This would be a very useful and pleasurable afternoon drive:
Video Bugatti Veyron at top speed - bugatti, top, gear, 407, germany
If anyone ever needs me to take their million dollar leisure-mobile out for a spin, I'm your man!
Saturday, March 10, 2007
Sunday, March 04, 2007
GO UGLY EARLY? EARLY STAGE FUNDING: WHAT IS THE NEW UGLY?
When I was starting my last company an experienced founder of several companies offered me the advice "go ugly early." He was applying it to the money raising process and extrapolated the "affect" to the rest of the early-stage business approaches.
In terms of business approaches he felt like you need one hyper-focused idea that represents the business and then super-rapid iteration on that focused "nut" until you get all the info you need to make the larger business "work."
I was thinking about how AvantGo was founded...(I was NOT a founder there)...when it was founded it was Bombardier software...and it was little but crossword puzzles on a Palm device. They rapidly iterated, failed quickly, and even got a cease and desist from the "Bombardier" company (http://www.brp.com/): the international recreational vehicle company. Oops...wrong name.
Of course AvantGo was on an early path to a half million bucks and 100,000 users by that time...so a re-name was fitting anyways...but they knew enough to know that at that level no one really cared about what they were doing until they were REALLY doing it.
The worse thing a start-up can do is pretty itself up for the world long before it is anything. There are many famous cases of the 100 user / 2$ dollar in revenue "branded" start-up. Yikes...that is a scary place to be for the founders: high expectations with low delivery of results.
Anyways, the "go ugly early" strategy for funding is a process that used to mean Angel money or a third tier small VC. But both of these types of funders are no longer "ugly" and here in the valley have built their own vogue. To be a super-angel here in the valley is now a calling card. Super-angels are rock stars...at least in the start-up community. I differentiate super-angels from traditional angels based on capacity and participation. Typical angels will do $50-200k a super angel will do $1-5 million.
To be funded by a seed fund or angel group carries HUGE value...
Consider the popularity of:
Band of Angels
Founder's Fund
Garage Ventures
Sand Hill Angels
The Angel Forum / Halo Fund
And lesser known but high value money such as:
Rembrandt Ventures
Bay Partners (Seed Program)
Nekei
Lightspeed (Gemini Fund)
Inspiration Ventures
Catamount Ventures
Leapfrog Ventures
Crosslink Capital
Rocket Ventures
Charles River (Quickstart)
I won't list super-angels for obvious reasons. But the classic example of a super-angel is a guy like Paul Allen, of course he may need a category all his own. But for the naive reader a quick seach on Allen wiill give you the gist.
In this listing I am thinking of very early stage money--either pre-revenue or micro-revenue stage start-up monies, and I exclude the big boy brands such as Sequoia, Menlo, Trinity, etc... They can do seed when the feel like it...but would hardly be considered, primarily, seed stage venture capitalists.
Of course all of the typical caveats apply...even if you are brilliant, and technical, and you have identified a market opportunity in a sufficiently large market space and you are loosely capable of communicating the investment opportunity to a seed investor--even then you probably won't get funded.
You probably won't get funded because the investor can't hear you for about 100 different reasons as varied as they don't like the way you dress to the state of their current fund to what they ate for breakfast.
If you are a skilled entrepreneur, you already know this: no investor's "no" means anything if YOU really understand the value of your business.
Here is what I mean by that:
When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind. It may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to the stage of science.
Lord Kelvin
(Stolen from Peter Rip's site)
Since early stage seed is no longer 'ugly' but vogue, founders and entrepreneurs now must find even wider ranges of "funding" their start-ups. What are the new, low-profile ways to get a start-up funded? What is the new ugly?
In terms of business approaches he felt like you need one hyper-focused idea that represents the business and then super-rapid iteration on that focused "nut" until you get all the info you need to make the larger business "work."
I was thinking about how AvantGo was founded...(I was NOT a founder there)...when it was founded it was Bombardier software...and it was little but crossword puzzles on a Palm device. They rapidly iterated, failed quickly, and even got a cease and desist from the "Bombardier" company (http://www.brp.com/): the international recreational vehicle company. Oops...wrong name.
Of course AvantGo was on an early path to a half million bucks and 100,000 users by that time...so a re-name was fitting anyways...but they knew enough to know that at that level no one really cared about what they were doing until they were REALLY doing it.
The worse thing a start-up can do is pretty itself up for the world long before it is anything. There are many famous cases of the 100 user / 2$ dollar in revenue "branded" start-up. Yikes...that is a scary place to be for the founders: high expectations with low delivery of results.
