« August 2005 | Main | October 2005 »
September 30, 2005
Opportunity on the Third Screen
I thought that the quote at the end of this announcement article yesterday by Motorola was spot on.
"It's incredibly valuable real estate on the home screen of the [mobile] phone."
Motorola was talking about its plan to release new dynamic idle-screen technology, called Screen3, by year’s end. The technology, “essentially pushes Internet information to a mobile phone's main screen. Thus, users can get news updates or the latest weather forecasts with just a glance at their phones, without having to open sluggish WAP browsers or other applications.” Yes, I realized this offering was originally announced at CTIA six months ago, and that all of the Pointcast comparisons have already been made. But I don’t think that’s the most interesting angle here.
Instead, I believe that this announcement denotes another early milestone of a mobile major player aiming to capitalize on the immensely valuable real estate of the mobile phone screen. This 1”x1” display has until recently been overlooked as a vehicle for information communication. Always with you and referenced perhaps dozens of times per day, it carries a lot of possibilities with it. Right now my own background screen is terribly boring calendar. Updated news and weather information would be a great replacement, if only just a first step to more personalized content.
And along those lines, when there’s content, there’s an opportunity for advertising. It surprises me that advertising on mobile phones has barely begun to take hold. I blogged about it in my post, The New New Thing – “New New Media,” back in April. Since then, I’ve started to see a few ads when I’ve checked sports scores through my WAP browser.
For me, this development is interesting from both a consumer standpoint and VC one. How will the ads be displayed in a manner so as to not become too intrusive? Unlike a PC browser where ads and content can be displayed simultaneously, the physical space for advertising in conjunction with content is limited. How will ads proliferate in a manner not to propagate attention theft? It seems all too easy to annoy people if all they want to do is make a call or quickly check a piece of info. From a VC vantage, I am excited about the potential for infrastructure companies to spring up supporting this advertising medium, like mobile ad networks or ad insertion providers.
Dynamic marketing messages and (pushed?) personalized content – coming soon to come to a mobile phone near you.
September 28, 2005
TRETC / Attention Theft
I spent most of today at Technology Review's Emerging Technologies Conference at MIT here in Cambridge. There were many engaging sessions, from Nicholas Negroponte (Chairman of the MIT Media Lab) talking about his quest for distributing a hundred-dollar laptop to children in developing nations, all the way to Jeff Hawkins (Co-Founder of Palm and Handspring) speaking about a theory of intelligence which he hopes to apply to developing intelligent machines.
In addition, the afternoon contained a “Social Computing” panel which included Dennis Crowley of Dodgeball and Joshua Schachter of delicious. Most of the discussion was fairly standard fare for a crowd which probably has had mixed exposure/understanding of the space. But the one thing that struck me was Joshua’s characterization of the “spam” that shows up in delicious; he called it an instance of “attention theft.” He also cited further examples of attention theft in other social software, like people you don’t know asking to become your friend in Flickr. It’s a distraction that steals your time.
I really like this classification and label of attention theft (which I hadn’t heard before per se, but looks like a few others have used it as well). It goes right to the heart of one problem with any open contributory content system – there are incentives for others to utilize that platform to grab my mind-share, even if it is not in my best interest. With e-mail came spam, and for the most part, it became fairly clear what rules to apply to discern valuable e-mail content from that which isn’t. The challenge was largely how to apply those rules. As we proceed further along towards socially-influenced content production and filtering, the distinction between what is valuable and what isn’t may blur. Perhaps the challenge moving forward will also be deciding what the rules are, not just how they are applied. Consensus is a good measure for the majority, but I want a personalized experience. No, I don’t want my time stolen, but I don’t want to miss valuable content either.
September 27, 2005
The Importance of Being Authentic
Thanks largely to the exposure of Fred Wilson’s kind words, my recent post on the Seven Founding Sins - common mistakes which often divert entrepreneurs off the path towards success – received a number of comments and feedback throughout the blogosphere. I’d recommend reading the original post, but the summary of the sins itemized are: inauthenticity, sloth, extravagance, taciturnity, greed, arrogance, and indecisiveness.
