nPost Blog

Guide to Evaluating Startup Ideas

A great developer I once worked with was kvetching at lunch one day. He’d been working at a well-funded startup for about a year and had come to terms with the fact that the startup was really a pretty dumb idea. He’d wasted a year of his life and had a pile of stock options that weren’t very interesting. His last two jobs had been similar. He asked me a question that, at the time, I didn’t have a good answer for. “How can you possibly know when joining a startup if it’s going to be successful?” In other words, how can you spot a good startup idea?

Since I’ve announced that I’m moving on in the coming weeks/months, I’ve been bombarded with cool offers at existing startups, larger companies, and, of course, I’ve been pondering some of my own startup ideas. So his question which I didn’t really consider very carefully at the time is now one that I’m thinking a LOT about.

So without further ado, here is my “checklist for good startup ideas”. No startup will do great on every aspect of the checklist, but this allows me to put startups/products to a sniff test that I think is pretty darn useful. Note, this list is in rough order of importance.

  1. How deeply do you think the startup will effect people’s lives? Can you imagine them using it every day? Can you imagine them being royally pissed if they couldn’t use it? This can range from utility (gmail) to emotion (twitter), but if a product isn’t in the “I’d rather chew off my own arm than lose it” category for a meaningful percentage of it’s users, it should be a non-starter.
  2. Are the hypotheses that form the basis of the startup tractable? In other words, can test the idea(s) in a short period of time? I’ve talked about the importance of tractability before (hat tip, Ev Williams). Bottom line is that most initial hypotheses are wrong to varying degrees. Twitter was very tractable. Tesla is not. I’ll re-use the money quote from Fred Wilson: “…Of the 26 companies that I consider realized or effectively realized in my personal track record, 17 of them made complete transformations or partial transformations of their businesses between the time we invested and the time we sold. That means there a 2/3 chance you’ll have to significantly reinvent your business between the time you take a venture capital investment and when you exit your business.”
  3. How does the cost-of-acquisition, cost-of-goods-sold (COGS) and revenue-per-customer stack up? Most software startup have a pretty low COGS, so this question generally comes down to, “How much does it cost to buy a customer and how much revenue does that customer represent over their life?” This obviously requires a lot of guesswork early on, but experience is a helluva teacher here. If you haven’t been on the wrong side of this ratio a few times, find a mentor who has. Any way you slice it, you need to fine a “scalable, cost-effective way to get your customer’s attention”. I can’t count the number of startups that aimed squarely at small businesses or “prosumers” with sub-$100 price point and have no idea on how they’re going to buy a customer (other than word of mouth, SEM/SEO, and PR).

    I love extremes here.
    Zynga, Twitter, and Facebook has nailed one extreme– their cost of acquisition is free and nearly infinitely scalable. If you can build a service that grows virally (free and growing customer acquisition), you can focus most of your attention on value creation and revenue-per-user. With a little success there and a little time to let the virus spread, and you can almost not help but succeed. I think it’s hard to overestimate the power of free marketing/customer acquisition.

    There are certainly extremes on the other side. What do you think Oracle’s revenue per customer is? How much can they afford to “buy” a customer for? What about Groupon?

    Pro Tip: If you’re raising angel or Series-A money and you say you’ll be using the proceeds for things like magazine ads and wrappers on busses, you’ve probably already lost.

  4. How MANY lives could you imagine touching in 5 years? This is different than asking about total addressable market (TAM). Craigslist started as a classified ads mailing list for San Francisco. Amazon started selling books. Have some imagination and consider what your company could morph into. Is it interesting enough to justify the opportunity cost and the fact that you’re looking at a drastically reduced salary for 2-5 years?
  5. Is it an invention or re-invention? Hats off to you inventors out there, but I strongly prefer an existing market to creating one from scratch. The companies whose equity I covet didn’t build anything NEW, they just built something BETTER (Google, Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Craigslist, eBay, Zynga etc). In short, the first mover advantage is a crock of shit (most of the time).
  6. Is it worth talking about? Can you tell a story about the product that would make a blogger say, “Holy crap– I could write a story around that that would get tons of links, tweets, and comments?” One of my favorite products is Visual Website Optimizer (it’s a brilliant A/B testing tool). The founder (a great product designer who I’ve had a few conversations with) sent out a barrage of emails to major tech bloggers and heard nothing but crickets (he appealed to Hacker News readers for advice– I think the discussion is interesting). His fundamental problem is that he doesn’t have a story that will drive links/tweets/comments/pageviews– all of the metrics that pro-bloggers care about. Oftentimes, clever PR people can create a story out of something that has nothing to do with the product (see: 37Signals & Zappos), but it certainly helps a lot if your product is funny, controversial, unusually useful, or inherently exhibitionist.
  7. Are you passionate about the end-game? This one is hard to rank. All of the points above assume you are a “mercenary” founder (maximizing for opportunity) rather than a “missionary” founder (passionate about a vision that keeps you awake at night). Great video on that point here. Regardless of whether your end game is a vision realized or a big pile of cash (or some combination thereof), you need to be passionate about it… You need to have something that powers you through the bumps in the road where a rational person would cut and run. Both motivations are dangerous, by the way. If you’re motivated by cash, you might have a hard time sticking through tough times when you realize what you’ve built might only be a single or a double. If you’re motivated by vision, you might not like the pivots your startup needs to take to survive/succeed.
  8. Is the market moving in the right direction? Can you imagine there being a LOT of growth and consolidation in the next 5-10 years? I just saw my first RedBox the other day (it’s a cool box outside of supermarkets that allow you to rent DVDs). They are currently on the wrong side of a market shift away from physical media– can you imagine people renting DVDs in 10 years? I think this one is particularly hard to get right (which is why it’s low on the list).