Anyways, the "go ugly early" strategy for funding is a process that used to mean Angel money or a third tier small VC. But both of these types of funders are no longer "ugly" and here in the valley have built their own vogue. To be a super-angel here in the valley is now a calling card. Super-angels are rock stars...at least in the start-up community. I differentiate super-angels from traditional angels based on capacity and participation. Typical angels will do $50-200k a super angel will do $1-5 million.
To be funded by a seed fund or angel group carries HUGE value...
Consider the popularity of:
Band of Angels
Founder's Fund
Garage Ventures
Sand Hill Angels
The Angel Forum / Halo Fund
And lesser known but high value money such as:
Rembrandt Ventures
Bay Partners (Seed Program)
Nekei
Lightspeed (Gemini Fund)
Inspiration Ventures
Catamount Ventures
Leapfrog Ventures
Crosslink Capital
Rocket Ventures
Charles River (Quickstart)
I won't list super-angels for obvious reasons. But the classic example of a super-angel is a guy like Paul Allen, of course he may need a category all his own. But for the naive reader a quick seach on Allen wiill give you the gist.
In this listing I am thinking of very early stage money--either pre-revenue or micro-revenue stage start-up monies, and I exclude the big boy brands such as Sequoia, Menlo, Trinity, etc... They can do seed when the feel like it...but would hardly be considered, primarily, seed stage venture capitalists.
Of course all of the typical caveats apply...even if you are brilliant, and technical, and you have identified a market opportunity in a sufficiently large market space and you are loosely capable of communicating the investment opportunity to a seed investor--even then you probably won't get funded.
You probably won't get funded because the investor can't hear you for about 100 different reasons as varied as they don't like the way you dress to the state of their current fund to what they ate for breakfast.
If you are a skilled entrepreneur, you already know this: no investor's "no" means anything if YOU really understand the value of your business.
Here is what I mean by that:
When you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactory kind. It may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to the stage of science.
Lord Kelvin
(Stolen from Peter Rip's site)
Since early stage seed is no longer 'ugly' but vogue, founders and entrepreneurs now must find even wider ranges of "funding" their start-ups. What are the new, low-profile ways to get a start-up funded? What is the new ugly?
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Saturday, February 17, 2007
TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN: JAMAN'S CONSUMER iFILM SUBSCRIPTION SERVICE AND TAILWIND'S ENTERPRISE CLASS ENCRYPTION AND SUBSCRIPTION MODEL
Jaman launched at Demo 2007 this year. Jaman is a system that allows users access to online film content for specific period of time. The trick of delivery and controlling online film is straight forward. This process of brokering and controlling digital content is not a new one. TailWind launched at Demo 2004. Same technology--different market (enterprise versus consumer) and different branding (traditional enterprise class software vs social network).
Consumer:
If I pay for access to a movie and my Internet access goes out am I screwed?
Well, no, you are allowed to download it to your machine so you have it whether you are offline or online.
Filmmaker:
You mean one person can pay to watch my film for a week and they can download it and share it with everyone else in the world? No one else would ever pay!
No. That is not the case. The download is on the user's machine but the download is encrypted and obfuscated so that the user cannot copy the raw files. In addition the encrypted files are encoded in such a way that they will only play back in Jaman or TailWind's player. Not only that but the player is so tightly wound around your movie that when the user's subscription has expired the movie is sizzled from memory: even if the PC is disconnected from the Internet.
Consumer:
You mean I can't copy the film to CD nor upload it to YouTube?
Correct. However you can share the movie with other people who have the proper permissions. In TailWind's system, if one user has downloaded the encrypted movie from a server in NYC to his machine in Brazil and his neighbor in Brazil has also subscribed to that movie...his neighbor can get it from him rather than from NYC. Again this is so long as the nieghbor is part of the TailWind network.
Also, in the TailWind system we can distribute CDs and USB devices that hold the movie but can only be played by users who have permsission from the TailWind network to playback that content/movie. The USB device is otherwise useless to anyone else.
Filmmaker:
Okay...so what you are telling me is that I can give my film to, let say, Krist Jake's Ocean Film Festival in San Francisco, and they will play it in their theaters and charge 10 bucks to the audience memebers. AND they will make it available for download from their web site? And they will charge for the access--say 10 bucks. And they will end access to my film when the film festival is over. They will end access to my film even if it has been downloaded and even if that computer is no longer connected to the Internet.
Yes. Correct, yes, yes, and yes. Exactly. The keys are the nature of the "policy" associated with the original download of the movie. The player enforces the subscription duration whether or not the computer is connected or not.
