amazon Payments, PayPal and the like are better-than-nothing half-measures. One simple fact remains: the online payments industry is just too fragmented. Users have too many passwords and logins to remember. The world needs a single standard for online payments. We need to make buying online as easy as buying in the real world, if not more so.

    And it can't be a browser plugin. Too few people download those. The payments have to be integrated into the browser itself, so that no matter the site, you can pay with two clicks. The other option is Facebook Connect. That could work too.


  4. The Need for Achievement

    December 26, 2009 by Matt Mireles

    I had a great conversation with Brad Feld today in the comments on his blog post: An Honorable Run and American Power. To keep things simple, i pasted it below.

    0

    's avatar - Go to profile

    @mattmireles· 1 hour ago

    Funny how solo endurance sports and entrepreneurship attract the same kind of people. I think it has something to do with mental wiring: the endorphin rush that comes from beating back pain.

    Reply

    3 replies · active 53 minutes ago

    +1

    Brad Feld's avatar - Go to profile

    Brad Feld 95p· 1 hour ago

    Great observation.  I think it’s also the willingness to be disciplines, to be willing to be “coached”, and to have systematic determination to win over a long period of time.  The cliché “it’s a marathon, not a sprint” is a really good one.

    Reply

    0

    's avatar - Go to profile

    @mattmireles· 53 minutes ago

    There’s the solo component too, at least for me: I didn’t go into triathlons or start a company because all my friends were doing it. I did it because the idea of doing something really fucking hard is appealing, because I like to push my body (I used to fight forest forest fires on a hotshot crew), and because I think what I’m working on is gonna change how people use the web. That’s just me, of course. But my guess is that most people end up there based on a similar decision matrix, as opposed to the “because it was cool” pathway that drives lots of other behaviors.

    Reply

    +1

    Brad Feld's avatar - Go to profile

    Brad Feld 95p· 50 minutes ago

    The “need for achievement” is a well documented trait of great entrepreneurs.  Interestingly, it’s also a key trait of solo athletes.  So – this concept fits together nicely.

    Reply

    0

    's avatar - Go to profile

    @mattmireles· 43 minutes ago

    Right. Clearly “the need for achievement” is gonna be part of what drives any athlete and any powerful biz exec, but it’s the solo part that separates the entrepreneur from the rest.

    Reply

    4 replies · active 19 minutes ago

    +1

    Brad Feld's avatar - Go to profile

    Brad Feld 95p· 41 minutes ago

    Actually, “need for achievement” isn’t a key driver for many business execs.  It seems to be a characteristic that stands out in a special way for entrepreneurs and athletes.  The powerful business exec is often motivated by thinks like “power”, “fame”, “recognition”, and “money”. [Emphasis added]


    style=”font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: 0px !important; margin-top: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; padding-top: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; text-indent: 0px; display: block; background-image: url(http://s.intensedebate.com/themes/universal/images/idc-transparent-090716-2.png); background-repeat: no-repeat; background-attachment: initial; -webkit-background-clip: initial; -webkit-background-origin: initial; background-color: initial; float: left; height: 20px; width: 9px; background-position: -516px -839px; “>
    Reply

    0

    's avatar - Go to profile

    @mattmireles· 34 minutes ago

    Hmf. Wow. Crazy. I never thought about “achievement” that way. That explains so much. Something inside me has always valued and pushed for accomplishing something real, but I’ve never been able to put it into words or been able to explain it that way to others. Where are you getting this stuff from? I wanna read it!

    Reply

    +1

    Brad Feld's avatar - Go to profile

    Brad Feld 95p· 26 minutes ago

    The classic reference for this stuff is Ed Roberts (MIT Professors) book – Entrepreneurs in High-Technology: Lessons from MIT and Beyond (Oxford University Press, 1991).  Here’s a link to Ed’s bio -http://mitsloan.mit.edu/faculty/detail.php?in_sps… />

    Reply

    0

    's avatar - Go to profile

    @mattmireles· 19 minutes ago

    Thanks dude!