That’s my list. Am I missing something that’s on yours?

Tech Support *is* sales



Tweet this!

david-beckham-shirtless

You probably think of “tech support” as the bottom of the food chain. “Shit flows downhill” and all that. After all:

  • Tech support deals with insane customers.
  • Tech support answers the phone; a job even salesmen don’t want.
  • Tech support keeps angry customers at bay while having no power to effect change.

Yep, that sounds lowly. Dismal too — how would you like to deal with an irate voice screaming at you when you know how to fix the problem but lack the authority to do it? This is a masochistic job for a poor slob with no other job prospects, right?

If this is your attitude, your conception of tech support is completely backwards and you’re missing out on important channels for marketing, product development, and sales.

The unexpected face of your company

We’ve all been jarred by someone’s voice not matching their picture. Take English footballer David Beckham, the quintessential picture of manly sportif — washboard abs, ex-captain of the English national team, and married to Posh Spice.

But then he opens his mouth. It’s like Kermit the Frog got kicked in the balls. (Oh, sorry UK folk, I mean kicked in the bollocks.) It’s so unexpected it’s the only thing you remember. Of the 3,204,523 pub conversations where someone said “Have you heard him speak?” maybe only 17 could tell you what he actually said.

You assume your home page is the public face of your company, but what happens when you open your mouth? What happens when your bullet points collide with your behavior?

For most of your customers, tech support is the only human interaction they’ll have with you. Are you really going to leave that up to your worst-treated, least-paid, least-qualified employees?

Tech support is sales

At Smart Bear we made millions of dollars in both individual and enterprise sales without “sales.”

Well, at least without the usual definition of “sales” — a collection of processes, personalities, and management single-mindedly focussed on hauling in revenue on a quarterly schedule.

How did we get six-figure deals without playing golf or using Salesforce? Simple: Our tech support was sales.

You could say the purpose of tech support is to answer questions or to unstick people who are confused, but I say the purpose of tech support is to make your customers fantastic at their jobs, which happen to involve your product. (Yes, I’m flagrantly paraphrasing the legendary Kathy Sierra, but the idea applies as much to tech support as to product development.)

So this means you don’t just help them locate a command in the menubar, you find out what they’re trying to accomplish and help them do that. You don’t just explain a feature but help them use the result to impress their boss. You don’t just apologize because you don’t have the feature they want, you help them work around it and be successful anyway. You know your product and problem-space better than your customers, so it’s not that hard to make them far more successful than they would be stumbling around without calling tech support.

Enabling your customers isn’t just about your product, but rather your entire company. Make your customer awesome and she’ll give you money so she can keep being awesome.

That’s sales.

A pleasant surprise

Everyone’s stereotype of tech support is negative. Oh the tales:

  • Ask tech support how to change the font and they’ll tell you to reboot your laptop.
  • Ask tech support to change your billing address and they up-sell you on three things you don’t want.
  • Calling tech support requires a GPS to navigate the labyrinth of menu options (which may have changed), wait-queues, and typing in your account number 3 times “for security purposes,” as if someone who stole your account number is incapable of typing it more than once.

When your customers expect a turd sandwich and you deliver a turkey club with chipotle mayonnaise, you earn major bonus points, like users twittering about your service, people switching to your service because of tech support, or customers not only following your Tweets but instructing their followers to do the same.

Oh look! Apparently tech support is a better “social media outreach” program than hiring interns to spray comments on random blogs. Are you surprised?

They say “under-promise, over-deliver,” and tech support has “under-promise” built in! Sure super-fantastic tech support is best, but even if you merely act like a human being you’re already ahead. If you just answer email with a non-automated response you’re killing it.

Why pass up such an easy opportunity to thrill a customer? Isn’t “a pleasant surprise” too rare in business, and don’t you want to be known as the company where it happens every day?

The closest thing to getting “outside the building” while staying inside the building

The Internet is abuzz with Steve Blank’s phrase that everything you need to know about your customers is “outside the building,” meaning that real customer development means talking to folks face to face, seeing their problems in the wild, and watching their faces react to your pitch, not brainstorming around a whiteboard and twiddling the font size in your PowerPoints. And I agree!

Still, for the Work-a-preneur or the bootstrapper with no travel budget it’s hard to get outside the building. Yes you should try as much as you can — it’s worth it — but what about the other 94% of the time that you’re at your desk, by which I mean the coffeeshop table closest to the power outlet that isn’t loose?

