Girls’ Entrepreneurial Power

A friend of mine asked if I had died since he hadn’t seen a post in a a bit. Well, all is well and I had a great ski outing with my son (first father-son effort). During the week, a friend of mine, Rob Albertson, forwarded on an interesting post by Vivian Wu as a guest blogger on TechCrunch titled Next Generation Entrepreneurs Compete at Google HQ. Google sponsored a business contest for 12 year old girls. I think this is awesome. I think all of the emerging efforts to teach entrepreneurship to our kids whether in the Inner City (NFTE), schools (BizWorld, Junior Achievement) or targeted at segments like girls are critical for all of us.

Entrepreneurship is critical for innovation in everything we do whether it is in non-for-profits, start-ups or within large corporations. I especially think it is key to get to our girls to instill in them the belief that they can succeed in Science, Technology, Math, Business and any traditionally male dominated fields. I see girls who love science and are good at Math fade into the Humanities because, in many cases, everything around them has told them they are not welcome.

Don’t get Anne Mulcahy started on this topic. She watched her daughters bump into the double standard in math (teachers telling them it was okay if they didn’t quite get the math since "they were girls"). She has told her daughters that they can do as they please after they have mastered Advanced Calculus.

I was interested to hear that there are no cheerleaders for the local New Trier High School Football team. It is now cool for the girls to be participants on the athletic field in soccer, lacrosse and field hockey rather than cheering on the boys. I don’t say this to put down cheer leading, but rather to comment that girls are feeling more empowered, and it is about time. We are vastly outnumbered by China and India. We need to have every member of society feeling empowered, engaged and fully productive.

Now, I want to know how to get this program to my daughters’ schools…

Bataan Death March

The venture business runs between the goalposts of greed and fear. This is no more apparent than during a funding event. Entrepreneurs are often puzzled by why another company’s funding erupts into a feeding frenzy, while their fundraising drags on like "the Bataan Death March." While no one can ever capture all of the intangibles, here is my stab at a couple of drivers:

Scarcity is king: like with any other asset, people tend to want something more when it is popular and they may be prevented from getting it. During a financing, this happens when there are active parties doing due diligence and generating term sheets. Scarcity is enhanced by several factors:

  • small raise amount…less available, less for new investors
  • strong insider interest…if Mikey likes it, the cereal must be good.
  • leave room for one at the table…if only one new investor can get in, they can’t collude since they are now all competitors for the one slot. This eliminates their ability to coordinate their attack and drive price down.

Financings, like fish, smell after a while: you can sometimes generate strong interest and buzz initially during a financing. However, if investors fail to advance the ball or, worse, begin to turn down the deal, it begins to go stale. Word gets out when lots of groups have looked at a deal and turned it down for the same reasons. Eventually, it is like the guy that all the girls at school turned down for the prom. To prevent this, use a rolling prospect list. Don’t go to all 25 potential investors day one. Go to the top 5 and see how they respond. Begin to tee up the next 5, but only engage a handful at a time. You won’t be able to service everyone at once. As they start to drop out or slow down on you, you can add additional names.

Where’s the beef?: without a forcing mechanism, investors will hover like vultures waiting for something to happen. Often, companies will try to create a pseudo forcing event by telling investors that they have a term sheet in hand. I recommend only doing this if you have a term sheet, while not optimal, you would be willing to close on (because you may have to). New investors will do one of three things. One, do nothing, waiting to see if you are bluffing. If you are bluffing, you are now officially screwed. They will assume you are so desperate that you are resorting to lying and will assume the price will be coming down. Two, back channel to figure out who the term sheet is from. They will decide if it is worthy of their throwing in a competing offer. If it is from Sequoia, then people start to foam at the mouth. If it is Dumb Strategic A or No Name VC, then they don’t really care. Three, shut down their process since they have too far to go on their due diligence and won’t make it in time.

Three’s a crowd: following up on the last point above, make certain when you start the herding process by announcing a term sheet, that your potential other suitors are far enough along in their process. You want to try and keep the various parties at roughly the same place in their due diligence processes so they all feel motivated to dive into term sheet at the same time. You need at least three players throwing out term sheets to run a solid process. When you start with only two, one of them is likely to drop out for some reason. This leaves you negotiating without a back-up and it will show through eventually.

Raise when you want, not when you need: any investor can look at your balance sheet and cash flow statements to figure out how much runway you have. The worst cluster *(&^#’s I have experienced are when the company is burning significant amounts of cash, insiders are tapped out and there are only a few months of cash left. Investors know that when you hit the wall, they can get you for pennies. Ironically, once you hit the wall, very often, they will not jump in since you are truly damaged goods at that point. If they do jump in, you will be squeezed mercilessly. So, keep the burn under control and stretch out the runway. Make certain your insiders have dry powder.