Given that I thought the discussion was interesting, I thought I would highlight a few others’ reactions. There were differing opinions as to which one people “liked best,” which lead me to believe that they indeed are all legitimate and important to avoid. However, my own personal favorite, inauthenticity, was discussed the most:
“Inauthenticity. While there are notable exceptions, most successful entrepreneurial endeavors are sprung from a genuine idea born from true experience or direct & tangible observation. A founding team should not only have the relevant experience, but also immediate and authentic understanding of the end-users’/customers’ need. Blank-slate brainstormed white-board ideas rarely even deserve the material that they’re written on. Great ideas search for a great entrepreneur; great entrepreneurs don’t search for a great idea.”
Fred Wilson agreed with the notion,
“Exactly... We look for entrepreneurs who have lived the pain point they intend to address.”
Rags Gupta, however, pointed out a number of successful companies were established with that the search, not the problem, coming first,
“While entrepreneurs certainly need to be intimately familiar with the problems they're trying to solve, I also believe great entrepreneurs can search for great ideas. The stuff that's come out of Bill Gross and his Idealab is probably Exhibit A here. While they got a lot of flak during the dotcom boom and bust, what got lost in all of it was the great ideas (and companies) that they spawned: Goto (Overture) -- the idea of having sponsored search results was a bold one, Snap, Citysearch, and several others.”
And finally, Charlie Wood claimed that identifying an authentic idea and entrepreneur is easy (especially compared those of the other traits):
This sin is easy to identify: the entrepreneur can only talk about the macro-scale idea, not the details. He can talk about the problem he's trying to solve in the abstract, but can't give real-world examples. He parrots what the press and analysts are saying, and rarely contradicts them. And he's hesitant to admit the limits of his knowledge in the domain space.On the other hand, authenticity is just as easy to identify. The entrepreneur will spend less time trying to convince you that he has a great idea and more time demonstrating it to you. He'll talk about what the potential problems are. He won't get tripped up on terminology, since it really doesn't matter. And people will find uses for his idea that he never imagined.
I first heard someone mention the benefit of an entrepreneur’s authenticity when Mark Leslie spoke about it at length, and it struck a deep chord with me. It seemed to go right to the essence of addressing the intrinsic rewards which I think motivate entrepreneurs in addition to external financial gain. Entrepreneurs addressing problems or opportunities that they have seen or observed first hand are creating a real solution, not just a business. Of course we can cite many counter-examples of entrepreneurs searching for an idea as opposed to the other way around, but we can find opposing instances for probably all of the sins enumerated.
I am not putting forth that if someone makes any one of these mistakes, that his/her start-up endeavor will be unsuccessful. Hardly. What I am suggesting is that demonstrating the qualities these is like running against the wind – you may get there anyway, but it’s definitely going to be a more difficult race. An idea and entrepreneur that is authentic starts from a right place at the core, which in turn pushes him/her to be energetic, responsible, communicative, generous, confident, and focused. And hopefully, that much more likely to be successful.
September 26, 2005
Web2.0 – The Conference
From far and wide to just around the corner, it looks like many people are converging on San Francisco next week for the Web 2.0 Conference. I am excited to make the trek out to attend as well. It should provide me with some (hopefully) thought-provoking material to blog about, much like the Syndicate Conference did back in May (here and here). More importantly, it will be a great to chat with other people excited about web innovation. If you are attending and would like to meet, drop me an e-mail at [david at genuinevc dot com], and we’ll make sure to connect.
Posted by at 3:48 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)September 22, 2005
OnTour Helps Me Find Who's On Tour
One of my first posts ever on this blog championed EVDB, a search engine for local events and venues. In it, I wrote, “I am looking forward to the day when I can set up an RSS feed of my favorite independent-label musicians, and have EVDB notify me when they are coming to town at a small local venue. Very powerful.” In the months since that was posted, I have been disappointed in the lack of content available in the system during the beta, and have neglected to use the service at all as of late.