Tech support is the next-best thing. Tech support is where people complain about what’s not working, what’s missing, and what’s confusing. But it’s not enough to just catalog problems!

The insights lurk in the meta-questions. If someone’s confused, for example, the immediate task is to set them straight, but there’s valuable product development to be had:

  • What caused the confusion in the first place?
  • Is my customer’s world-view different from mine?
  • Is our terminology wrong?
  • Are we using the wrong metaphors?
  • Do I need to optimize the new-user experience instead of the expert-user experience?

Those are tactical questions stemming from the immediate problem, but then there’s even more interesting strategic questions:

  • Does this hiccup belie a customer pain-point I didn’t know existed but I can solve?
  • Is there enough evidence of a conceptual mis-match that I should pivot?
  • Is there a new product idea here?
  • If they’re abusing my product to get what they really want, can I provide what they really want from the start?

This last line of questioning is exactly how Smart Bear came to be a company about peer code review and not “version control data mining.” If I hadn’t paid attention attention to these meta-questions, you wouldn’t be reading this right now. Yes, it’s that critical.

To answer these you have to go back and forth with customers to hack into the root cause. You have to see hundreds of emails so you get a gut-feel for what customers are experiencing — something you can’t get from a Incident Summary Report or somesuch automation.

Tech support is the closest, most honest chance for product development — certainly more straightforward than squeezing it through traditional “sales.” Here’s where real users discover and report on your product.

Are you listening, or just throwing it away?

What else?

What else can tech support do if you’re willing to give it the attention and power it deserves? Or do you think I’m wrong and it really is better to have $1/hour people protect you from those inane customers? Leave a comment and join the conversation.



Tweet this!

Solving the "marketplace" business model



Tweet this!

A sizable percentage of Capital Factory startup submissions take the form of the “marketplace.” In fact, 3 of the 10 selected companies from the past two years have followed this business model.

3928

Marketplace companies are notoriously difficult to start, so I’m constantly amazed that so many entrepreneurs chose this route. Maybe it’s the “go big or go home” mentality? If there’s a business plan less likely to succeed than a restaurant, this has to be it.

But it’s not impossible; here’s some of the pitfalls and how to address them.

A marketplace is born

A “Marketplace” connects buyers and sellers who otherwise have trouble finding each other.

Cow salt and pepper shakersLet’s say someone owns a two miniature porcelain cows ironically dressed as farmers and performing the very functional task of salt and pepper shaker. Of course the owner wants to sell these (because now he’s sober), but how?

Halfway around the world, someone else is proudly admiring their collection of 167 cow-themed salt and pepper shakers which, 82 years from now, will be on an episode of Antiques Roadshow where it will be valued at…. (I won’t spoil the surprise!). She wishes she could expand her collection but how?

eBay converts these complementary desires into transactions. It’s a “marketplace” in that they “create a market” in which sellers connect with buyers because eBay provides a sufficient quantity of both.

More examples:

  • Priceline connects leftover rooms to bargain hunters.
  • Expedia connects airplane ticket buyers to fares and routes.
  • uShip connects specialty shipping companies with people who need to ship things UPS doesn’t accept (like motorcycles or horses).
  • SpareFoot (a Capital Factory graduate) connects available public storage units with people trying to find units online.

These companies typically make money either by charging sellers for listing (akin to the yellow pages) or by charging a sales commission (akin to a “finder’s fee”). It’s easiest to charge sellers because they’re the ones trying to make money.

So what’s the problem?

The hardest part of any business is the beginning, but this is especially true for marketplace companies because you have a classic chicken-egg problem.

Specifically, buyers don’t visit the site because you’re obscure and lack inventory, but sellers aren’t interested in listing because there’s no buyers.

It’s worse than it sounds because you also have what I call the double company problem: You’re trying to build two companies at the same time, and both have to succeed or you’re dead.

For example, Priceline has to sell each hotel chain on the value of their service, create integrations between hotel management systems and their database (in real time), and negotiate legal and financial details. At the same time, they also run television ads (with celebrities), are expert at SEO and AdWords, built a user-friendly web site, and do tech support for consumers.

These are distinct operations — different clients, different technology, different sales process — almost like two separate companies. The effort is doubled and the risk is quadrupled. After all, if you get sellers but not buyers (or vice versa), the marketplace is a failure!

This all sounds dismal, but here’s a handful of strategies to overcome the obstacles.

Forget automation: Do everything manually

One of the allures of the marketplace business is that once you reach critical mass, you should be able to “sit back, relax, and let the money roll in.” Automation is the key; buyers and sellers have to find each other and perform transactions without requiring additional human beings.

But just because automation is the goal doesn’t mean it’s the way to start. The good thing about automation is it’s efficient; the bad thing is you cannot learn because you’re not involved in the process. And at the start, learning is where you should be spending most of your time!

For example, when SpareFoot began they weren’t sure how to charge storage companies. Should it be a $20/month listing fee? Or a flat “finders fee” per lead? Or a commission on leads which convert to sales? Could they charge extra for a “premium” listing? Should purchases go through SpareFoot so they can extract their cut, or should they bill storage companies separately?