Listen for Key Themes: when you hear back from the first batch of investors, determine key themes and impediments. Make certain you have answers in place to address these. Do not go the defensive route and say "these stupid investors just don’t get it. Why is it called venture capital if they want all of the risk out of the deal." Whatever, the reason, the consumer is always right and if enough consumers come to the same negative conclusion, you are tarnished regardless of reality. Don’t let lightning strike twice. If your pitch is disorganized or conveying the wrong points, fix it. If they want to see more customer traction, it might make sense to hold off the financing process a touch and get a few more customers in place. If they don’t like your burn, reduce it and get your financials under control more.

Intangibles that drive a strong process:

  • Market position/rank: everyone loves a champ. If you are #1 or #2, people are interested. If you are further down the food chain, someone has to find something special in you to love.
  • Proximity to exit: if investors can taste and see the exit, they are more likely to jump in and to price based off of that assumed exit value.
  • Attractive analogs: investors will put you into a given category. They will look at other companies in that category and see if they like it or not. Telecom equipment is not a good category but a sexy 2.0 (for now) is more interesting.
  • Strong economics: good margins and sales momentum.

In short, you have the ability to control your destiny. Be prepared for the investors not to come in and make certain you have your plan B in place. Knowing this, you will appear and negotiate with more confidence and avoid being lumped in with the kid without a prom date. Manage your burn, your dry powder and your milestones to make certain you don’t end up over your skis too far. And, try to drive scarcity into the process. Small investor allocations, strong business momentum and multiple stalking horses (or self-sufficiency) all lead to peaked investor interest. Avoid bluffing and fake forcing mechanisms as they always seem to backfire and make you look like a naive amateur. Don’t believe your own hype (manage your alternatives religiously) because financings can go cold quickly overnight. If investors smell blood, you will find yourself in a painful Bataan Death March.

How Did the Superbowl Ads Fare?

Comscore recently released the results of their consumer survey that quantified "Americans’ attitudes and opinions related to Super Bowl XLI." In my Doritos post this week, I mentioned the various benefits that Frito-Lay gained from their user generated ad strategy. Not only did they get significant buzz/free publicity and lower production cost on the ad, but, according to Comscore, over 40% of those surveyed said it improved their perception of the brand. In the coming years, you will continue to see an increasing blending of the social networking and ad/marketing worlds. Whether it is buzz, trusted sources, greater connection to the public, these approaches more tightly couple the producer and the consumer. This is the advertising version of reality TV. Of course, like reality TV, once we are flooded with user generated ads, the novelty will wear off and marketers will be forced to continue to innovate and find improved ways to connect, using social networks, with their customers.

                                             

IMPACT ON BRAND
Highest Improvement    Improved        Damanged       Unchanged
————————–           ——–              ——–             ———
Blockbuster                      41%                2%                57%
Doritos                             40%                3%                57%
Toyota                             40%                 3%               57%

While some have commented that the GoDaddy ads had the highest brand damaging impact, I would also point out that it also improved perception with 26% of the respondents, netting a 12% improvement.  They definitely continue to get free press…

Highest Damange          Improved       Damaged       Unchanged
————————–           ——–               ——–              ———
GoDaddy.com                   26%              14%            60%         
Nationwide Insurance         27%              12%            61%         
Garmin Navigation             28%              11%            61%

And, of course, Budweiser dominated the popularity polls, knockind down the #1 and #3 slots.

                                              Percent of Respondents
                                       "Ad you would like to see again"
                                              ———————-
Budweiser                                           35%         
Doritos                                                31%         
Bud Light                                            29%         
Coca-Cola                                           25%         
Blockbuster                                         17%         
Chevy                                                 15%         
GoDaddy.com                                      15%         

Crunch Goes the Ad Industry

I have written a couple of times about the growing trend in "crowdsourcing" in the marketing world where advertisers seek ideas and even campaigns from their user base. I was curious to see how the various experiments played out on the Superbowl, especially Doritos’ effort which planned to run a $2.4m UGC ad.

As Fred Wilson points out in his post, My Favorite Superbowl Ad, both Doritos and these guys knocked it out of the park. Doritos had over 140 million impressions of their contest to create a Superbowl ad according to Cymphony. They had surpassed their advertising goal even before the game started.

More amazing is the fact that this was made by a bunch of 21-22 year olds for under $13. They talk a little about their efforts on their page of the Contest website. We will see if this is the beginning of something more widespread or simply a one-off PR stunt around the Superbowl. I have to believe that this will increase over time since it:
1) greatly expands the creative sources and ideas around an idea or product
2) is economically attractive
3) generates viral buzz
4) automatically creates connection and buy-in from the customer base as you reach out to them

Very cool. Congrats to John Compton and the Pepsi team on this one.

Daily Routines of CEO’s

Too many days start in a rush, get picked apart by one off events and end up feeling like enough was accomplished. Lifehacker pointed out a piece by Jim Citrin on Tapping the Power of Your Morning Routine in which he interviewed 20 successful CEO’s and executives about how they went about their day. Unfortunately for us night owls, nearly every one starts the day early (4:30-6), reads/emails, works out and then either goes to work or handles family matters. Quite a few takeaways and over 250 comments on this piece.

