Exit Numbers – $100M is rarer than you think
Fred Wilson put up a post today that grabbed a slide from a recent presentation Mark Suster gave at a Founder Showcase event. The chart (and Fred’s post) back up with numbers the qualitative argument I was making in my recent post on Pattern Recognition (I wish I had these data when I wrote my original post!). In my post I argued that while there is plenty of talk about a handful of high flying companies (Zynga, Twitter, Facebook, etc.) that vast majority of venture back companies can expect significantly more modest outcomes. In fact history suggests that a majority won’t even return invested capital to investors. All this talk about the stratospheric valuations of this small group of companies however has investors fundamentally misjudging the chance that their latest investment will do the same. As the chart from Mark’s presentation clearly shows, not only is it the extreme exception for a company to hit the kind of valuations that are getting all of the press attention but even hitting the $100M mark is rare. On some level I think we all know this, but seeing the numbers in black and white really puts a exclamation point on exactly how rare it is. And as Fred points out (as did I in my prior post), investing in early stage companies at the kind of valuations that are prevailing today is a losing bet… …
June 22, 2011· 2 min read
The real bubble
great business plan tweet.jpg While there’s been plenty of discussion and debate about whether we’re in some kind of valuation/venture bubble right now for early stage tech, there is one bubble that I’m pretty sure of. I’m seeing more great business ideas right now than I can remember seeing at any time in my 10 year venture career. We typically see around 1,500 business plans a year at Foundry (we actually see more than that, but this is the approximate number that are relevant to our investment focus). On average we’ll take a meeting with somewhere around 10-15% of these and hear a bit more than what was in the introductory email or initial business plan. And we typically invest in 8 (our Foundry blog does a pretty good job of tracing our investment history and pace if you flip through our old posts). These numbers work for us and for our strategy and part of our operating philosopy is not to deviate significantly from our investment pace (depending on the mix of seed investments this number could go up or down in any given year but overall we’re comfortable at roughly the 6-10 new investments per year pace). …
March 4, 2011· 3 min read
HR as a core competency
In the world of start-ups, HR is at the bottom of the bottom of the heap of priorities most companies are working on. The vast majority of companies think about HR as a process and compliance function, outsource it to 3rd party providers (payroll, benefits, etc.) and doing their best to forget about it. If there’s any focus on HR as a function it is around recruiting (also typically outsourced and generally treated as very episodic). Sure – there’s plenty of talk about “culture” – of success, of working hard, of some other superlative that’s not particularly interesting or differentiating (“we want to hire great people and expect them to be hard working and successful!” duh) – but little real work done to actually execute against that and almost never someone made responsible for achieving success in people management. …
November 18, 2010· 3 min read
Boulder featured on Fox Business News
For a long time my hometown of Boulder, Colorado has been known as a great place to live but more recently Boulder is taking on a reputation as a great place to start a company as well. And the rest of the country is starting to take notice (see BusinessWeek, HuffPo and the NY Times). Today Fox Business News did a few live segments from Boulder highlighting some of the people and institutions that are helping create great entrepreneurs and great companies here. I was fortunate enough to be interviewed live along with Lijit CEO Todd Vernon (Foundry is an investor in Lijit). I have to say it was a little nerve wracking to be doing a live feed (this occurred to me about 30 seconds before going on air, before which time I was perfectly calm, after which time I thought my heartbeat might be visible through my shirt). In the end it was super fun and great visibility for Boulder.