If they had picked a strategy and automated it, there’s a low chance they would have picked the right one. All that time spent writing and debugging code, worthless.

Instead SpareFoot decided to automate nothing. When a potential buyer made a search, they grabbed their email or phone number and said “Thanks, we’re going to find you a great deal by Thursday.” Then they banged the phone all day, calling up regional storage facilities. Their pitch was awesome: “I’ve got a lead for you; his name is John Doe and he’s looking for a 10×20 with air conditioning. If your rate is competitive, we can do the deal today. By the way, if you want us to send leads like this to you all the time, it’s $20/mo to list with us.

The bold phrase in there is damn compelling, right? And of course they varied the offer based on current pricing theory or in real-time based on the interaction with that particular storage facility.

None of this — determining the pricing structure and amount, building relationships with facility managers, and ensuring buyers’ success — would have happened if they started by writing code or any other sort of automation.

Happy buyers before the network effect

Clearly the value of a marketplace increases as it grows — both as a business and to the buyers and sellers.

This is most apparent with companies like eBay and Craig’s List: The immense variety of listings facilitates long-tail transactions that would be impossible with a smaller, more specialized marketplace.

But at first your marketplace won’t be large, so to get started you have to deliver value even though you’re small.

To see this done right, consider Threadless, a bootstrapped marketplace matching people seeking unique T-shirts with people who invent them. Even if the site contained only ten T-shirts, as long as they were awesome buyers would still be able buy a cool T-shirt. In fact, the site’s initial obscurity would be a virtue, because part of what makes a T-shirt “cool” is relative scarcity.

As another example, consider Etsy: A marketplace linking people who create handmade goods with people who appreciate the craftsmanship and uniqueness that can’t be found at Walmart and who want to subsidize creative arts. Even with just ten items for sale, buyers would still be purchasing a handmade product and supporting an artist; marketplace enormity doesn’t increase the pleasure of the buyer.

eBay and Craig’s List are counter-examples: Their value-proposition is “you can buy anything,” which works only when the seller network is immense. If you’re bootstrapping and your value proposition includes the words “anything” or “anyone,” you’re probably reaching too far.

Solve the seller side first

It’s typically easier to solve the seller side of the equation than the buyer side.

After all, the value proposition to the sellers always boils down to “You’ll make more money,” whether that means a new sales channel or a way to monetize surplus inventory. Sellers are often already selling, which means they’re easy to find and they answer the phone. With the right proposition there’s little reason for them not to try you out.

What could “the right proposition” look like?

  • You build their listing for them.
  • Their listing is free for 12 months.
  • They pay only if the lead to provide completes a sale.
  • They get a low price lock-in for one year.

And you could ask for a few things in return:

  • They complete a survey (your customer/market research).
  • They agree to a public testimonial (after the first sale).
  • They agree to let you A/B test different ways of presenting their offering.
  • If you start bringing monthly X traffic, you get to start charging them $Y.

Another reason to start with the sellers is that if you do attract even a few buyers and there’s no inventory, they’ll have a bad experience (e.g. “I tried a search over the entire state and found nothing!”). They’ll never return.

Whereas if you at least have inventory, each consumer could not only potentially buy something, but might spread the word that your site really works.

Why waste time and money acquiring buyer traffic if you can’t capitalize on it?

Use a novel strategy for attracting buyers

The buyer side of a marketplace often boils down to a numbers game: If you can get N visitors per month and P% of them buy, it works. Typically P is small, so N has to be really big.

Unfortunately that puts you into the same position as every other website on Earth — competing for traffic.

If your answer to how you’ll attract big N are things like SEO, Google Ads, and word-of-mouth, that’s an automatic fail. First of all, this is what everyone else is doing, so none of this is a competitive advantage. Second, you can’t directly control any of these things, so it’s do-and-pray, not a strategy.

To have any chance at success on the buyer side you need superior strategy. As an example of one, take OpenOfficeSpace, a new startup that’s a marketplace for partial office spaces like subleases and co-working; the Priceline of office space. There’s no way they could compete on keywords like “office space” or “subleases,” neither in SEO nor AdWords.

So instead, they wrote an amazingly useful guide to leasing commercial real estate, aimed at the small business audience. There’s a butt-load of important advice in there, some of which was new to me and some I’d learned by screwing it up a few times — things like how to root out all the actual leasing costs, what parts of the lease are negotiable, move-in conditions, how to deal with brokers, and techniques for finding space.

This is so valuable, you know people are going to bookmark it. Many will spread the word through Twitter and Facebook just because it’s genuinely useful information. Bloggers (like me apparently!) will promote it.

This produces a steady stream of new eyeballs — all people pre-qualified to be interested in the marketplace aspect of the business. The chatter even helps with SEO — that link I gave them kicks some juice their way, and deservedly so.

What else?

What are other advantages or pitfalls of marketplace-style businesses? How else can you address the difficulties? Leave a comment and join the conversation!



