OnlyOnce

Techstars: One Pitfall to Avoid

Techstars:  One Pitfall to Avoid

George and I met with our Techstars "mentee" companies again yesterday.  As was the case with the last meetings, the sessions were energizing and fun and great to see new companies unfolding. One lesson I was reminded of yesterday with both companies is a timeless one, since at least the beginning of the commercial internet:

Don't create a "solution looking for a problem"

I call this the Pointcast problem, after the mid-90s service that pulled headlines into screensavers and clogged corporate networks until the fad passed. 

One of the companies we're working with has this challenge looming in front of them.  They have a very cool concept and technology.  It's clear that it solves some problems, but there are many possible problems it solves, for many different people.

The key to get past this hurdle in the development of a business is to force yourself to articulate one or more very clear, crisp definitions of "it solves THIS problem for THIS person who is willing to pay THIS amount of money to have the problem solved."  Even if you end up with two or three of these statements to then go concept test in the market, at least you will be able to shape your product and messaging development towards getting into the revenue jetstream somewhere, to quote my friend David Kidder from Clickable.

First day at Techstars: Where do you start?

First day at Techstars:  Where do you start?

I'm a new mentor this year at Techstars, a program in its third or fourth year in Boulder (and this year also in Boston for the first time) that provides a couple dozen companies with seed capital, advice and mentorship, and summer "incubation" services in a really well conceived for-profit venture started by David Cohen in Colorado.

Yesterday was my first day up there with my colleague George Bilbrey, and we met with three different companies, two of which we will tag team mentor through the summer.  I won't get into who they are at the moment, mostly because I'm not sure what the confidentiality issues are offhand, but I'll make the first of a series of posts here about observations I make from doing this work.

Yesterday's thought was:  Where do you start?

It was so interesting to meet with in some cases pretty raw companies.  They weren't exactly "a guy with an idea," but for the most part they were <5 person teams with a working code base and some theories about who would buy the product. 

So where do you start on the question of business planning.  Do you dive into the deep end of details?  (What should we charge?  How do I get my first 5 beta customers?  What about this new feature?)  Or do you wade into the shallow end of methodical planning?  (Who is our target market?  What problem are we solving?  How much is it worth to the prospect?  What will it cost us to produce, sell, and support the product?)  We heard both of those approaches yesterday across the three companies. 

My conclusion isn't that there's a single correct answer.  For most mortals, it's probably the case that while it's good to have a product and an inspiration behind it, there's a long road between that and a successful company that requires careful articulation of the basics and a good grip on potential economics before incremental investments of time or money. 

But there are the occasional companies whose ideas are so perfectly timed for such a large market or user base that some of the method can be ditched up front in the name of getting to market (think Twitter or eBay) -- provided that the company circles back to those basics down the road in order to grow smartly over time.

Anyway, it was a thought-provoking day and great to see new entrepreneurs and ideas take root.  George and I have a series of six sessions set up with these companies as well as the full Techstars Demo Day in early August.  I'll try to blog some thoughts after each session.

Five Years On

Five Years On

As of this past weekend, I've been blogging on OnlyOnce for five years.  My main reflection as I was thinking about it during this morning's run is that blogging is different.  I started blogging to try out what was at the time the "new, new thing" (there were almost no CEO blogs at the time), just like I have tried out lots of other new technologies or web services from time to time over the years -- from Skype to Facebook to Twitter to about 50 others.

You'll never see a tweet from me about an anniversary of using Twitter.  Or any other comparable from that above list.  Blogging has ended up being fundamentally different.  It's not just another expression of my status updates or another way to connect with friends and colleagues.  It's become a core part of my business operating system, although I suppose that's the case for many other tools as well. 

I think the main difference is that OnlyOnce has become a true form of creative expression for me.  It's like (I imagine) writing a book or composing a piece of music. I'm not suggesting it's high art, but I view it more as an ongoing project than most other online tools or sites I've tried out over the years.

Here's to the next five years of it.

Vertical (Dis)Integration

Vertical (Dis)Integration

A couple years ago, Dave Morgan wrote one of the best thought pieces on the future of the newspaper business in his Mediapost column.  Essentially his observation was that newspapers are an outdated vertical integration, and that to survive, smart papers would disaggregate into 5 separate companies and run each one as a separate business, taking on a new life unshackled from the newspaper:  local ad sales (they could own that franchise for the Yelps and Yodles of the world), local content (who better to syndicate local content?), local distribution (no other companies drop something on every doorstep every day), printing (still a business that requires scale), and digital.  It's just a brilliant idea.

And it's a shame none of them followed his advice, since they're all going out of business now.

What occurred to me this week as I'm soaking in the goodness that is my new Amazon Kindle is that while newspapers may need to disaggregate to stay alive, Amazon is slowly amassing a strategy of very clever vertical integration that could well fuel its growth for decades to come.