I should also add that, at least in a TailWind network, TailWind tracks how many times your movie was played on that user's machine. And for how long each time. In this way you know all the niggly details about how long they watch at each sitting. What parts they repeat. And so forth.
Consumer:
So Jaman and TailWind do the same thing?
No. TailWind's technology is actually a far more secure system, with more deeply developed tiers of tracking data and policy setting and vertical enterprise applications. Jaman has clearly cornered a niche where social networks of filmgoers crossect with online/offline viewing of films at film festivals. Clearly the Jaman consumer approach has groomed their use model to be user freindly and pleasing to the eye and they have integrated features that highlight human to human interaction in combination with their film delivery. I think of it like watching a movie in Webex.
Filmmaker:
So should I trust Jaman?
I don't see why not. I mean no system is perfect and if someone wants to set up a video recorder to record the screen as the movie plays back there is nothing you can do about that. In fact--how many pirated movies happen exactly that way in a movie theater? Quite a few. Of course doing so in the comfort of your own home and then downloading it to your iPod is one helluva alot easier than trying to set up a video camera in a public theater.
Also, most iFilm ain't got to worry about being pirated. Most indie films are just trying to get more people than their wife and mother to even sit through their project. At a slightly higher level, the films of the San Francisco International probably do need some level of security...most of these filmakers classify as independent but if they are in SFIFF they are probably "famous" by most indie filmmakers standards.
I wish Jaman the best of luck...I deeply understand their space and wish them well.
And TailWind? Will TailWind ever field a consumer-based model? Hard to say...depends on if we think we can make money at it. If we don't see money in it...we'll stick to the enterprise. Hoorah.
[For folks deeply interested in the technology behind the distribution of online film: from Revver, to YouTube, to CustomFlix and so forth do check out the CinemaTech blog: http://cinematech.blogspot.com/ & specifically, http://www.scottkirsner.com/webvid/gettingpaid.htm. Scott Kirsner has done alot of good work in this arena. I met Scott at the IIFF held San Francisco Townhall Meeting, (February 2007), Thursday, Feb 15, 2007. Scott is a repeat presenter there..and he was pretty much the only speaker of value at the event. The rest was fluff.]
Consumer:
If I pay for access to a movie and my Internet access goes out am I screwed?
Well, no, you are allowed to download it to your machine so you have it whether you are offline or online.
Filmmaker:
You mean one person can pay to watch my film for a week and they can download it and share it with everyone else in the world? No one else would ever pay!
No. That is not the case. The download is on the user's machine but the download is encrypted and obfuscated so that the user cannot copy the raw files. In addition the encrypted files are encoded in such a way that they will only play back in Jaman or TailWind's player. Not only that but the player is so tightly wound around your movie that when the user's subscription has expired the movie is sizzled from memory: even if the PC is disconnected from the Internet.
Consumer:
You mean I can't copy the film to CD nor upload it to YouTube?
Correct. However you can share the movie with other people who have the proper permissions. In TailWind's system, if one user has downloaded the encrypted movie from a server in NYC to his machine in Brazil and his neighbor in Brazil has also subscribed to that movie...his neighbor can get it from him rather than from NYC. Again this is so long as the nieghbor is part of the TailWind network.
Also, in the TailWind system we can distribute CDs and USB devices that hold the movie but can only be played by users who have permsission from the TailWind network to playback that content/movie. The USB device is otherwise useless to anyone else.
Filmmaker:
Okay...so what you are telling me is that I can give my film to, let say, Krist Jake's Ocean Film Festival in San Francisco, and they will play it in their theaters and charge 10 bucks to the audience memebers. AND they will make it available for download from their web site? And they will charge for the access--say 10 bucks. And they will end access to my film when the film festival is over. They will end access to my film even if it has been downloaded and even if that computer is no longer connected to the Internet.
Yes. Correct, yes, yes, and yes. Exactly. The keys are the nature of the "policy" associated with the original download of the movie. The player enforces the subscription duration whether or not the computer is connected or not.
I should also add that, at least in a TailWind network, TailWind tracks how many times your movie was played on that user's machine. And for how long each time. In this way you know all the niggly details about how long they watch at each sitting. What parts they repeat. And so forth.
Consumer:
So Jaman and TailWind do the same thing?
No. TailWind's technology is actually a far more secure system, with more deeply developed tiers of tracking data and policy setting and vertical enterprise applications. Jaman has clearly cornered a niche where social networks of filmgoers crossect with online/offline viewing of films at film festivals. Clearly the Jaman consumer approach has groomed their use model to be user freindly and pleasing to the eye and they have integrated features that highlight human to human interaction in combination with their film delivery. I think of it like watching a movie in Webex.
