Rss Feed
Tweeter button
Technorati button
Reddit button
Linkedin button
Delicious button
Digg button
Stumbleupon button

SaaS problems for Bootstrappers

Another great post from David Skok. He writes some of the meatiest startup posts, and has great insight into the deeper problems that startups face. I would recommend going through and reading his archives. The article brings up another topic that I don’t read much about– bootstrapping and customer acquisition costs.

There are some very common business simulation games you can play that show how successful companies run out of money and fail.  Essentially, you play a game of balancing the costs of acquiring customers with the time it takes to get a payback from those customers.  This gets painful as you start to scale, and even more so if you are successful.  You have more CAC, but aren’t seeing the income yet, and you run out of money.  This process is exaggerated in subscription based services, because the LTV of a customer can be stretched over years. You may not get your CAC for over a year.

This presents two problems to us bootstrappers.  First, without funding, you have to bankroll the company during that scale.  Each month, the company is growing, but you are deeper in the hole.  Even if you decide to go get funding at this point,  this can take a lot of time.  The better the service is doing the faster you run out of cash, which forces you into making quick deals.  The other choice is to grow more slowly. This is bad as it allows competitors time to enter the market before you get your critical mass.  This also leaves a strategic opening for a better funded company. They can do exactly what you are doing, but spend huge on CAC and leap-frog you.

The second problem with long LTV curves is tuning.  What small companies are really good at, is tuning and pivoting.  This is really hard when the payback is long.  You could tune something that causes higher initial uptake but higher churn. It may takes months to figure that out and by that time you have scaled the worse practice.  This is much less true in products with one time fees (although still somewhat true).

Finally, there is the problem with searching for business models.  One of the key jobs or an early stage start-up is to find you market. What if that market has $500 CAC, with a 20x payback over two years?  How do you experiment with that? I can’t sink $50k every time I want to play with a new campaign. I am limited to searching for business ideas that are within my CAC budget.

Anyway, a great post for David.  CAC and LTV have to be factored into you startup plan from very early on.

Spectrometer Fun

A quick writeup of some fun we had making spectrometers: http://www.determan.net/all/spectrometer-fun/

Microloans as part of your Charitable Portfolio

As I plan where I want my charitable contributions to go, I mostly think about areas where my money can do the most good. For example, I roughly think about what percentage of the donation will go towards hunger, disease, education, political lobbying, conservation, environment, etc.  Large charitable organizations have to do the same thing all the time. After you make these allocation decisions, you have to figure out how to spend the allocation. For me, this generally means looking for organizations that specialize in that area and winnow them down to the most effective and choose the right one to fund.  Once I give that donation, the money is gone and hopefully doing good things. Microfinance is fundamentally different.

With microfinance, there is a chance that the money will come back to me.  That chance depends on who I lend to, but kiva.org claims that their repayment rate is over 98%.  So, does this mean I can expect to lose only 2% of my donations?  Can I give 50x the amount of money that I was going to donate and leverage my donation?  Its not quite that easy, as just as in investing, there is risk.

But this brings us closer to a set of tools that already exist for finance.  Lots of techniques exist for analyzing risk vs. reward. You can plug in your best numbers and come out with an efficient frontier or whatever.  But there are some fundamental problems before we can use these tools for charity…

  • There is a chance if you front-load a charity, you can actually eliminate a problem, like finishing off a disease or ousting a dictator.
  • What is risk anyway? Is it the chance that you will only solve a % of the problem you intended with the loan?
  • What is the reward? Is it QALE’s?

Anyway, I doubt these are things nobody has thought about. I will continue reading and giving.

MassChallenge pitch fest notes

I had a great time at the MassChallenge one minute pitch last night. First of all, the space is unbelievable. These companies are going to have to be extremely successful to ever get another office with that kind of view. Here are some notes I had on some of the companies that either pitched or that I bumped into walking around the area:

This also involves an interesting experiment. I didn’t write down any names at the event. How many did I remember without having to go to the MassChallenge site? I will note either way.