The Kindle is brilliant vertical integration -- it's the device, the distribution, and the retail model all in one.  And if Amazon is smart, eventually once they have enough market share, they'll just start doing deals directly with authors and cut out the publishing industry altogether and own the content as well.  They can hit both the long tail (with publishing and distribution costs approaching zero, the risk associated with signing a new untested writer for a revenue share deal are nil) as well as the head (cool place to release your newest book if you're, say, Steven King).  And at that point, they'll have a model that should produce an enormous amount of profit for them.

It's interesting to look at these two situations in parallel -- the transition of old media to new media, with one set of losers and a winner, where winning strategies are polar opposites.

I Don't Want to Be Your Friend (Today)

I Don't Want to Be Your Friend (Today)

The biggest problem with all the social networks, as far as I can tell, is that there's no easy and obvious way for me to differentiate the people to whom I am connected either by type of person or by how closely connected we are.

I have about 400 on Facebook and 600 on LinkedIn.  And I'm still adding ones as new people get on the two networks for the first time.  While it seems to people in the industry here that "everyone is on Facebook," it's not true yet.  Facebook is making its way slowly (in Geoffrey Moore terms) through Main Street.  Main Street is a big place.

But not all friends are created equal.  There are some where I'm happy to read their status updates or get invited to their events.  There are some where I'm happy if they see pictures of me.  But there are others where neither of these is the case.  Why can't I let only those friends who I tag as "summer camp" see pictures of me that are tagged as being from summer camp?  Why can't I only get event invitations from "close friends"?  Wouldn't LinkedIn be better if it only allowed second and third degree connections to come from "strong" connections instead of "weak" ones?

It's also hard to not accept a connection from someone you know.  Here's a great example.  A guy to whom I have a very tenuous business connection (but a real one) friends me on Facebook.  I ignore him.  He does it again.  I ignore him again.  And a third time.  Finally, he emails me with some quasi-legitimate business purpose and asks why I'm ignoring him -- he sees that I'm active on Facebook, so I *must* be ignoring him.  Sigh.  I make up some feeble excuse and go accept his connection.  Next thing I know, I'm getting an invitation from this guy for "International Hug a Jew Day," followed by an onslaught of messages from everyone else in his address book in some kind of reply-to-all functionality.  Now, I'm a Jew, and I don't mind a hug now and then, but this crap, I could do without. 

I mentioned this problem to a friend the other day who told me the problem was me.  "You just have too many friends.  I reject everyone who connects to me unless they're a really, super close friend."  Ok, fine, I am a connector, but I don't need a web site to help me stay connected to the 13 people I talk to on the phone or see in person.  The beauty of social networks is to enable some level of communication with a much broader universe -- including on some occasions people I don't know at all.  That communication, and the occasional serendipity that accompanies it, goes away if I keep my circle of friends narrow.  In fact, I do discriminate at some level in terms of who I accept connections from.  I don't accept them from people I truly don't know, which isn't a small number.  It's amazing how many people try to connect to me who I have never met or maybe who picked up my business card somewhere.

The tools to handle this today are crude and only around the edges.  I can ignore people or block them, but that means I never get to see what they're up to (and vice versa).  That eliminates the serendipity factor as well.  Facebook has some functionality to let me "see more from some people and less from others" -- but it's hard to find, it's unclear how it works, and it's incredibly difficult to use.  Sure, I can "never accept event invitations from this person," or hide someone's updates on home page, but those tools are clunky and reactive.

When are the folks at LinkedIn and Facebook going to solve this?  Feels like tagging, basic behavioral analysis, and checkboxes at point of "friending" aren't exactly bleeding edge technologies any more.

Senders No More

Senders No More

February marked the official end of Return Path being in the email sending business, even a little bit. Of course we still have corporate email servers, and we still have basic retention email marketing programs for our customers and prospects (with explicit permission of course!), but after a 9 1/2 year run, we no longer have direct consumer email-based relationships.

As we announced last fall, we recently divested all of our businesses other than our deliverability and whitelisting business -- Postmaster Direct (list rental), Authentic Response/MyView.com (surveys), and ECOA (change of address). Those were great businesses, but they increasingly diverged over the years from each other and from our core deliverability business, so it made sense for them to belong to different companies in the end.

Besides diverging from each other, being a bulk sender of email had both advantages and disadvantages for us as a company. On the one hand, it was good for us to see firsthand what some of the issues are that impact our clients. We were, in fact, our own clients, one business unit to another. But on the other hand, being a bulk sender carried a real business risk of compromising our position as a trusted intermediary between senders and receivers. It was always a fine line to walk, and while we never got in trouble for it, we were always concerned -- to the point where for a long time we didn't allow our other business units to apply for our whitelist, Sender Score Certified, even at "arm's length." At least we weren't an ESP!

