Need to slow down?
January 31, 2007
via Fred
iPhone Commercial
January 30, 2007
Check out the latest iPhone commerical target="_self">here.
Okay already, I removed SNAP. . .
January 30, 2007
On occasion people email me about my blog. Mostly positive stuff, but recently more than a few of you have asked (demanded?) that I get rid of Snap Preview (the feature that gave you a look at a page before you actually clicked on it). I guess lots of people are annoyed by it. Anyway, it is gone now. Performancing has a post explaining why Snap is bad for your blog:
- Accidental triggers: When scrolling, or just moving from one element (maybe a link, maybe a photo etc) to another, the unintentional triggering of the SPA popup is distracting, at best. It draws the eye away from the task at hand, and causes annoyance, and loss of concentration — if you’re actually selling anything, pay close attention to this point!
- Click stalling: Quite often, when trying to click a link that features the Snap abomination, I have to click several times to get the damn thing to work. This is too much effort. If your site is that hard to use, you can bet I wont be back, and neither will others.
- I trust you: No, really I do! Im at your blog, despite like everyone else being really busy, im at your blog! I just want to follow the fucking link ok? Dont crowd me like some over-eager second hand car salesman trying to sell me a dodgy link, just let me see that its a link, read the anchor text and decide if I want to click it. I dont care what the bloody site looks like, if you’re linking to it, that’s good enough for me — really, get out of my face.
Linden Labs = DeBeers
January 30, 2007
Much attention has been given to the virtual world called Second Life. The world has its own currency, commerce and land. What bothers me about virtual worlds like Second Life is that wealth created in the world is artificial. Land is a commodity in Second Life, but just like DeBeers controls the value of diamonds, Linden Labs controls the value of land in their world. At any moment Linden Lab could just ‘create’ more land just as DeBeers could open their Swiss vaults and flood the streets with diamonds.
Looks like a parallel world is being created in Second Life’s image. This ‘metaverse’ will be distributed instead of centralized. Now anyone can create land and value will be based on location not scarcity. Anyone with a server will be able to ‘expand’ the universe. In a distributed world Phillip Rosedale wouldn’t be King, instead he would be a simple citizen. I wonder if Second Life will connect their world to the new open world?
Court rules in favor of online ‘journalists’
January 30, 2007
A Calofornia court ruled that Apple would have to pay $700,000 (defense costs X 2.2) to bloggers who fought a subpoena issued by Apple. Turns out, according tot he court, bloggers are afforded the same rights as a traditionally given to journalists; including the right to offer their sources confidentiality. The bloggers don’t have to turn over the identity of their sources. The EFF helped defend the bloggers saying,
"We are very pleased, as this will go a long way towards keeping EFF on the forefront of impact litigation defending the rights of online journalists and others," EFF Staff Attorney Kurt Opsahl wrote in an email. "Bloggers break the news, just like journalists do. They must be able to promise confidentiality in order to maintain the free flow of information. Without legal protection, informants will refuse to talk to reporters, diminishing the power of the open press that is the cornerstone of a free society."
The matter seems closed as Apple decided not to appeal the decision and paid the bloggers in full.
Big in Japan Source Code Release
January 29, 2007
Last year I got a wild hair and decided that Big in Japan should release its RSS tools using an open source license. The move was the right decision and lots of folks have taken us up on our offer and repurposed the code. Literally almost a hundred thousand people have downloaded one or more of the tools. Several people have launched versions of the tools and attempted to sell the running version on eBay (some through fraud). It has been interesting to watch.
Other people are taking our idea and running with it in their own business. Today I was reading a post on the WebPl.US blog:
So the question is, where is the business model going, and how will it affect my business? Well the next major trend I think we’ll see is in the SaaS market moving to partial open source. Take a gander over at Biggu’s move to release the source code to a few of their tools. This was a smart move for three reasons: 1. They couldn’t keep up with the hackers trying to break their apps, so they let everyone else deal with it. 2. They weren’t making money from the apps they open sourced, so this lets them reallocate resources to revenue generating projects. 3. It was a major PR tool, it allowed their other revenue generating products (podcall, podserve, etc.) generate some good buzz and ultimately some more exposure.
Now its hard to extract a clearcut business model from Biggu’s move, but its sort of what I’m about to get to. My suggestion for what could be a very successful SaaS move would be to open source the entry level version of your app. Give it away, free! But do that instead of offering a free for life account on your system. Let the community who was less likely to pay for your product or might have had their concerns about offloading their data to another host run it locally. Just give away a stripped down version of your product. This gives developers and end users a taste of what there is. Then turn around and sell/lease/rent your pro versions with more features. The users will see the missing features and flock to this paid model. The SaaS model itself has already been proven, as it gives end users a cheaper way to get into the software versus the high up front costs of a traditional software model, and people are more likely to try the software and keep it if its easy to get into.