ArtVenue (Remembered name without looking it up)

I bumped into ArtVenue walking around the cubes. ArtVenue is trying to connect artist with local venues that can show their art. They want to facilitate the discovery and booking of local sites that will display art. This is a great idea, and a wonderful example of a win/win idea– cafes and restaurants need art and artists need to show art. If they can execute, this could be a wonderful business. Tough parts ahead are getting the critical mass of venues in each target area to sign up. I think this is going to involve feet on the street going around and finding venues. This is tougher to scale for resource reasons. Maybe the solution is to recruit your artists as evangelists. Have artists find great places to display and arm them with the info to give to venue owners to get them to sign up. The other nice thing here is that you don’t need much of a critical mass to make this useful, and you can focus on single geographic areas at a time to validate the idea. Anyway, great idea waiting to be executed correctly. Nice job.

Diffuse5

What I took away from this pitch was that Diffuse 5 was like an Angie’s List with a focus on businesses that are friendly and supportive of gay families. I loved the pitch.  A problem that I believe in and a possible solution. There is a lot of stress and anxiety in bringing people into your house and for some reason there is always added stress of bringing in workers. I am sure there is much more added stress when you have a non-traditional family. I love the idea of a site that helps assure you that the person you are bringing in is both competent and has shown respect for families like yours.

I was a little confused after going to the site, as it appears it is more expansive than my understanding and I couldn’t actually find the AngiesList type stuff there. Maybe they are mid-pivot and don’t have that functionality there, yet.  (EDIT: This is the case… see Ashley’s comment below.). Anyway, I loved the pitch and think its a great idea. I don’t know if anyone else does this, yet.

As far as challenges, there is the obvious tough road of building a social-based site and getting to critical mass. They will have to push hard to reach this. The second challenge is as they grow, some of the 800-pound gorillas may add features to their existing site to combat Diffuse5. That doesn’t always work, though, and there is certainly room for more focused sites if they can prove having special domain features is worth moving from the big sites.

SittingAround (Remembered name without looking it up)

SittingAround is a shared baby-sitting site that focuses on family-based sharing of child care. As far as my experience goes, parents have four main forms of child-care: family, child care facilities, paid babysitters and informal/semi-formal swapping with other families. Other than family, swapping with other trusted families is by far the best. They have kids around your kids’ age, you trust them, they are local, etc.

So, what are the challenges? The way this is handled now is extremely social. Usually one parent calls up another and chats and mentions that they would love to have little Billy over, or that they have a meeting and they would rather not call a sitter. Its a little bonding experience and not at all business like. It is also very free flowing where each side can talk about how Billy is doing, how he loves coming over. There is lots of thanking and talking about how little Sally can come over next week. I think SittingAround has to maintain this type of loving atmosphere. These are our kids we are talking about and that involves lots of emotions ;)

I do love this idea and think it has a lot of potential. It can grow coop by coop without the need for a larger critical mass. The big challenge is convincing people that they need this vs. the informal way they are doing it now. It goes without saying that they also need to make sure it works. If I try to work out sitting a couple times and the site doesn’t work out, I am not coming back.

Other Notes

There were a bunch of great bio and mechanical startups. Thing like a water filtration and a film that lower drag on boats (link). These are awesome-sounding, but not my area of expertise, so I have a hard time commenting. They sound excellent, though, and I really hope they succeed.

To all participants, feel free to drop me a line. I love talking startups, business plans and execution. I would love to sit down with any of you and just throw around ideas.

Less Tracking, Please

It’s tough being a standards writer.  For every single thing you propose, there is a mob of developers trying to twist your ideas in a way to make money.  Sometimes it is by exposing a security flaw, other times by bringing up great business opportunities. Then, there are the trackers…

These folks spend all their time thinking of ways to track you across multiple sites, and learn more personal information about you, so they can sell it to someone who is trying to get you to buy more crap. They use cookies (ho-hum), flash cookies,  flash unique IDs, etc. They also use ETags. ETags are great and can really help speed up the net, but they can also be used to track you even when you delete all your cookies and go into private browsing mode. Yes, KISSmetrics, I know its legal HTTP and legal Justice Dept. wise, but come on guys.  First, this isn’t what it is for, and second nobody wants this.  You are being scummy.  Not only that, but when you do this, it makes people start blocking ETags which ruins the purpose of ETags.

There is an article about this in Wired.  It makes me mad and makes me start installing plug-ins.  I am not against web ads, but this is invasive and against the spirit of the web.  I just installed Google’s “Keep My Opt-Outs” plug-in. I don’t want to install complete Ad-Blocking, because I think this is a healthy business model, but only within boundaries.

Any other good plugins?