This VC Has A New Vibe

I was bemoaning the other day how klutzy my MyYahoo homepage was. You have limited ability to move things around, adding feeds is cumbersome and you can’t readily add cool widgets. I was thinking about how great it would be if they or someone came out with an aggregator of widgets. It would be an open platform that would allow you to stick the zillions of cool widgets floating around onto one homepage. I did a few Google searches on Widget aggregators but got little.

I then read Walter Mossberg’s piece on Netvibes and Pageflakes on Friday which are close to this. While neither allows you to jam any random widget you come across, both give you significant leeway in adding a growing see of widgets contributed to both. I am embarrassed a bit by this since a) I knew that one of Danny Rimer’s (of Skype fame) latest deals was Netvibes and b) that about 20% of my readers use Netvibes to read my posts. That said, I was like a kid in a candy store on Friday (not my most productive day from a work perspective). I have weather widgets, theater widgets, a Skype widget, a Meebo/Jabber widget for IM, key feeds, various search engines and such. It is a true portal of my interests, communication media and consumed content.

Yahoo is supposedly coming out with a similar concept for MyYahoo. Come on guys…you are getting lapped in category after category. It is amazing how poorly they execute against such an amazing customer asset. Note to self…buy Yahoo stock when I begin to see some signs of innovation creeping back into the firm since the results will pop big-time. We will see how the new ad system fares…

In the interim, add some Vibe into your world!

Venture Philanthropy Podcast

As you all may know, I continue to get more involved withe world of venture philanthropy. Much like venture capital, if done well, drives innovation and change into the corporate world, I believe that venture philanthropy can also positively impact traditional philanthropy. I’ll define what I view as key principles to venture philanthropy in a later post.

Susan Herr has launched Philanthromedia in conjunction with the Community Foundations of America to discuss current topics in the world of philanthropy. In the just released premier audiocast from her new Discerning Donors series, she interviewed seven people from the venture philanthropy world (including me…as a caveat). For those of you interested in this world, this is a good feed to add.

Can’t we all just get along?

"Can’t we all just get along?"
— Rodney King

I was talking this afternoon with one of our CEO’s, Tim Stultz, at Imago. He mentioned that he had been cornered at a cocktail party by a number of local angel investors. They proceeded to lay into him about how evil venture capitalists were, how VC’s always screwed them and how could he work with VC’s. They said that they took the risk, helped start the businesses and ended up getting crammed down in the end.

Tim pushed back (guess we will have to do an upround next financing!) and said that the terms he had seen in some of their deals were unrealistic and screwy. My favorite, which he mentioned as well, is the non-dilution clause…the angel investor will maintain their % ownership even after the new money comes in.

I don’t think this kind of relationship has to develop like this. The biggest issue in these deals is that angels try and structure/price financings with no understanding or knowledge about what a likely next financing will look like. When reality hits and all of their bells & whistles are torn out, they feel violated. For example, on the non-dilution cause, who then takes the brunt of the dilution…management. Who does the new investor affiliate with…management (not the old investors). So, why set yourself up for a certain reversal that won’t stick.

The second issue is that angels pump all of their money into the deal day one (or a large portion). We have spoken a lot about this in the past. Dry powder is king. Angels aren’t the only ones hit hard when they run out of money. Every VC will also go along for the ride.

The third issue is set up by the entrepreneur. Sometimes they raise money from angels because that is their only source. However, a number of times, they do it because the angels will give them all of the terms the VC’s won’t. They get a high valuation which, when milestones are met, gets hammered by the new money coming in.

So, my greatest advice to angels is to use convertible debt. Don’t try and guess what the right structure is. Simply have a vanilla vehicle that converts into the next round and use warrants to get a discount. Some VC’s will push the money to common and some will try to strip the warrants off. However, most will let it fly. This eliminates many of the sticking points. Also, make certain that you preserve dry powder. Put 1/3 of your eventual total allocation in day one.

My advice to entrepreneurs is don’t stuff the angels with crappy terms. Realize that they are sticking their necks out for you so don’t start out with a deal at a $19m post-$ at the seed level unless you are a rock star.

Listen to the Oracle of the LA Riots and get along!

Fix to Google Reader Issues

A number of you have emailed with an issue that when you go to my feed, you are prompted by a log-in request. This is being driven by an issue with an old post called Global Perspective. I fixed the issue and reposted but most readers have the old version. Delete the Global Perspective post and the issue should go away. If not, let me know.

Blog of the Week: AskTheVC

A couple of months ago, Brad Feld had mentioned to me that he was excited about a new blog he was going to come out with. Given the success of Feld Thoughts, I was curious how he could top it. Well, he launched AskTheVC a couple of weeks ago and it looks like another winner. It is a series of Q&A’s on core topics relevant to entrepreneurs and start-ups. Well worth adding it to the blogroll!