It will be interesting to see what the web application landscape will look like in the next ten years. Will open source rein supreme?
Bankruptcy = Success?
January 29, 2007
According to Robert Young of GigaOm, "The ability for a U.S. entrepreneur to go bankrupt is actually the most important element of this country’s economic success and wealth. It’s a great example of why I love counterintuitive thinking."
The post is titled "Bankruptcy: The Opportunity to Fail" and suggests, "…the greatest invention in this democracy and capitalist system we live in and know as the United States is, of all things, bankruptcy."
Having been ‘there’ and ‘done’ that I would have to agree. Of course failure is no fun and bankruptcy is the ultimate and final form of failure in business. I recommend avoiding it at all costs in your personal life, but in the venture capital space you NEED to take risks that could result in huge returns or massive losses. Singles and Doubles don’t cut it when your term sheet requires you to return 5x the investment before your team sees a dime. Read more from Lightspeed here.
The Costanza Principle
January 28, 2007
If you are a fan of the sitcom Seinfeld, you will no doubt recall George Costanza’s strategy of doing the exact opposite of what he normally would do to turn his life around. Of course it worked for George who got the girl and the job with the strategy.
I can’t help but think that others have inadvertantly had success do to this principle, what I like to call the Costanza Principle. For example, the whole open source movement ~ i.e. giving software away for free instead of selling it has ironically made hundreds of millionaires.
Lots of other people have taken the Costanza Principle and applied it to their field of work. For example, Michael Port applied the principle to sales:
Standard Suggestion: "Always Be Closing"
Costanza Principle: "Always Be Opening"
Explaination: Why? Because you never know when a complex sale is going to be “made.” Our job is to continue to open doors not work to close them. How do you do this? With an always have something to invite people to offer. Stop selling and start inviting. Deliver so much value that you think you’ve gone to far and then deliver more. The people you’re meant to serve will then raise their hands and ask to buy from you.
Standard Suggestion: "There’s a Sucker Born Every Minute"
Costanza Principle: "Our Customers Are Smarter Than We Think"
Explaination: Well, obviously this typical sales shtick is low vibrational and absurd if you’re selling high value services. But we still hear it all the time as part of the typical sales mentality. Why must we continuously disrespect our customers—the people we’re supposed to be serving (serving being the operative word)? I’m spoken down to all the time by people selling me a wide range of products It doesn’t matter whether I’m buying new hardwood floors, stereo equipment, or a salmon filet at the market, I am perpetually perplexed at how people talk down to those whom they wish to sell to. The odd thing is… it is actually a lot easier to sell when we respect the intelligence of our customers. And when we do, they tell us how to sell them what they want.
Standard Suggestion: "Speed Selling (AKA Close Early and Close Often)"
Costanza Principle: "Slow Down!!!"
Explaination:
I do almost everything quickly. Ask anyone that knows me and they’ll tell you that patience is not my greatest virtue.
But there is one thing I do slowly–sell. Which is the opposite of the typical selling paradigm, isn’t it?
Why must we rush that process? Why must we set up sales processes and bonus structures and incentive plans for closing sales quickly? Why must it always be about the end of the month, or the quarter or whatever?
I’ve been searching for a new Customer Relationship Management (CRM) software for some time now and believe that I’ve found the system that I’d like to use. However, in order to use it, I need to have an application built that will integrate all of my customer and client data between my online system and this new CRM system.
The salesman that I’m dealing with is a really nice guy. He’s been super helpful. In fact, he’s extended our trial period for the software a number of times because my programmer needs to access it to create the app and it’s taking longer than expected to build, as is often the case in software development.
One problem though… this lovely salesman keeps calling and emailing with great urgency at the end of each month to see if I’m ready to close the deal. In fact, he calls each time letting me know that it’s the end of the month and he’d really like to hit his numbers so he’s hoping I can make something happen before the end of that week or, worse yet, the end of that day.
Now, again, he’s a really nice fellow, but I’m not buying this system for him. And I’m certainly not buying it according to his time frame so he can make his numbers.
The point is, we often set up processes that are meant to incentivize our sales people, and all they do is put pressure on our sales people to then put pressure on our potential customers.
What if we reversed the process? What if we rewarded our sales people for building trust over time? What if our sales professionals were offered bigger bonuses when they made more (and more meaningful) contacts with potential customers over longer periods of time? What if we offered a bigger bonus to a salesperson because they made a sale three years after first contact rather than 3 seconds after the first contact?
What if, just once, we thought about the not so distant future rather than just the next few minutes? Not only will you have happier prospects but you might also just have better customers. At least think about it… please?