    Reply



  5. Location, Mobile and a Business Model for the New York Times

    December 24, 2009 by Matt Mireles

    I was chatting over coffee today with Jim Schachter of the NY Times, updating him on Speakertext's progress and talking about the divide between what NYT has done w journalism on the web vs what NYT has done with the business of journalism on web. We got on the topic of iPhones and I threw something out there that I want to expand on and share with you all…

    The New York Times iPhone app should offer location-based Starbucks coupons. Here's how it would work:

    • Each time someone opens up the NYT iPhone app, the app would find the user's location via GPS
    • Based on the user's location, the app would direct him/her to the nearest Starbucks, and render both the user's and the Starbucks location on a map via the Google Maps API, offering optional turn-by-turn directions
    • At Starbucks, the user could call up the coupon in the app, have it render a unique discount code (or bar code??) full-screen on the phone, and then show the coupon to the cashier in exchange for a $1 discount off of his/her order
    • The Starbucks cashier scans/records the code, which Starbucks tracks in a database
    • The NY Times gets paid a percentage of the total sales
    • Users who don't like Starbucks can opt-out of the coupon offers

    Boom. Everyone wins: The user, Starbucks, and the NY Times

    Here's why it makes sense: Starbucks and the NYT have a lot of overlap in terms of customer demographics. People also like to hangout and read the NYT at Starbucks. Both are national brands, and now that the NYT has an iPhone app, both physically ubiquitous.

    And it would be WAY better than the current stupid Mastercard nag screeen they've got going on.


  6. Openness, Evil and Google

    December 22, 2009 by Matt Mireles

    Chris Dixon has a great post today on Google's hypocrisy regarding openness. I think the title says it all: Google should open source what actually matters: their search ranking algorithm. His focus is not so much that keeping secrets is bad per se, but that telling everyone else to open up while they do not is totally hypocritical. 

    Hypocritical, but brilliantly Machiavellian. As I wrote in the comments:

    "Don't be evil" is an impossible yet convenient mantra. Having power means you gotta be willing to protect your interests, which they clearly are, and invariably there is some trade off between what is good for users, the world and Google. That said, it is very good for Google to have its users believe that it has their interests and their interests alone at heart. In fact, the whole sanctimony play is quite Machiavellian. 

    Well played, GOOG. Well played.

    My point is that Google is trying to say their interests totally align with users & the world at large. That is a lie–a convenient lie and one that makes people & employees feel good about themselves, but a lie nonetheless.


  7. Seizing Opportunity

    December 22, 2009 by Matt Mireles

    Mark Suster has been killing it lately over at Both Sides of the Table. This gem is from a post entitled  "What Makes an Entrepreneur: Perspiration."

    For every person who comes into my office with a good idea I respond, “Don’t worry about your failure, worry about your success.  If you fail, you move on.  But if your good idea pops big time then trust me there will be three PhDs from Stanford sharing a cheap apartment in San Jose working around the clock to beat you.  They’ll be eating Ramen (OK, I usually say Taco Bell, but that’s just me …) every night and saving their pennies to pour into the company.”  You’ll get over your failed company.  You’ll never get over coming up with a great idea, getting initial traction and watching someone else get all the glory (and financial returns).

    It may be unfair, but it’s the reality of capitalism. 

    This reminded me of an experience I had back when I was fighting forest fires. It was the Summer of 2004, just before I moved to New York and started studying at Columbia. My group, the Modoc Interagency Hotshot Crew, had been deployed to Alaska to fight a half-million acre fire just outside of Fairbanks. Our mission was to keep the fire from burning down the city. 

    When you have a 500,000 acre fire burning in rugged terrain, you can't just whip out a big hose and spray the thing down. Instead, you conduct burnout operations–essentially, you light backfires off of a perimeter of roads and bulldozer lines that burn all the unburned materials inside the perimeter and stop the fire dead in its tracks (cuz there's nothing more to burn). At least that's the theory.

    My boss was a guy named Greg Keller (aka the Old Man), an old hotshot from way back. Burning was his favorite thing in the world. If he was in tech, imagine what Steve Ballmer would be like if he dropped everything and became the project manager for Google Wave. He was confident, experienced, and aggressive. 

    Three days into our deployment (we'd work 16 hour days for 14+ days straight, then get 2 days off before starting over again),the Old Man pitched the fire's senior management on a major burnout operation that would keep the fire out of Fairbanks. The weather forecast showed 4 days worth of perfect conditions. And of course, he volunteered us to lead the operation.

    The fire's Management Team balked. No way. Too Risky. If we couldn't hold it, they said, the fire would make a B-line for Fairbanks.

    Everyday for the next seven days, Greg begged them to let us burn. After seeing six days of good weather go by and realizing the forecast was for a dramatic worsening of conditions that day and then the next few days after that, they relented. "But go slow," they instructed him.

    e="font-size: 15px; ">Slow, however, was not in Greg Keller's vocabulary. 