Tweet this!

A Designer in Support of Design Contests

15 years ago, you couldn’t even BEGIN to look for a house without a real estate agent (who takes 6-7% of the purchase price from the buyer). Today, the internet has changed that. 10 years ago, someone starting a small business had to eat a cost of thousands of dollars to get a solid looking logo– often more if they didn’t want to roll the dice on just using a solo designer (of if their first designer didn’t create something that they loved). Today, a small business can get dozens of designers working in a public forum for $500. I think that’s AWESOME. But like real estate, there are casualties. And, like real estate, there is anger. But to me, “transactional design” (the kind of design that can take a few hours to net a good product and doesn’t require a lot of consultation) is an inevitable casualty of the global economy and the evolution of the internet (see 99Designs).

It’s a Global Village Now

I was in India for 3 weeks last year and was STUNNED at the cost of labor. We rode in taxis for the entire trip and spent less on them than the 1 way trip home from the airport in Seattle. Talented tailors would throw in manpower of tailoring a shirt if you just bought the cloth. If it’s unfair to pay $500 for a logo, was it unfair for me to pay Indian market rates for a taxi ride (usually less than a buck or two)?

The $300 bounty for a winning logo design is a kings ransom for a young designer in most of India (and the rest of the world). Guess what, Western world? You’ve got to compete– and Walmart has taught us over and over again that consumers aren’t going to pay 10% more (much less the 1000% more that an onshore hourly designer would cost) just so they can feel good. Some of them will- but most of them won’t. We can’t put the genie back in the bottle here. You’re better off trying to find creative ways to compete than bemoaning the unfairness of it all– it’s like a cottage seamstress complaining about the existence of the new textile factory down the road– technology changes markets.

For a rural Indian designer, entering 10 contests per week and winning one for $500 might be a huge win (and he doesn’t have to write a single proposal!). And that designer might be damned talented. How different is this than a services business investing $500k in sales effort on 10 different $10m RFPs and ultimately winning one? In fact, isn’t this just a different sales investment/risk than costly networking, proposal writing, advertising, etc., etc? Heck, the designer doesn’t even have to issue a Net-30 invoice– 99Designs drops the money to the winner pretty instantly.

So I’m assuming that the gripe with design contests isn’t that people are getting paid LESS than they used to, but rather that they could get paid NOTHING even after expending the time and effort of producing a logo. Which brings me to my next point:

Whether you are a Business or Freelancer – getting paid requires that you risk time and money.

If you want paying work without spending time/money or taking risks, you should go find a job with a paycheck.

My first business (a technology consultancy) was CONSTANTLY investing staggering amounts of money and time to get customers…. We had sales guys, who made healthy base salaries and some commissions. We went to networking events to establish relationships with people who could be customers someday. We took existing clients to lunch to chat about projects on the horizon. We sent out custom holiday cards to every client every year to keep us visible. We built and maintained a web site with a rich and updated portfolio. We had snazzy business cards that had to be kept up to date. We had really nice business clothes for the clients that cared about such things. We cooked up gorgeous custom proposal documents for customers– and these proposals required considerable analysis work and consultation with the customer (spec work!). We even responded to RFPs sometimes (rarely). All of these efforts can come up empty, of course. Many of them did, but in aggregate, my business grew like gangbusters. Software is no different. I heard that Salesforce.com spends 60-70% of their topline on sales/marketing. Much of that is probably wasted, but I’m sure they are in a constant state of making their marketing spend more efficient (just like 99Design entrants are probably in a constant state of gauging the kinds of contests that will net them the most bang for their effort).

In short, getting paying work cost TONS of time, money, and risks (how many freelancers do you know who average 100% billability in a 40 hour work week over a year?).

If you are a fresh-off-the-boat designer (or a rural one), you should expect your costs and risk here to be higher than if you’re not. You’ll have to invest more and get less as you build up relationships, your skills, and a portfolio. If there are too many designers eager for work (as I believe there are right now– the design world is NOT growing as fast as were churning out design grads), the market is going to make this harder for you. Don’t like markets? Get a paycheck-job or go learn Ruby on Rails (then you can fall out of bed and land on 2-3 lucrative freelance offers).

The nature of design

The best work general comes from seasoned professionals who engage in a deep discovery process, run through a lot of iterations, and work closely with the client. That being said, you can see flashes of brilliance without all of this, especially in the world of “transactional design”. Some of the stuff on 99Designs is GOOD. For a logo, book cover, or smallish web site design (especially for a smallish business) the difference in value received between a $30,000 engagement and a $500 contest is not worth $29,500. In fact, the contest might (on some occasions) yield better results faster. Even if it doesn’t, it’s CERTAINLY faster and can help with brainstorming. From a purely economic point of view, rolling the dice with a contest is a quick experiment to run that might yield exceptional results. I could design a good from-the-hip book cover in a few hours and it MIGHT be great… Design can be random and certain design tasks are 90% inspiration and 10% perspiration rather than the inverse. The bigger the design project, the less this is true, obviously. Again, I think logos (for small businesses) is the sweet spot.