But now that risk is gone. We are senders no more. Be sure to read our CTO's description of what it was like to send a transactional privacy policy notification to 20mm addresses, most of which hadn't been mailed in months or years.

More Useful Than I Thought

More Useful Than I Thought

I've had a Twitter account for a couple years but only started using it in earnest in the last couple of weeks.  And while it is to some extent yet another distraction and flow of information, it's proving to be much more useful than I thought.  Here are some nuggets from literally less than a week of heavy usage:

- Nice quick exchanges with three existing customers who I otherwise wouldn't talk to

- Already have over 200 followers, at least 50% just in the last few days

- One set of direct messages, and we turned a skeptic into a free trial provided that the client work with us on an important but difficult case study we've been meaning to generate for a while

- One quick @reply later, and I turned someone asking about our services into a live sales call with a local sales team member in London and a positive public tweet back about us

- An exchange with a customer who left us for the competition (partially - he's still on Sender Score Certified) and said something snarky about us on Twitter yielded a positive tweet and this comment: 

Thanks going out of your way to better understand your customers. That in and of itself means a lot.

- Serendipity - I was on the west coast, noted it, and a friend there pinged me to see if I had time to get together (I didn't this trip, but that would have been a nice bonus)

- Set up my blog to notify of any new post via Twitter using twitterfeed.com...set up Facebook to pick up my tweets as status updates using the Facebook Twitter app.  The result is that my traffic is WAY up on the blog

I'm sold.  Now I just need to figure out how to be interesting and brief at the same time.

Less is More

Less is More

I have a challenge for the email marketing community in 2009. Let's make this the Year of "Less is More."

Marketers are turning to email more and more in this down economy. There's no question about that. My great fear is that just means they're sending more and more and more emails out without being smart about their programs. That will have positive short term effects and drive revenues, but long term it will have a negative long term impact on inboxes everywhere. And these same marketers will find their short term positive results turning into poor deliverability faster than you can say "complaint rate spike."

I heard a wonderful case study this week from Chip House at ExactTarget at the EEC Conference. One of his clients, a non-profit, took the bold and yet painful step of permissioning an opt-out list. Yikes. That word sends shivers down the spine of marketers everywhere. What are you saying? You want me to reduce the size of my prime asset? The results of a campaign done before and after the permission pass are very telling and should be a lesson to all of us. The list shrank from 34,000 to 4,500. Bounce rate decreased from 9% to under 1%. Spam complaints went from 27 to 0 (ZERO). Open rate spiked from 25% to 53%. Click-through from 7% to 22%. And clicks? 509 before the permissioning, 510 after. This client generated the same results, with better metrics along the way, by sending out 87% LESS EMAIL. Why? Because they only sent it to people who cared to receive it.

This is a great time for email. But marketers will kill the channel by just dumping more and more and more volume into it. Let's all make Less Is More our mantra for the year together. Is everyone in? Repeat after me...Less Is More! Less Is More!

Twitter

Twitter

A small administrative note...I changed my Twitter name to mattblumberg from its more obscure predecessor.  Not sure I'll tweet a lot more, but I may give it a try.

Charting A New Path: Focus is Our Friend

Charting A New Path:  Focus is Our Friend

When Return Path turned six years old a few years ago, I wrote a post on my personal blog (OnlyOnce) titled You Can't Tell What the Living Room Looks Like from the Front Porch. The essence of the post is that flexibility is a key success factor in starting and growing a business, and sometimes the business turns out different than what you thought when you wrote that business plan. At the time, I was commenting on how different Return Path turned out - operating five businesses - than we did when we started the original ECOA business in 1999.

Today, the message rings more true than ever. On the heels of our recent announcement that we have acquired our largest competitor in the deliverability space, Habeas, we announced a series of moves internally that chart a very new path forward for the company. We are:

• selling our ECOA business to FreshAddress, Inc., our long-time esteemed competitor in the email list hygiene and updating business;
• spinning out our Authentic Response market research business and our Postmaster Direct lead generation, list rental, and online media brokerage business into a new company called Authentic Response; and
• combining our Strategic Solutions consulting business in with the consulting portion of our Sender Score deliverability and whitelisting business to form a new, powerful global professional services team inside of Return Path

The title of this post says it all. Focus is Our Friend. Return Path and Authentic Response will be able to concentrate on their respective businesses, with more focus and resources to get the job done in the high quality, innovative way each has become known for.

Look for each business to come out with more exciting announcements in the weeks and months ahead as they begin to execute more swiftly as independent, focused companies. We wish our new partner - FreshAddress - well with the ECOA businesses that they've acquired from us. It's hard to let go of one's original business. I will have to blog about that separately sometime soon. We want to thank our dedicated clients and employees for their once and future contributions as we chart this new path forward.

You never do know what the living room looks like from the front porch.

Onward!