Filmmaker:
So should I trust Jaman?
I don't see why not. I mean no system is perfect and if someone wants to set up a video recorder to record the screen as the movie plays back there is nothing you can do about that. In fact--how many pirated movies happen exactly that way in a movie theater? Quite a few. Of course doing so in the comfort of your own home and then downloading it to your iPod is one helluva alot easier than trying to set up a video camera in a public theater.
Also, most iFilm ain't got to worry about being pirated. Most indie films are just trying to get more people than their wife and mother to even sit through their project. At a slightly higher level, the films of the San Francisco International probably do need some level of security...most of these filmakers classify as independent but if they are in SFIFF they are probably "famous" by most indie filmmakers standards.
I wish Jaman the best of luck...I deeply understand their space and wish them well.
And TailWind? Will TailWind ever field a consumer-based model? Hard to say...depends on if we think we can make money at it. If we don't see money in it...we'll stick to the enterprise. Hoorah.
[For folks deeply interested in the technology behind the distribution of online film: from Revver, to YouTube, to CustomFlix and so forth do check out the CinemaTech blog: http://cinematech.blogspot.com/ & specifically, http://www.scottkirsner.com/webvid/gettingpaid.htm. Scott Kirsner has done alot of good work in this arena. I met Scott at the IIFF held San Francisco Townhall Meeting, (February 2007), Thursday, Feb 15, 2007. Scott is a repeat presenter there..and he was pretty much the only speaker of value at the event. The rest was fluff.]
Saturday, February 10, 2007
Caught in the Slop: Mucking my way through the Affiliate Marketing Abyss: CJ, Shareasale, Turn, Linkshare, Clickbank, & Revcube as Step 1
With the launch of BeyondthePod.com I've looked into the value of affiliate marketing. For a new site with a unique business proposition, the best advice I've heard yet is to scrap affiliate marketing entirely. Good advice...but advice that works well in the short term but cramps the business over the long term.
BeyondthePod (BTP) doesn't/can't spiff for purchases of merchandise, but they will spiff for every lead on a user that BTP might get the opportunity pay cash for their iPod. So how do you incent an affiliate to send people to your site that you want to buy from?
From what I can tell, the BTP model would work like lead generation system and spiff the affiliate that generates the lead accordingly. In high enough volume this can be 10 bucks or more. Though in lower volumes, the program spiffs at a much lower dollar value.
So I took a look at a wide variety of programs. CJ is the monster in the market and as far as I can tell, CJ thinks of sites like BTP as bad business, and CJ does pretty much everything they can to not do business with us. I guess in some ways it would be like BeyondthePod implementing SAP--the folks at CJ want accounts like Levis and Coke not start-up brands like BeyondthePod.com. A lower bar version of this type of system is RevCube, but even RevCube is too full service of a shop for my needs today.
So I looked at CPmil stuff at Clickbank and Linkshare. For BTP the model could provide eyeballs but these programs either required that BTP use their commerce system or they couldn't support a lead gen commission structure. Plus a wide variety of folks warned BTP away from the spoofing that happens in these programs when you expose your self via CPmil models.
I've since revisited this...CPmil is not all bad. I think the click through would at least create a marginal affect on page ranks...but the reality that you're paying for non-revenue clicks with little visibility to the desired outcome of lead gen clicks or revenue is a tough sell in a hardcore, move-fast-to-the-bottom-line start-up.
There are new value-add "logarithm" companies like Turn.com. I think they are a no lose proposition, at least while they are in Beta (read: free), to see if they can auto-generate valid value-add affiliate partners. My guess is that the matrixed affiliate-to-offer matching will have better effect than the random grab bag that tends to occur in most affilate systems...but I'll throw in the caveat that it won't be that much better, at least not for new, unique players. I say this, hoping beyond hope, that I am wrong. I also hope that I can implement Turn without its Javascript interfering with Adwords and my affiliate program of choice's cookie/script. I'd like the results it promises...I'm just skeptical.
Shareasale looks like the tightest fit between flexibility, usability, and price for BeyondthePod.com. Of course until BeyondthePod decides to land a series of affiliates that understand how to create conversions in conjunction with the offer at BeyondthePod.com's site, BTP is likely to leech along and bottom feed in low traction affiliates. My guess is that BTP and the high value affiliates will find each other--good business finds good business.