This morning, I read Rags’ blog entry about PassAlong Networks’ newest offering, OnTour, and downloaded the application. This program automatically scans my hard-drive for all of the music files that I own, builds a directory of artists which I like from those files, and then presents me with a list of the those acts’ upcoming concerts in my local area. I’ve thought about and talked about an idea like this one informally before, and I am very excited to see that someone actually created the service. You can try it here.
Of course, the software isn’t perfect yet. For example, it has some difficulty string matching (“Ambulance LTD” vs “Ambulance Ltd”). And I wish that I could set up an RSS feed or alert system to notify me when new acts I am interested are booked rather than me having to fire up the application every few weeks. But, for now, color me a happy user (as well as those bands like The Frames, BMRC, and Michael Penn which I now will go see play).
Posted by at 3:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)September 21, 2005
Spread the Word: It's Not Viral
It seems to me that usage of the word “viral” has gotten a little out of hand recently. A term that was coined during the 90s boom which then fell out of fashion with everything else, it appears to have undergone a resurgence lately. I’ve heard many entrepreneurs say something like: “Our service is viral, so we don’t need to spend much money on (sales and) marketing. Once we get the product developed and a few customers use it, they’ll of course tell their friends, and it will spread like wildfire.” While I do not doubt the power of happy customer positive word-of-mouth referrals, I believe that there is a distinct difference between a product/service that generates excited users and one which is truly viral. I define something as viral if the act of referring another user is deeply incorporated into the product or service itself.
The genesis of viral marketing is usually attributed to Hotmail’s original signature at the bottom of all outgoing e-mails stating “get your free email address at Hotmail.com.” It helped propel the company’s rapid growth because the invitation for others to register was integrated into the outgoing e-mails themselves. One “modern” example of viral marketing and growth is Skype. Inherent in their model is communication over a propriety network which requires that both users use the same service. When one person wants to speak to another who isn’t on the system, it is essential that the first invites the second to join. Again, an invitation from one existing user to another is an essential component of the offering. The “viral” nature of the service is not out of user goodwill from a pleasant experience, but rather a functional component to using the service.
Of course, this viral/non-viral distinction is a grey line and doesn’t necessarily need to be separated. Something can spread with viral growth even if the service itself doesn’t contain viral functionality. My frustration, then, stems not from those who bend the viral concept, but those who break it. (Can a traditional enterprise software product with a nine-month sales cycle involving many decision-makers really be viral? Really?). The problem with this and any overuse of a word is that the excess dilutes its original meaning, and so I wish that we’d save the word viral for those applications that really are.
(Feel free to forward this post to someone… but just don’t tell them it’s viral.)
September 20, 2005
...Thinking About YubNub and a GUI IOS...
Ever since I learned about YubNub from Nivi’s post two months ago, my head has been spinning about the potential power of this tool. If you’re not familiar, YubNub is a “command line for the web.” Further described, “YubNub is an outsourced OS. YubNub is an operating system web service. YubNub is a web service for developing web services.”
I’ve been hesitant to post about it, though, as I still trying to grasp and digest what the ramifications of this structure truly means. It appears to me that YubNub is a meta-control tool of what Jim Moore calls “web superservices”, operating on level five of his “web superservices solution stack.” Though I am having trouble translating this theoretical classification into something that is tangible and useful in the immediate-term. It’s good to see that Paul Kedrosky has found some practical use-cases of the service. I’ll have to really dig in myself to understand it, but my intuition tells me that there is something extremely compelling here.
(Also, YubNub’s the command line interface has a very MS-DOS prompt feel to me… perhaps the next generation of incremental innovation wraps an AJAX-enabled user interface around the service to really give the layman a true GUI Internet Operating System?)
September 19, 2005
The Future of Music
A few weeks ago, I finally had a chance to read Kusek and Loenhard’s book The Future of Music: Manifesto for the Digital Music Revolution
At the core of the book is the analogy that “music [in the future] will be like water: ubiquitous[,] free flowing,… mobile, shareable.”