Standard Suggestion: "Don’t Sell the Steak, Sell the Sizzle"
Costanza Principle: "Sell the Steak (AKA Sell the real value)"
Explaination:
I know. I know. A little sizzle is helpful—as long as it’s part of the story of the product and reflects what the product actually offers. When I hear “don’t sell the steak, sell the sizzle” I immediately loose my appetite because it invariably leads to over-hyped totally unrealistic promises (aka: lies). Which, as you well know will diminish the trust and credibility you are trying to build with potential clients. I’ve been working on cutting out the unnecessary and extraneous hype from my language, my writing, and other marketing materials. I’m not 100% there yet but getting better.
Look, here’s the thing. Many sales professionals “have” to sell products that are far from a 16oz. perfectly aged and seasoned filet. They may be trying to sell left over scraps and they are forced to try to find a way to create some sizzle. But you don’t have that problem. (If you do, get out of that business.) You offer a remarkable product that a highly targeted, very specific group of people or businesses would go nuts for.
Just tell the truth. People really like that. Remember, our customers are smarter than we think.
You can sell ‘virtually’ anything on eBay. . .
January 27, 2007
You just can’t sell ‘virtual’ goods. Nick Douglas points to an article on Slashdot that explains that eBay won’t let you sell virtual stuff on the site. Evidently an eBay spokesperson suggested that anyone caught trying to sell virtual goods would be punished. Nick noticed the irony:
"So much for eBay founder-chairman Pierre Omidyar, who also invested in Linden Lab, makers of the virtual world Second Life. "This generation that grew up on video games is blurring the lines between games and real life," he told BusinessWeek in May. Guess blurring doesn’t count when eBay’s money is on the line."
The official policy, "The seller must be the owner of the underlying intellectual property, or authorized to distribute it by the intellectual property owner." Slashdot explains:
Mr. Hani Durzy, speaking for eBay, explained that the decision to pull these items was due to the ‘legal complexities’ surrounding virtual property. "For the overall health of the marketplace" the company felt that the proper course of action, after considerable contemplation, was to ban the sale of these items outright. While he couldn’t give me a specific date when the delistings began, he estimated that they’ve been coming down for about a month or so. Mr. Durzy pointed out that in reality, the company is just now following through with a pre-existing policy, as opposed to creating a new one. Given the nebulous nature of ownership in online games, eBay has decided the prudent decision is to remove the possibility for players to sell what might be the IP of other parties via their service. Mr. Durzy made it a point to say that initial listings of virtual property would not have punitive actions. Their assumption, he said, is that most users break with policies because they’re unaware of them, rather than maliciously. Initial infractions will result in a delisting of items, and an attempt to educate the user on the policy. Persistent disregard for the policies, of course, will result in a removal of the seller’s account.
TED needs your help!
January 26, 2007
Are you a specialist with regard to billing an ecommerce? Chris Anderson’s TED Conference is moving to a year round membership model. The idea is to include not only the conference, but TED book club mailings, conference DVDs, access to TED’s networking tools and so on.
I of course love TED and planned to attend. I pinged Chris and suggested that if he was moving to a membership model (and raising the price by 50% to boot) he should consider charging monthly fees instead of a single one-time payment. Chris indicated, "we’re not set up to do this."
I am too busy to help Chris set up monthly recurring billing for members, but I am sure someone out there can help. You can reach Chris via email at chris@ted.com. Who is Chris? According to his bio: he is the curator of the TED Conference held each February in Monterey, California. The son of British missionaries, he was raised in India, Pakistan and Afghanistan before British ‘public’ school and an Oxford degree in Philosophy. A brief career in journalism, coupled with a passion for technology, inspired his launch in 1985 of Future Publishing, a computer magazine company based in the UK. In November of 2000, Anderson left Future to concentrate on the work of his non-profit foundation, The Sapling Foundation, dedicated to effect change by leveraging the power of ideas via technology, education, smart design and mass media. The TED Conference (TED stands for Technology, Entertainment Design) is now owned by the foundation.
Sun: Quick on the draw to engage!
January 26, 2007
Matt and I wrote posts somewhat critical of Sun a few days ago. Since then the folks at Sun gave me a call and offered to resolve the issue. They also asked me how they might address the small business and startup space more effectively. Matt followed up with a post here and explains,
Where does that leave Automattic now? We just brought 20 new HP/Debian boxes online. David Comay followed up his comment with an email requesting to get together, and since he’s a kernel hacker and not a sales guy I’m very open to that. Likewise with Jeff Barr from Amazon, though their web services are so beautifully self-service I wonder what we’ll chat about. Another chance for Sun? Time will tell. For us it’s a pragmatic issue, not a religious one. If nothing else, I’m hopeful that the discussions spawned will help put Sun’s nascent startup efforts back on track.