The offer at BTP is incredibly compelling--but how likely is it that the link-and hope-strategists of the more general affiliate marketing world will ever take any time to grock what's at work? Not likely...
My guess is that the key affiliates for BeyondthePod.com will be a tight fit between the iPod economy and the iPod ecosystem of products, services, and social events. Somwhere betwixt the Gizmodo's and the iLounge's and iSkin's and the Podcasters and the PodRippers of the iPod economy a viable opt-in BeyondthePod affilate system will generate serious dinero for the right affiliate or set of affiliates.
I have my own private list of sites i think are a fit...but if you know of a site whose readers that would want to know they could get cash for their used iPod? Let me know...drop me a note in a comment...
Soon to go live, the BTP affiliates program, at http://beyondthepod.com/affiliates/
BeyondthePod (BTP) doesn't/can't spiff for purchases of merchandise, but they will spiff for every lead on a user that BTP might get the opportunity pay cash for their iPod. So how do you incent an affiliate to send people to your site that you want to buy from?
From what I can tell, the BTP model would work like lead generation system and spiff the affiliate that generates the lead accordingly. In high enough volume this can be 10 bucks or more. Though in lower volumes, the program spiffs at a much lower dollar value.
So I took a look at a wide variety of programs. CJ is the monster in the market and as far as I can tell, CJ thinks of sites like BTP as bad business, and CJ does pretty much everything they can to not do business with us. I guess in some ways it would be like BeyondthePod implementing SAP--the folks at CJ want accounts like Levis and Coke not start-up brands like BeyondthePod.com. A lower bar version of this type of system is RevCube, but even RevCube is too full service of a shop for my needs today.
So I looked at CPmil stuff at Clickbank and Linkshare. For BTP the model could provide eyeballs but these programs either required that BTP use their commerce system or they couldn't support a lead gen commission structure. Plus a wide variety of folks warned BTP away from the spoofing that happens in these programs when you expose your self via CPmil models.
I've since revisited this...CPmil is not all bad. I think the click through would at least create a marginal affect on page ranks...but the reality that you're paying for non-revenue clicks with little visibility to the desired outcome of lead gen clicks or revenue is a tough sell in a hardcore, move-fast-to-the-bottom-line start-up.
There are new value-add "logarithm" companies like Turn.com. I think they are a no lose proposition, at least while they are in Beta (read: free), to see if they can auto-generate valid value-add affiliate partners. My guess is that the matrixed affiliate-to-offer matching will have better effect than the random grab bag that tends to occur in most affilate systems...but I'll throw in the caveat that it won't be that much better, at least not for new, unique players. I say this, hoping beyond hope, that I am wrong. I also hope that I can implement Turn without its Javascript interfering with Adwords and my affiliate program of choice's cookie/script. I'd like the results it promises...I'm just skeptical.
Shareasale looks like the tightest fit between flexibility, usability, and price for BeyondthePod.com. Of course until BeyondthePod decides to land a series of affiliates that understand how to create conversions in conjunction with the offer at BeyondthePod.com's site, BTP is likely to leech along and bottom feed in low traction affiliates. My guess is that BTP and the high value affiliates will find each other--good business finds good business.
The offer at BTP is incredibly compelling--but how likely is it that the link-and hope-strategists of the more general affiliate marketing world will ever take any time to grock what's at work? Not likely...
My guess is that the key affiliates for BeyondthePod.com will be a tight fit between the iPod economy and the iPod ecosystem of products, services, and social events. Somwhere betwixt the Gizmodo's and the iLounge's and iSkin's and the Podcasters and the PodRippers of the iPod economy a viable opt-in BeyondthePod affilate system will generate serious dinero for the right affiliate or set of affiliates.
I have my own private list of sites i think are a fit...but if you know of a site whose readers that would want to know they could get cash for their used iPod? Let me know...drop me a note in a comment...
Soon to go live, the BTP affiliates program, at http://beyondthepod.com/affiliates/
Wednesday, February 07, 2007
Check out these Blogs versus iPods numbers across demographics from iMedia
Check out these Blogs versus iPods numbers across demographics from iMedia
See the details here: http://www.imediaconnection.com/content/6105.asp
Any surprises?
See the details here: http://www.imediaconnection.com/content/6105.asp
Any surprises?
My Ipod Economy Web Survey via Survey Monkey
So I'm a Survey Monkey now. Ho hum...always said I would never be one...and here I am. The survey I've postyed is a quick 5-7 questions about iPods. Do drop in on it and take it if you have a minute:
Click here to take my iPod economy survey
Click here to take my iPod economy survey
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)