    And so we burned. On one side, there was a forest filled with 50 foot, tinder-dry spruce trees behind which was a massive fire; on the other, a forest of similar dimensions, behind which was the largest town in Alaska. Separating them as a dirt road. We were on that dirt road. 

    Slow lasted 20min. 

    "Alright guys," the Old Man commanded over the radio, "it's time to put the hammer down. Push it."

    And so, the four guys who had been walking slowly in the woods, dripping fire here and there, broke into a sprint, leaving a trail of lit gasoline behind them. Pretty soon, there was a wall of 50-75ft flames along the road. My job was to watch the stuff that wasn't burning and wasn't supposed to burn. 

    Radiant heat poured across the road. Goddamn, i thought, i need some cover. 


    Looking up, I could see a giant smoke column forming. As long as it was pointing toward the main fire, we were in good shape.

    A few minutes later I heard the distinct pitter-patter of rain drops hitting the ground. Intense, hard rain. That's weird, I thought. Something hot landed on my neck, then my ear. "Oww fuck!" I yelled. My skin was burning. 

    Shouts of "Fire!" came from up and down the line. When I looked up, I could see 20, maybe 30 little fires just in my immediate area. The wind had shifted. Our column was pointing the wrong way.

    I ran around desperately trying to put out each little fire. In the distance, I could hear the thwap-thwap-thwap of approaching helicopters. Chainsaws revved. A water-dropping blackhawk sprayed us down. But pretty quickly, the little fires became bigger fires–too big to put out by hand. Smoke filled the air.

    "Let's get the fuck out of here!" someone yelled. And so we did. 

    Over the radio, a helicopter pilot muttered "Modoc really fucked this one up. Say goodbye to Fairbanks."

    Our reinforcements proved useless. The fire went on a tear, ultimately burning into an old, unmarked dynamite cache. The explosion shook my bowels and knocked my Captain to the ground. No one was hurt, luckily. 

    The town didn't burn and I didn't die, luckily, but we both came close. At the end of the day, the Old Man gathered us 'round and gave a little speech that has stuck with me ever since.

    "There's seeing opportunity," he said, "and there's seizing opportunity. A week ago, we saw a great opportunity, but we didn't seize it. We waited. And waited. By the time we decided to act, the world around us–the weather, the circumstances–had changed and the opportunity that we had originally seen so clearly was gone. But we went for it anyway and fucked ourselves in the process."

    "Let this be a lesson to you: If you see an opportunity, you gotta seize it. You gotta do it right away. Because if you don't, it will disappear, and no matter how hard you try, you can't get it back."
     


  8. Hiring & The Benefits of Radical Transparency

    December 19, 2009 by Matt Mireles

    This post is a follow-on to The Scrappy Startup: Asset or Liability?

    TechCrunch has a great post today by Vivek Wadhwa:
    Stealth Startups, Get Over Yourselves: Nobody Cares About Your Secrets
    .  

    The essence of the article is that operating in stealth usually involves a shitty trade off. Operating in stealth offers protection against the risk of others stealing your idea. In exchange, you lose the opportunity to talk with customers, suppliers, investors and smart people outside of your organization. As he puts it:

     Learning what a customer needs is an iterative process. You try something, get feedback. Both you and your customer learn more and you try again. You keep doing this until you have something which is so compelling that the customer will pay money to have it—that’s when you know you have a killer product. But you can’t get feedback if you’re in stealth. You only have yourself to talk to. 

    Most entrepreneurs say they are in stealth because they are worried about competitors stealing their ideas. This can be a risk if you have such a simple idea that just by hearing it, someone can replicate it. If this is the case, then you do have a lot to worry about. But even in this case, what will ultimately make the difference between success and failure isn’t your idea but your ability to execute and dominate your market very fast. You need a superb management team including top notch marketing and sales staff, great industry connections, and deep-pocked investors. You aren’t going to get any of these things by staying locked up in your basement.  

    I couldn’t agree more! But there’s one other group that the scrappy entrepreneur needs to talk to and attract: Engineers! 

    Unless you have money, it’s really hard to get talented people to join your crazy, against-all-odds venture. And unless you have talented engineers on your team, it’s hard to get money. Very much a chicken v egg problem. 