Supply & Demand

As a business, we try to be as fair as possible with vendors, but we’re in business to be profitable. If I look at the winning designs on 99Designs and I generally like them more as much as any designer’s portfolio, is eschewing the cheaper option really the way to go? Paying bottom dollar prices CAN mean that someone somewhere is being exploited. I’ve seen no evidence that the 99Designs designers are exploited however, though it’s obvious that there are designers with higher costs of living in the US who simply can’t compete on transactional design services.

If you answered “yes, as a matter of principal” to the last question, how do you feel about internships (unpaid or crappy pay)? How do you feel about buying sneakers that were made in a Chinese factory with awful working conditions (check your feet, please)? How do you feel about the fact that the average Google employee generates over $1m per year in revenue but gets paid less than 10% of that #? Shopping for the best dollar-to-value ratio generally means that someone gets a disproportionate cut of the wealth in the transaction (even just a little bit)… Though are Google employees really getting screwed? Is an Indian designer getting screwed if she’s pulling down $20k year on 99Designs? And where is the outrage about things like iStockPhoto? Or 99Designs’ Logo Store? Is responding to a clear need in a design contests for a speculative chance at pay really that different from a photographer tossing up a speculative photo on iStockPhoto and hoping that someone might eventually buy it? The ones that have great photos make a ton of money. The ones that suck probably need to take photography classes. Heck, is it really that much different from my startup, where I spent a big (expensive) chunk of my live to launch something hoping that someone would want to buy it? Isn’t a startup in the “spec-work” category?

Design contests are a meritocracy in the extreme– good designers can probably make good money and (with a track record of winning and a great portfolio), eventually graduating to less-speculative lead generation if they so desire (though I bet GREAT designers could net thousands a day on 99Designs). Bad ones don’t and have to seek other marketing avenues or other lines of work. Again, welcome to business. Given the huge number of designers that enter contests OVER AND OVER again, clearly many have decided that they’d rather roll those dice than roll the dice associated with RFPs, Adwords, hiring salesfolks and other lead-generation efforts.

These are just some thoughts. As a designer, I’ve never done spec work (unless proposals count– they probably should). As a business, I’ve never asked for it… But from either side of the table, I’m not sure I have an ethical problem with it. So from one (admittedly kinda mediocre) designer to the rest of you– how are design contests “damaging” designers beyond the way that Google News is “damaging” newspapers?

How to Ask for an Introduction

I don’t know a ton of important people. But as a founder of a venture-backed startup with some amazing investors and advisors, I do know a few.

With Nivi and Naval preaching the gospel of social proof (can I get an “amen”?!) and with fundraising posts and articles espousing the importance of introductions, it’s no surprise that about once a week someone asks me to introduce them to someone else. It’s especially common around Y Combinator Demo Day, where YC groups shift from pure product mania to fundraising mode. I’m pretty sure that YC tells new crops of startups to ask for introductions from the funded companies from previous sessions.

What does surprise me is how people ask for these introductions. Here’s pretty much how they usually read:

“Hey Tony. I’m [insert name] from [company name]. We’re starting our fundraising effort and I was wondering if you’d introduce me to [insert RescueTime investor/advisor].”

I usually will make the introduction, but the person asking for it is certainly not making the most of the opportunity (and asking me to spend my social capital by doing so). So after making a mess of these introductions in varied ways, here is my suggested checklist for making an introduction (it’s pretty much my reply when I get a request like the one above):

  • Write the introduction for me. Seriously. You know more about your story than I do. You know the things to say that will make someone light up. I don’t. I might flub it. I can personalize it (“Hey [insert investor name]- hope your trip to [offensively exotic location] was fun. Welcome back! Listen, I wanted to introduce you to…”), but you should make the pitch. Bonus: this saves me a few minutes of writing, which is kind and thoughtful of you!
  • Don’t bury the lede. What’s the thing that will get an investor excited? Be concise, but talk about social proof, traction, growth, size of the market, how badass your team is, mainstream press coverage, other investors who are on board, and user passion/joy. Choose whatever distinguishes your startup from the sea of startups that investors read about every single day. Unless your product is revolutionary, spend more time talking about your market (“we’re helping companies in the billion dollar widget maker market sell doodads”) and your team than your product (“we’ve got an ajaxy shopping cart!”). If they investor blogs or has EVER talked about their investment strategy, hopefully you’ve read how they think and tune your pitch to match that.
  • Heap on the social proof, man! Getting an email intro from a near-stranger (me) is about the weakest social proof you can get (but it’s better than nothing). Tell us how many other investors you have soft-circled. Give us a link to a list of all of the blog posts praising you. Or all of the users tweeting about you. We’re herd animals. If the investor feels like the herd is leaving him behind, that’s a good thing.
  • Think about why it’s an opportunity for investors. If I’m writing to an investor about a company that looks like a credible opportunity, that’s me doing them a favor. If you don’t have any bullet points that many you look like a great opportunity, that’s me doing you a favor and adding noise to their already overflowing inbox.
  • Keep it short. All of the above stuff could mean a lot of content. You’ve got to pick and choose what to send and hope it’s enough bait for the investor to dig in and learn more.
  • Bonus points: track it. When we were talking to investors, we created custom (private) pages for each investor we were courting giving them a ton more to dig through and get excited about if they wanted. The emails were short and sweet with a “want to learn more” link at the end. We used Google analytics to track which people clicked through and which individual pages they clicked on so we could know what to focus our discussions on when we met them.

