« December 2009 | Main | February 2010 »
January 15, 2010
Seven Lessons I've Learned Organizing Events
For the past five years, I’ve been organizing a regular event here in Boston called the Web Innovators Group (aka “WebInno”). Every couple months, 700-1000 web & mobile entrepreneurs, techies, startup junkies, and investors gather for one big meetup of the community. It’s been personally fulfilling to start something which begun as a small informal gathering grow into a real component of the local startup scene (and now drawing people from New York and Washington DC). I had no intentions of becoming a large event organizer (nor do I now have aspirations to become one more than I have). However, as a venture capitalist I believe that it’s incumbent on me not just to be a member of the entrepreneurial community but also truly participate in and contribute to it. Having started WebInno with no previous “events” experience, I’ve fumbled my way through putting them together at times. But along the way I learned a few general lessons which can be applied more broadly to organizing events, so I thought that I’d share them:
- FREE is the right price. Not that people aren’t willing to pay. I am sure that a subset of attendees would. But a cash outlay, of any price, raises the bar to committing to an event in advance. It just adds an incremental amount of friction in the decision as to whether or not to attend. We have great sponsors* which affords us the opportunity to accommodate the crowd with a reasonable space, but when the event was smaller with a modest (read: no) budget we found venues which held us for free. People just showed up when they heard about it and of course they could leave just as easily. But it turns out they stayed… and came back for the next event. If you polled people if they would like (a) free drink(s) or food included with an event, of course they’d say yes. But I don’t think that’s a necessary ingredient. People want other people, and if they want a drink they can buy one. I’d attribute much of the success of WebInno to the fact that it was free when few other events around town were.
- Listen by loudly asking for feedback… It sounds cheesy but it’s true. Some people will tell you their opinion anyway, but it may not be a representative cross-section of the attendees and likely not the best sample from the people you’d ideally like to attend. But if you specifically and repeatedly ASK the entire crowd, they’ll share their voice, as everybody liked to be heard. I’ve tweaked the event in many many ways (from adding a separate room for demo tables to alphabetic check-in folders) based on direct input from attendees.
- … but stay true to your vision. With many opinions, you’re bound to hear conflicting inputs. When soliciting feedback, I think it’s imperative that you take each suggestion and run it by a gut-check of your own vision of what you want the event to become.
- Content isn’t your main draw – the people are – but it’s a helpful anchor. People attend events because they want to meet and see other people. Period. But I think adding content gives them something to talk about, something to hang a hat on for an initial conversation with a new acquaintance or an old friend. Programming content, in the case of WebInno the demos and sometimes speaker/panels, transform it from a mere gathering into an event.
- The web is your friend. Organizing and promoting an event without all the helpful web applications would have been so much more difficult ten years ago. I’ve used Eventbrite for the registration logistics and can’t sing enough of its praises. The www.webinnovatorsgroup.com website is built on Wordpress with automatic updates maintained by Feedblitz. I use Constant Contact for the mass emailings. And of course social media has helped spread the word, from the nearly two thousand Twitter followers (@webinno) to all of the blog posts attendees write as follow up.
- The details matter. How bright the lights are. Where the podium is. How the chairs are arranged. Pauses during the program. Expectations about who’s attending. These are little things that affect how the event runs and how it’s perceived afterwards, and there are a lot of them. It’s imperative that you keep on top of them. All of them.
- Be nimble. An event changes over time, both in the size and the composition of the crowd, but also in the context of the environment. When I started WebInno it was a dozen people gathering in a bar with nametags, now it’s certainly a production. Along the way I’ve tweaked the format quite a bit, sometimes for the better and sometimes with less positive results. I’ve found that people forgive authentic mistakes but not contrived errors. When I’ve been open and honest about experimenting with new features and they don’t go well, I surely hear about it, but for the most part attendees understand and return.
- Ask for more feedback. I write it twice (and at it to a list of seven) because this one is the most important. Events spark magic when the right people go. I often hear stories about people meeting a cofounder of their company at WebInno, finding a customer, or connecting with a new employer. All of those stories make the work in organizing the event worth it. And so to that end, if you’ve attended the Web Innovators Group recently or in even the (way) past, and you have a suggestion, idea, or comment: I am open to hearing them. Feel free to comment on this blog post, message me @davidbeisel on twitter, or send me an email at [david at web innovators group dot com].
Wrapping up, I wanted to put a quick plug for the next WebInno event which is going to be held on March 1st: http://webinno25.eventbrite.com/. It’s open to everyone in the entrepreneurial web and mobile community here in Boston and outside it.