    The solution? Radical transparency

    At the same Columbia Job Fair that I wrote about in my previous post about The Scrappy Startup: Asset or Liability?, I did something fairly radical for a pre-launch startup: I wrote a five-page explanation of our product vision (only some of which had been executed) and our business plans and gave it to every engineer I met or that came to my table. Plus, I answered any and all questions they had.

    Mind you, this was an Engineer job fair–these are people who could actually steal and execute all our ideas.
    The end result? Even though I missed half the job fair because I was still writing/printing out our propaganda, I left with 150 resumes and access to some absolutely amazing talent. We ended up hiring two guys we met there, and may still hire more. 

    Now, I’m learning all this shit as i go along like anyone else, and I don’t claim special knowledge. However, I’ve thought a lot about why this strategy actually worked. 

    Here’s the key lessons: 

    #1 I showed up in a T-shirt & jeans, which is to say we embraced our startupness and wore it with pride. This doesn’t happen at most Ivy League career fairs. 

    #2 We made it clear that we were looking for generalists who could solve problems fast and learn quickly and we set the bar low in terms of experience. <b>Young, talented, and hungry? SpeakerText is the place for you!</b> This, I’m gonna guess, attracted a lot of people and created buzz. 

    #3 Our product description and plans were aspirational, they laid out a vision of a better Internet, and by implication, a better world. We laid out big, hairy, audacious goals and offered prospects a slice of the action. 

     #4 This is perhaps the most important point: We demonstrated trust, and in doing so, earned their trust. More than anything, being secretive, being stealth and making people sign NDAs up the wazoo sends a message that you don’t trust them, that you think they might fuck you. And when people get that vibe, they assume (consciously or not) that you yourself are not trustworthy, that you might fuck them. This is not the message you want to send to people you’re gonna ask to commit to a journey filled with hardship and that will probably fail. 

    As they say, you want missionaries, not mercenaries. 



  9. SpeakerText to Launch at Jan. NY Tech Meetup

    December 17, 2009 by Matt Mireles

    SpeakerText-Logo1-small 

    This just in…

    SpeakerText, the company I founded in October 2008 amidst the global economic apocalypse, will be launching on stage in front of 700 people at the Jan 5, 2010 New York Tech Meetup. Get your tickets now.


  10. The Scrappy Startup: Asset or Liability?

    December 17, 2009 by Matt Mireles

    Mark Suster had a great post recently on "What Makes an Entrepreneur" and the role of street smarts, the need for a willingness to defy social conventions and how elite education and employers can hurt entrepreneurs. I was riffing in the comments about my dream of going up against Silver Spoon Competitors and ended up explaining how we recruit engineers at SpeakerText.

    As the CEO, the key thing that I've realized is that it's not enough
    for me to have this mindset, but that I need to build a team that
    shares the scrappy mindset. And so when I went recruiting at Columbia's
    engineering job fair, I highlighted the risk involved in our recruiting
    propaganda. Here's what I wrote:

    SpeakerText is an early stage
    venture. We have been self-financed up to now and have no plans to
    raise outside capital until after we have our product in the hands of
    real users…We have big plans for SpeakerText and we’re going to need
    high quality people to turn these plans into a reality, but the road
    ahead contains many obstacles and unknowns. The opportunity is great, but so is the risk. If thinking about this fact makes you excited (in a good way), then we want to hear from you.

    And
    you know what, even though all i had was some printouts, my table was
    packed with people. I left with about 150 resumes, including some from
    really unbelievable candidates. We hired the top 2 people as
    freelancers and bought them iPhones as compensation. I'm talking
    co-founder quality guys. Now we're prepping to bring these guys on
    permanently and give them equity.

    This got me thinking. All the startup blogs say that finding high quality people is so key, but they never address how to find these hidden geniuses when you've got no cash. Well, here's what I learned from all this : Startups should embrace their scrappy startup-ness and wear it like a badge of honor.
    Turn the fact that you're undercapitalized and going up against huge
    odds into a challenge, a sexy adventure for the brave, heroic few who
    seek to join you.

    A good analogy is the Marine Corps: they don't offer
    you money for college or life skills or any of that bullshit. The
    Marine Corps offers to kick your ass, pay you dirt, and turn you
    into a fighting machine. They take what others might see as a liability
    (sub-standard fringe benefits) and turn it into an asset. That's their sales pitch. And they
    get better people for it.

    There's a lesson here for startups: Be yourself, be scrappy and be proud. Make scrappiness sexy. Sell the adventure and you'll get exactly the right people.

    Reblog this post [with Zemanta]