October 12, 2010· 1 min read
The Freemium Myth – more data
My last post with some thoughts on product pricing has received a ton of traffic, comments and email. Clearly this topic is one that a lot of entrepreneurs care about (and struggle with). A few people pointed me to a great post by Ruben Gamez of Bidsketch on the Software by Rob blog that talks about freemium plans and why, in Ruben’s view, they aren’t always drive the results companies are looking for. It maps well to my thinking (I directly called the freemium model into question in my pricing post). There’s some great data in the post – definitely read the full thing. Here’s a few that caught my eye: …
August 19, 2010· 2 min read
Rewarding failure
This seems like an appropriate topic against the backdrop of my recent post on becoming more of a data driven organization. When you expose data, you expose not just those areas of your business that are doing well, but also those that aren’t. And this brings up an interesting question: Does your organization embrace failure or only reward success? Specifically, do you encourage people to create challenging goals and give them credit for the work they did trying to achieve them, or do you (implicitly or explicitly) encourage people to sandbag and as a result “overachieve”? The answer to this question may be more nuanced than you originally think once you sit down to consider it. In fact, most people in our society are programmed to reward overachievement rather than an effort that falls short of achieving a really high goal. But the behavior this can encourage is counter-productive to many business activities. And while we may pay lip-service to the “setting lofty goals” idea, the reality is that most companies don’t work this way. They have engineering deadlines, sales goals, etc and rather than creating a culture of setting aggressive targets and trying like hell to get there, they prefer the greater certainty and achievement of “managing expectations”. Failure is something to be defended against (and if you do fall short, there’s always a reason that’s not your fault). …
June 18, 2010· 2 min read
Your reality filter
One of the great joys of working with entrepreneurs is the energy, enthusiasm and aspiration they bring to their businesses. But don’t forget to consider your business for what it is, not what you hope it will be. Which is to say that there’s a balance between planning for the future and recognizing where you are today. And striking this balance is part of what makes a great entrepreneur – the ability to consider in all aspects of your business (sales, product development, engineering, etc.) the right mix of practical current reality and future aspiration.
May 18, 2010· 1 min read
Is your early stage business stretched? Good!
Most early stage companies feel stretched. While they don’t lack for ideas, they typically lack for resources (money, people, time, etc.). In my book this is a good thing. Scarcity of resources forces starker choices and ultimately results in better decision making. I sometimes joke with companies about the occasional over-funded competitor and tell them to use their relative lack of funding as a “competitive advantage”. What I mean is that lacking endless resources (or seemingly endless resources – in many cases even gobs of money eventually runs out) will force them to focus on what’s important, not what everything that’s possible, probable or half way interesting. …
June 15, 2009· 1 min read
What’s your business mantra
One thing that comes up early on in many of the companies that I work with is the question of how to build a framework through which to make decisions about product and business direction. Because it’s easy to get sidetracked (or just blinded by all of the possibilities out there) I often suggest to companies that they come up with a “mantra”. It’s oversimplified and doesn’t work for every situation (and of course needs to be revisited as the business changes over time) but the idea is to boil the key drivers of the company down to a sentence or two – maybe some broad categories that define they most important areas of focus or possibly something that looks like a statement of purpose. When a question of priority or direction comes up you can then bounce that idea off your mantra and see what happens. For example – “will this gain us more publishers” “will this make our advertisers more successful?” “will this help travelers share their experiences better” etc. I’ve found that doing this up front helps streamline decision making and have been in many conversations where we’re grappling with how to prioritize a series of tasks where we throw them up against our two or three mantras and what falls out is a clear priority of what needs to be done right away, what can be done later and what shouldn’t be done at all. …
June 12, 2009· 2 min read
dotting i’s and crossing t’s
Will Herman’s post yesterday on the challenges of co-CEO’s reminded me of something I’ve been meaning to get off my chest. Many businesses run loose and fast in their early days. And lets face it, the kind of people who are drawn to starting companies often aren’t process people – they are creative thinkers. While that’s part of the fun of early stage companies, don’t forget that there’s a side to what you are doing that needs to be properly documented and orderly. It’s not just Mark Zuckerberg who has founder problems – I’ve seen many business partnerships with the best intentions disintegrate, where their founders who were no longer seeing eye to eye, had to work out (or not work out as the case may be) the details of their split. And while I’m certainly not your lawyer, I’d strongly recommend that even if you are starting your company with your childhood best friend who you just got out of the army with that you put together at least a basic set of documents that will cover not only the formation of the company itself (which most people don’t tend to forget…) but also clarifies who owns what, what – if any – vesting there might be on your founders stock, what IP is owned by the company (and that the work you are doing together is company property, not individual property), etc, etc. …
March 20, 2009· 2 min read