* Thanks to the 2010 platinum co-sponsors, Microsoft and Venrock, as well as newly added gold sponsor, Silicon Valley Bank.
January 7, 2010
Two Decade-Defining Acquisitions? Then (Google) & Now (Apple)
Back in 2003 Google acquired Applied Semantics for just over $100M. This startup had a little technology called AdSense which allowed for the presentation of contextually relevant ads on a set of distributed publisher sites. Obviously this moniker lives on in Google’s ad network, Adsense for Content, which serves as a base for a significant chunk of Google’s revenue today. In a decade in which we saw the web become increasingly distributed with a proliferation websites and content, this acquisition served as a foundation to empower Google to move beyond their core search Adwords product. With it, Google monetized via advertising not only on their own search pages, but beyond. I nodded my head in agreement reading Tristan Lewis’s post last month calling it the #1 tech deal that defined the decade.
Fast forward to this week (in a new decade) and Apple agrees to acquire Quattro Wireless. Like with Google’s acquisition of Applied Semantics, this deal adds a fundamentally new business model to the company. Not only will Apple now be able to monetize through physical product and content (first-party software & resold entertainment media) sales, it will be able to generate real revenue via advertising. In a decade where we’re going to see a proliferation of mobile device incarnations and media content manifestations, adding the ad network bow to the Apple quiver gives the company that ability to monetize not just at the core of what consumer experiences they control, but everywhere. Sound familiar? It should be duly noted that, unlike Google, Apple isn’t very acquisitive (14 vs. 59 in the past ten years). So when they buy something… it’s meaningful. And I think this move means a whole lot.
January 5, 2010
Majority of both Drivers and VCs are Above Average
Whenever I am navigating through the notorious Boston traffic, I am often reminded of the cognitive bias of illusory superiority. That is, the “above average effect,” which “causes people to overestimate their positive qualities and to underestimate their negative qualities, relative to others.” The Wikipedia article on the subject cites the classic study where a full 93% of U.S. drivers put themselves in the top half of the driving population. I can assure you that that percentage of drivers here in Boston I wouldn’t even consider “good,” let alone impossibly above the median.
The one other group which seems to exude this type of thinking is venture capitalists. I can’t tell you many times I’ve been at breakfast/lunch/cocktails with another one or a couple VCs and someone talks about all of the other “bad” VCs who don’t know what they’re doing. That they’re bad for the business and should get out. (It’s funny, but it’s always remarked that the present company is undoubtedly excluded.)
Yet the reasons discussed in these conversations are always different. Some VCs are aggressive in their willingness to “pay up” for a deal in a segment which is hot; some are biased not to follow the latest fad and invest for the long term. Some VCs are thesis driven and deliberate in their investments; some prefer to be flexible in their approach because, after all, real opportunities are just that - opportunistic. Some VCs prefer very early stage; some VCs prefer to see more traction and invest later. Some are at large funds with the ability to put significant amounts of capital to work; some are at small funds which can benefit from smaller exits. Some are “entrepreneur friendly”; others push “tough love” which works. Some VCs are at new firms which are nimble; some are at firms with heritage and a track record which matters. Some are VCs young and hungry; some are wise with experience. Some are former operators and entrepreneurs, so they’ve experienced both sides of the table; some are career VCs who benefit from the pattern recognition of having been involved in so many startups.
At the end of the day, all venture capitalists will tell you that they’re above average. Go ahead – ask one. Of course, they have to be… we’re eternally optimistic or we would be doing something else.
Naturally, not all venture capital returns can be above average (…or even good, but that’s the subject of another post.) But for the entrepreneur, I’d argue that you can and SHOULD have an above-average VC. And that situation is made possible because different VCs are right for different entrepreneurs. Of all the dimensions listed above (and a myriad of others which are important), many are qualitative and a reflection of the individual’s personal style. That approach should synch well with how an entrepreneur operates and what’s going to help him best achieve the goals for his business in maximizing shareholder value. Different entrepreneurs have disparate needs and qualities which a VC can compliment and partner with, and those aspects can even change for the same entrepreneur depending on where he is in the company life-cycle.
“What do you want from your VC?” I am often surprised how many entrepreneurs who are embarking on a fundraising process who can’t answer this question well. Because while not all venture capitalists can be above average, VC-entrepreneur relationships should be. And it makes sense to know what you’re looking for when you seeking it.
And yes, of course, I do consider myself to be an above average driver.