It will be a utility, available everywhere, just as water is for us now. The authors maintain just as we don’t pay for a single usage of water today – in the shower in at the gym, at a drinking fountain, or in a public restroom – we won’t consciously and directly pay for music in the future as it becomes pervasive in our lives. Of course, there will be instances of pay-per-listen “premium” music, just as we have premium bottled water today, but the open and everywhere model will dominate.
Kusek’s and Loenhard’s thought-provoking metaphor challenges the reader to think about the implications of how music is both produced and consumed, along with how emerging technologies will potentially facilitate changes in those behaviors. If as we transition towards viewing music a service utility instead of a pure product, then what does that mean for those who create music, facilitate its distribution, and enjoy it? The “music like water” analogy provides a tangible example to aid us in exploring these consequences.
However, strength and credibility of the arguments put forth in this “manifesto” started to wane as I continued reading. The authors are clear in their biases and perspective, which could be refreshing. Yet much of the remainder of the book reads like a piece of anti- record label propaganda with little regard for valid opposing positions:
“The end of ‘music as a product’ may mean the end of the record label as we know it.” (page 39)“Today, in the full consideration of the current ‘jail the file sharers’ campaigns that RIAA et al are promoting, we have nothing but another round of oligopoly-led McCarthyism.” (page 43)
“We will have to accept that the current copyright regime – and it is most certainly a regime – is not a default requirement for creators who want to make a living of their art.” (page 51)
The author’s overt name-calling and axe-grinded detracted me from the main focus of their argument: that file-sharing and other forms of digital distribution will continue to enable great change in allowing people to consume the type of music that they want, when they want it, and how they want it. Like I’ve written previously, this theme of technology giving users more control over their consumption doesn’t just apply to music, but to all content. I just wish that the authors of The Future of Music didn’t spend so much time mud-slinging to make this point.
September 16, 2005
Wishing Well (for Personalized Communication)
Bill Gates recently commented in an interview with Jon Udell yesterday,
"And there's a lot more issues to be solved than RSS… Ultimately the whole problem of notification, of what is it should I be paying attention to next? Is it the e-mail that came in? The phone call? The bid we're supposed to make? That's actually a very deep user interface problem, you know, having all these things understand your context and their priority and who's saying that they think something is urgent. And then you just go to your computer screen and it's ranked for you. You know -- first pay attention to this, then pay attention to this.That's the holy grail that these technologies are in service of, is that the thing where you always had to go find things, now the system is being a bit smarter for you in terms of now you're not polling the world."
Greg Linden, the Founder/CEO of Findory comments further:
"We need help with information overload. We need a smart system that helps us focus on the information that matters. We need personalized information streams where our attention is directed toward the most interesting and important."
I couldn’t agree more with Greg’s assessment of information overload. Determining the relative ranking of pieces in the Incremental Web which I should read is becoming increasingly difficult, if not near-impossible. Should I read this post, scan through that delicious tag feed, or view this photo-stream? Findory’s service does a great job of personalizing news content like this, but it’s only a first step.
I believe that Gates is referring to something even more powerful, "a very deep user interface problem," as he calls it. Is it possible for technology to eventually not only to determine a relative ranking among a specific set of information, but also determine an absolute ranking among many sets of information? Ideally, I want to not only know the most important news that I should read, but also have my computer (read: personal device) determine if, how, and when I should read an article, accept a Skype call, or listen to a voicemail – all depending on the meta-data known about that particular communication. A tall order, I know, but something I wish for in a chaos of information available today. Personalization technology, tagging, and social network/connection data are helping us get there, but it’s going to take some time.
September 14, 2005
The Meaning of *How* You Communicate
There are a myriad ways that people can contact and send me messages these days. My work e-mail address, my blog e-mail address, one of my many personal e-mail addresses, my mobile phone, SMS on my mobile, my work phone, my home phone, snailmail on at my physical work address or my physical home address, via LinkedIn, FAX, etc., etc. What I think is interesting is that not only does the content of a message carry meaning, but the forum that it’s communicated to me does as well. Whether you send a message via SMS or via snailmail conveys something about its urgency, its importance, its intimacy, and its desire for response. (A quick aside: Want to really get someone’s attention who you don’t know? Send them a FedEx and follow up with a phone call immediately.)