Dallas based Skywire in fight with Atlanta based Ebix
January 25, 2007
I reported back in December that Skywire was aquiring Docucorp for $127MM or $10 per share. Today Ebix announced they are countering the Skywire offer. Their deal offers $11 per share or $140MM, here is the breakdown:
- $45 million in cash. Ebix has already secured a preliminary commitment letter to handle the $45 million cash component.
- $95 million in the form of 3,467,153 shares of newly registered Ebix stock, valued at $ 27.40 per share (the preceding 30 day average price of the Ebix common stock).
- Ebix proposes to pass on to Docucorp shareholders up to 10% of any price appreciation in the shares of Ebix common stock (pledged in the equity component of the Ebix offer) beyond the 30-day average price of $27.40. Beyond such appreciation, the number of shares provided in the offer would be reduced to bring the total value of the equity consideration upon closing to approximately $104.5 million.
- The above would imply that Ebix offer would be $140 million at the low end and $149.5 million at the high end.
- Similarly, in the event of a decrease in the price of Ebix common stock prior to the proposed merger, the number of shares would automatically be increased to provide for an equity value of $95 million. This provision would hold true up to a collar value of $24.50 for the Ebix stock, or a maximum of approximately 3.88 million Ebix shares.
- Ebix is open to increasing the cash component of its offer if the need arises and if the Docucorp Board determines that this would be in the best interest of its shareholders. To generate additional cash for closing, Ebix, intends to sell shares of its common stock to a select group of institutional investors who have shown an active interest in participating in a private placement of Ebix stock.
Texas Startup Job Board
January 24, 2007
We a starting a little job board experiment. We will be providing job listings for Texas startups here. The skeleton site is created, we will be making it look pretty over the next month. Feel free to give it a try.
Building your business in the nude?
January 22, 2007
Guy Kasawaski asks, "Is a business plan necessary?" He quotes from an article in the new ’slim’ edition of the Wall Street Journal to help answer his question. According to the Journal Babson College released a study comparing the success of over 116 businesses started by alumni and determined that "the study found no statistical difference in success between those businesses started with formal written plans and those without them…"
Guy agrees with the findings of the study but takes issue with the statement, “unless a would-be entrepreneur needs to raise substantial startup capital from institutional investors or business angels, there is no compelling reason to write a detailed business plan." He suggests that most venture capitalists don’t spend more than ten minutes reading your plan, much less believing what your write. He explains, "Most of the plans that we see at Garage are too long and too detailed—to the point of reducing credibility." Guy’s advice:
- Perfect your pitch, then write your plan.
- Use the business-plan exercise as a way to get your team on the same page.
- Keep it short: ten to twenty pages.
- Spend no more than two weeks writing it.
- Don’t get obsessed with with details in your financial forecast because it should be one page long.
We never wrote a business plan for Architel or Big in Japan. Had we it would be fun to read our first draft and compare it to the businesses as they exist. I can assure you, they would bear little resemblence to our business today.
Sun Apologizes . . .
January 21, 2007
Last week I blogged about Matt’s comments and reprinted an earlier post I wrote titled, "Eclipse at Sun." Turns out Jonathan, the CEO of Sun, apologized to Matt in his own blog on Friday in a post titled, "Courage is Relative." (Originally titled "Good, Bad and Brave" He wrote:
And before you send me the email, yes, I saw the entry written by Matt Mullenweg - and all I can say is… I’m really sorry, Matt. That’s not the way Startup Essentials is supposed to work. We screwed up, and you’re completely right to suggest if that’s the norm, we should kiss goodbye our aspirations of reestablishing our business in the startup community. If there’s anything I can do to win a second chance, I’d like to know. I appreciate your first sentence.
I will be interested to read Matt’s response when he returns from La Paz.
Search
-
Startup Jobs
-
Recent Network Posts
-
Interview with Phil Yanov - Founder of GSATC
From South Carolina Startup Blog -
Interview with Matt Dunbar of the Upstate Carolina Angel Network
From South Carolina Startup Blog -
Calling all NC Start-Ups!
From North Carolina Startup Blog -
Drew Curtis, Fark and a curry recipe database Part 1
From Kentucky Startup Blog -
Can you hand me the business section?
From North Carolina Startup Blog -
New Economy Survey
From Kentucky Startup Blog -
Interview with Evan Tishuk of OrangeCoat
From South Carolina Startup Blog -
Young Entrepreneurs of Lexington
From Kentucky Startup Blog -
Welcome to the Washington Startup Blog
From Washington Startup Blog -
Welcome to the Alabama Startup Blog
From Alabama Startup Blog
-
Interview with Phil Yanov - Founder of GSATC
Advertisement