All that said, if you’ve got a great investment opportunity (with a launched product and some happy users), don’t be shy about dropping me a line if I can help (with introductions or advice).

(post scriptum: If you are in the market for introductions, you should check out VentureHacks’ StartupList!)

(post post scriptum: If you’d like to learn more about making good introductions, Chris Fralic just wrote an outstanding post for the “connector” – The Art of the Introduction)

PR for Startups

My startup (RescueTime) has enjoyed some pretty ridiculously good PR (online, print, and video). It’s not a surprise that the most common questions that we get from other founders are about PR. How do you get press and the blogosphere talking about your product?

When you research this topic, you’ll see lots of technical and how-to articles that talk about how to build relationships with writers, how to use services like PRweb, how to format a press release, and more. In a lot of ways, this reminds me of SEO (search engine optimization). Research SEO and you’ll find a bunch of articles about page markup, link sculpting, meta descriptions, and all sorts of other mechanical processes. But what you won’t find much of is information that teaches you how to write great content and how to build your startup and features (from the ground up) with “linkworthiness” in mind.

Just like fabulous content solves 75% of your SEO problems, fabulous storytelling solves 75% of your PR problems.

I think there’s a lot of built-in contempt for PR and marketing among entrepreneurs (especially hacker-flavored entrepreneurs). We’ve all been in companies with fat communications budgets wasted by blow-hard marketeers, so many of us have dismissed the profession altogether. We’re so entranced by the concept that just building something people want will win the day. I remember cheering the first time I read the quote, “marketing is a tax you pay for being unremarkable“. I remember reading a statement on Hacker News that said, “my code speaks for itself“. Two years ago, I would’ve said, “Right on, brother! Preach it!”

But my mindset has shifted about 180 degrees over the past few years. I now believe that how you say something is at least as important as what you’ve built. The A/B testing and design/copywriting iteration that we’ve done over the past year (which has, over time, resulted in a 400% increase in conversion rate on our site) really has driven home this belief. What’s A/B testing if not a bunch of microscopic marketing/PR tests?

What you need to send to reporters and bloggers

If you’re reaching out to reporters and bloggers, you put yourself in the shoes of that person. They are looking to write a headline that causes readers to buy a magazine/paper or click on a link. They are looking to write a story to support that headline that causes readers to consume that content and (ideally) find the content so provocative (note that “provocative” can be VERY different from “valuable”) that they send the link to their friends and relatives, post it to Twitter, and write a supportive (or critical) write-up on their blog.

If you can truly empathize with a writer, you fairly quickly realize why your new social bookmarking app, web annotation service, or small business accounting app isn’t particularly newsworthy. You aren’t click-bait. You aren’t link bait. You aren’t going to sell a paper.

Which is why your most important problem from a PR point of view is this: How can you make your uninteresting (to a broad audience) company interesting?

The good news is that it’s quite do-able. If at all possible, read Made to Stick by the Brothers’ Heath. If you can’t read it, read this summary. If you can’t do that, just try to craft a story that succeeds in as many of these areas as possible:

  • Surprising
  • Funny
  • Personal
  • Has a story arc
  • Useful

(notice how low “useful” is on the list? That’s not an accident. You have to be REALLY useful to be worth talking about.)

A boring company with good storytelling skills can do some amazing things on this front. Off hand, I can name a company that sells shoes online that did pretty well on the PR front, a personal finance app that a lot of people talked about, and a creator of small-business project management software that people can’t stop linking to. If you want to see smaller/earlier successes, check out Balsamiq or UntitledStartup (both are doing some clever things out of the gates).

So if you tell your product’s story at a party (which you should, over and over!), watch the listeners eyes. Do they glaze over? Or do they light up? Do they laugh? Do they argue with you? Do they ask questions? If a you’ve never had a listener at a party say, “wait a minute– John over there would LOVE to hear about this… Let me grab him!”, then you probably aren’t ready to work on the mechanics of outbound PR. If at the end of your story, the listener doesn’t often say, “Can you tell me that URL one more time?” as they reach for their smartphone, then you need to keep working on your story. Because charging forward on outbound PR with a shitty story is pretty much the equivelant of working on your SEO mechanics when you know you have crappy content. Your’e ignoring the most important part in favor of the least.