Moreover, the message senders’ communication tool also sends a signal. Is an e-mail coming from your gmail account or a work account? Are you calling someone from your mobile while grocery shopping or sitting at your desk with your landline? It seems to me that a Caller ID number (or if it’s blocked) says something not just about who’s calling, but why they are calling.
Finally, the tricky part is that different communication methods carry different meanings for different people. I once worked at a consulting firm where it was imperative that people checked their voicemail almost hourly – it was just part of the culture that that was the primary method of communication. Now, I’ve gone a day or two without checking my work voicemail, but you know that you can reach me via e-mail almost instantly. Or, take Skype. Rumor has it that eBay is mandating that all employees register for a Skype account – surely forcing communication via a specific forum carries a certain meaning with it as well.
September 13, 2005
Seven Reasons To Become a Founding Entrepreneur
In my recent post Seven Founding Sins, I outlined a number of potential mistakes that founders commit that can limit the success of their endeavor. However, I thought that I would balance that post with a positive one. Despite the many similar lists (here and here) detailing how to know that you are an entrepreneur, I wanted to share my own thoughts on the great reasons to become one. I could argue that the title “Founder” is the best one in the world to have, and the following are a few reasons why (from my own perspective).
Creation. The essence of a founder’s job is to create something where there was previously nothing. An idea becomes a plan; a plan produces a product; a product launches a company. To me, the notion of conceiving and building something both tangible and real is paramount.
Evangelizing. From the second that a founder begins to craft something, his/her job is to spread the word – to potential co-founders, employees, customers, investors, etc. What could be better than talking about something which you are building and are truly excited about with as many people possible?
Variety. The title “Founder” is function-agnostic. Sure, someone may be a technical founder or a founder with expertise & a formal leadership role in another function (sales, marketing, etc.), but during those exciting early days everyone is wearing many different hats. The diversity in the tasks required of someone in this role necessitates that there is rarely a dull moment.
Upside. Most great founders aren’t solely motivated by money, as there are many intrinsic rewards for choosing this path (and probably other better risk-adjusted ways to generate personal wealth). But I think that financial upside absolutely is – and should be – a key component for any founder motivations. It’s no secret that the rewards for successful founders can be land somewhere between generous and astronomical.
Control. Many jobs leave the much of one’s destiny to the group he/she works in, the company he/she works for, etc. Obviously, there are extraneous unmalleable factors with everything in life, career paths are no exception. But a founder is in a unique position to be largely in control of his/her own destiny like few other roles allow.
Passion. A founder with authenticity (see founding sin #1) doesn’t just conceptually understand the problem being solved or value being created, he/she believes and knows it. This deeper resonance produces a reward and benefit that potentially overshadows the others.
People. Someone once defined entrepreneur to me as “Someone who creates with resources that aren’t under his/her direct control.” (Anyone know the source of this?). And while a founder does have more control than those in many other positions, he/she ultimately relies on other people. A founder must recruit in, and then rely on, every single person and constituency who can affect his/her company’s success. And I think that’s great.
September 8, 2005
eBay and Skype: Connectivity over Content
With today’s buzz surround the rumor of eBay’s potential acquisition of Skype, I was struck by what the larger implications of this move would be. One of my readers, Zbigniew Lukasiak, recently brought to my attention an article which I read last weekend. Written by Andrew Odlyzko, “Content is Not King” maintains “that connectivity is more important than content.” Citing historical industry revenue figures, Odlyzko makes the point that “spending on connectivity [point-to-point communications] is much more important for communication services than spending on content can ever be.” Though the article is a little long and somewhat dated, it is a good academic argument supporting this thesis.
If these eBay rumors are indeed true, it represents a significant departure from the company’s current main business lines. And at a speculated multibillion dollar price-tag, the deal would certainly be valued at more than its most recent acquisition, Shopping.com, a “content” site. While the latter deal makes sense to me strategically, the Skype one for me is a stretch. Certainly there are other more strategic content companies out there for eBay to acquire. Given a blank slate to spend suspending strategic considerations, eBay’s possible move re-raises the question – is connectivity worth more than content?
September 7, 2005
Seven Founding Sins
Over the past couple years, I have been involved with and close to a number of both successful and unsuccessful startups. To me, the most exciting (and most perilous) times in a company’s life-cycle are the early first stages when it is just getting off the ground. The company’s founder(s) role is an essential one which carriers many risks for missteps. So I’ve compiled what I’ve learned to be the Seven Founding Sins – common mistakes which often divert entrepreneurs off the path towards success.
Inauthenticity. While there are notable exceptions, most successful entrepreneurial endeavors are sprung from a genuine idea born from true experience or direct & tangible observation. A founding team should not only have the relevant experience, but also immediate and authentic understanding of the end-users’/customers’ need. Blank-slate brainstormed white-board ideas rarely even deserve the material that they’re written on. Great ideas search for a great entrepreneur; great entrepreneurs don’t search for a great idea.
Sloth. It may seem obvious, but founding a company is not a full-time job. It’s a full-time life. And then some. And then some more. Only those who truly understand this notion have a shot.
Extravagance. A startup is just that – a startup. Without the full corporate infrastructure support, and more importantly, without extensive monetary resources, founders and employees must spend wisely. Even if VC financing has been raised, extravagant and wasteful spending by a few founders/leadership sets the tone for the entire organization. Jet-set lifestyles are appropriate after the liquidity event, as employees treat resources with the same respect that those in power do.
Taciturnity. Rapid progress and constant adjustment in a new endeavor requires continuous communication of these changes. Founders need to ensure that all of the constituents who are involved in making the company a success – co-founders, (prospective) investors, advisors, (potential) customers, employees, analysts, press, bloggers, professional service providers, etc. – are regularly updated with an accurate and realistic assessment of both developments and challenges that affect them specifically.
Greed. Holding too tightly to the percentage of ownership figure doesn’t allow room for a company to attract the leadership, employees, and investors that will maximize shareholder value – including the founders’. A flourishing startup endeavor requires investing equity in others to generate substantial return.
Arrogance. There is a fine line between a beneficial pride of confidence and a dangerous arrogant hubris. Founders must realize the limits of their abilities and seek help/input about when others on the team are more informed or in a better position to make decisions. Letting others control activities frees founders to contribute where they can best – in whatever role that may be. Nobody, including a founder, is always right.
Indecisiveness. The beauty of a startup is that there are endless possibilities. The difficulty is to concentrate on one opportunity, not every opportunity. The sooner that a new company can find its focus and make strides, the better. Of course any new company necessitates flexibility, but there is greater risk in trying to be “all things to all people” than succumbing to rigidity. In the end, tough choices are indeed tough, founding entrepreneurs need to make them.
September 1, 2005
An Alpha Post
Thinking about the meaning of “beta” after yesterday’s entry concerning the term’s potential overuse, I wish the term could be alternatively applied in one certain situation – on my blog posts. More generally, what if there was a way to meta-tag content, like blog-posts, with a level of how thought-out the ideas are contained within? One could classify each idea along the typical development stage nomenclature of pre-alpha, alpha, beta, and gold/release. There are many times when I would to have liked to signal to readers that what I am expressing is just a new idea that I am toying with, not something that I’ve spent a lot of time on with hard-felt beliefs. The following are some of my other posts correlated to how developed the ideas were when I posted them:
Pre-alpha: Musing on Three Not-So-Fully-Baked Ideas
Alpha: An Entrepreneur’s Perspective on Information Asymmetry in Bootstrapping
Beta: All That (Content) Glitters is Not Gold
Gold/Release: Why I Like Our NewsGator Investment
Perhaps we could use microformats, tags, or some other system to accomplish this goal? I am just thinking out loud here; perhaps you could say that this post is in alpha stage.