Post Scriptum – On the Value of PR

Having enjoyed pretty great PR success, I wanted to throw out a final thought. Like a lot of accelerants (marketing and funding being two other examples), PR can be like throwing gasoline onto a fire. Or it can be like throwing gasoline on a pile of wet wood. It can be especially exciting if your business is enjoying growth already. But PR (and, more broadly, your startup) is a marathon, not a sprint. The first couple times you get a PR hit, you’ll quite likely be flummoxed by the fact that your traffic and usage doesn’t really change that much as a result. TechCrunch might get you 5-10k uniques. Being in the print version of the New York Times might get you a few thousand uniques. PR is not going to result in a viral/word-of-mouth explosion, but it’ll speed things up nicely if you’ve already got one happening.

As Andrew Chen says in one of his many fabulous posts (why bloggers and press don’t matter for user acquisition), if you’re going to spent time on marketing and PR, spend it on things that will pay ongoing dividends rather than 1-time dividends. Andrew was talking about stuff like viral loops and SEO, but in my opinion he missed the most important marketing “gift that keeps on giving” – crafting and tweaking a story that makes you worth talking about.

Design your Blog like You’d Design a Product

When I decided to take a weekend and focus on my blog I realized one big thing:

Most blogs are crappy products. And most of my favorite bloggers (the ones that espouse taking design, marketing, testing, and iteration have largely blown off the designs of their blogs To be clear, I think the quality of the blog is almost entirely measured by the quality of the content and not the theme. But blog success is a function of content quality and the ability to turn readers into people who retweet, comment, subscribe, or follow.

Success (whether it’s a blog or a product) is looks a lot like this:

Quality of Product * Success of Marketing * Conversion of visitors = Success

Certainly, outstanding bloggers (or outstanding products) can win on just quality of product. Some of my favorite bloggers (let’s single out Paul Graham (though I think he’d call himself an essayist), Dave McClure, Andrew Chen, and Eric Reis) have blog formulas that look like this:

(great writing = 10) * (great word of mouth marketing = 7) * (no clear call to action, no testing = 1) = 70 (pretty darn successful at expanding their influence)

(Note: McClure might get a -1 for too many font colors! :-) )

My hats off to all of ‘em. They are better (and more prolific) writers than I. But we all know that a little A/B testing can go a long way. We’ve seen that a quick/dirty redesign of an already effective looking page can pump conversion by more than 20%. Hell, we’ve seen that a few iterations of Twitter language (leading to “you should follow me on Twitter”) can boost clickthru by 173%. Could a weekend’s (largely outsource-able) work double a visitor’s chance to become a follower/subscriber, comment, or even read a second post? If you’re starting point is a stock blog theme, I think so.

Here’s what I think you should do on a blog to maximize the 3rd part of the forumula above (and, to a lesser degree, the second part):

  • Toss in some social proof. Assume people don’t know who you are and make it clear who you are and why you are important. You’re establishing credibility– why should anyone read what you have to say? Take a look at VentureHacks if you don’t know what I mean. Well played, sirs.
  • Figure out what you want your visitors to do. Clearly, you want them to read your posts, but scribble out a stack-ranked list of the actions you want your readers to do and make sure your design supports that. If there’s crap on your blog that doesn’t support that (badges, widgets, etc) pull ‘em. Here’s my list:
    1. Retweet! No way a blog is ever going to have a viral loop, but if a reader likes what they’re reading and wants to spread the word, that’s huge– so encourage it! 1 subscriber is 1 subscriber. A retweet means hundreds or thousands of potential new visitors/subscribers. If my conversion rate on other activities is meaningful, this is my post important user behavior.
    2. Follow me on Twitter. This was a hard call to prioritize over RSS subsription, but I think a lot of people are turning to Twitter to replace their RSS readers. Feels like the right trend. Also, clickthrus on my posts on Twitter results in pageviews– it’s trackable. RSS isn’t.
    3. Subscribe via RSS. Makes it an almost certainly that they’ll at least see my headlines henceforth
    4. Subscribe via email. I dropped this to fourth because I don’t think most of my readership rolls that way, but it’s still a fine way to get content.
    5. Comment. Other than the “game of blogging” (i.e. maximizing reach, influence, audience), the discussion is the big part of why I blog. Bonus points, discussion makes a post feel lived-in and heaps on some more social proof. I’ve ceded the UX of commenting to Disqus, who thankfully does a badass job of encouraging conversation. Further, a comment gives me a chance to talk to the commenter (I almost always try to reply– take a look at Neil Patel if you want an example of a fabulous blog post. He always replies).
    6. Read a second post. In this world, I think getting someone to read a whole FIRST post is a great achievement. If people want to read more, I want to help them do that. But, heck– if they like my stuff, subscription/following on Twitter seems much preferred for both parties as a primary call to action.

Now maybe you could argue that a blog shouldn’t be treated this way. Maybe we’re all blogging to express our feelings, hone our writing skills, and be part of the conversation. That’s fine if that’s true. But look at the degree to which blogging has been instrumental in the careers of folks like the ones I’ve mentioned (as well as Fred Wilson, who says much of his deal flow is because of his blog) and it’s pretty hard to argue against trying to make your blog an effective funnel. Hell, at least spend a few hours and pluck the low-hanging fruit.

At the end of the day, every web site is a funnel and most blogs are pretty damn leaky. Take a weekend and plug some holes.

hosting