Turning off Ads for Non-Clickers

When displaying ads on a webpage, we optimize the order in which we show ads.  We show ads in the order that we think will make the most money for the site, taking into account everything we know about the viewer.  Each ad is a little less likely than the previous one to make us money. After a while, though, it can become clear that this user is probably never going to click on an ad.  We have given them ample opportunity and they just aren’t the clicking type.

We are also trying to optimize the user’s experience on our site.  We genuinely want them to have a good experience on our site because it will cause the site to grow. Having a happy user on the site has value in and of itself and the better that user’s experience, the better for everyone. So, we need to put a money value on a user’s experience.

Put these thoughts together and there is a point in the ad stream where we should turn off ads for certain users.  The added value of their experience without ads is worth more to us than the small chance we will make money from them clicking an ad.

Startup Sales Complexity

David Skok has an outstanding article on a topic I love: Startups and Sales Complexity. I think about sales complexity a lot when brainstorming new products. It is very important to understand sales strategy from day 1 to make sure you have the sales resources to match the sales model. I think most startups tend to be overly optimistic about the level of sales required for new products. Even worse, I think many times this planning is pushed off until after the product is built. It is a shame to build a great product when you will never have the resources to sell it properly. This is especially true if you are entering a defined market where competitors exists with a good sales process. It is very hard to compete against companies who have established sales channels in large companies if that is your target market.

Also, I think people underestimate the complexity of the freemium model. Viral growth is great, but rarely spontaneous. Startups have to put in large efforts in the sales/marketing of the free product in order to get enough market share to be profitable on the small percentage of premium buyers.  Our company, FitDay, had a great freemium model, but it took years of building the free user base to the point where this was viable.

Sales complexity also affects your financing model. Bootstrapped startups tend to be tech heavy. If the product is going to require a hefty sales process, raising capital becomes more necessary. The company will need the money to bring in the sales resources. Also, having competent investors who understand sales is a great balance for a tech heavy startup. I do love bootstrapping, though. Whenever I end up down the path of designing a sales heavy product, I start dreaming about fully outsourcable sales.  Does that exist in a usable form yet? Its tough, because you need your sales group to be experts in the domain, but wouldn’t it be great to have on-demand sales?

For Sale for Good Reason

In his post Not For Sale, David Heinemeier Hansson explains why he is not interested in selling his company. He makes some good points about sticking with a growing company and being dedicated to a making an impact with a company.  He says of selling a company:

Why would you want to take a 10 times multiple of today’s earnings, if you believe you can still grow your business and you’re committed to sticking around to do it? Why do you think you’d do a worse job than a prospective buyer of running your own business?

There are many reasons to want to sell your company even if you believe that it can still significantly grow.  The first and most important is a balance between risk and reward especially when you factor in diminishing returns.  Lets say the vast majority of your net worth is in a single company that you founded.  If you are offered $10 Million for that company you have to make a complicated decision.  Is the risk that the company will drop in value (which is always very real for a startup) worth the shot that the company will grow.  Another way of thinking about it is this:  If you had $10 million in cash in your pocket, would you invest all of it in your company?  If you can honestly answer “yes” then you should not sell. It is my opinion, though, that very few people can rationally take this kind of risk. That is too much in one basket for the average person.

You also need to factor in diminishing returns.  If you wait and sell that company for $20Million, that does not make you twice as happy. Welfare economics teaches us that after a certain point, more money takes on very little real meaning in our lives.  On the other hand, if the company fails, going from $10Mil to $250k will make a gigantic change in your life.

The company making the purchasing offer is coming from a very different position.  Most likely, after buying your company, the bulk of their net worth will not be tied up in this one investment. They will have a portfolio of assets and that greatly lowers the risk of losing everything.  It makes perfect sense for them to take big bets when the case of an individual failuer does not break them. This is standard portfolio theory.

So, the decision to sell a company depends on many things. One of which is your noble desire to grow the company you founded.  But never forget that selling can lock in your gains and guarantee a very good outcome for you.  It can take much of the risk off of the tables, especially if this is your first cashout and you have a real chance of losing everything.

Assigning value to your time

Startups are often resource constrained, and it is our job as founders to optimize the resources we have. If every task could be broken down into cost / benefit with the same units, this would be easy, but life is never that easy.  The cost of a task can be measured in money or time or aggravation or loss of focus. Benefits can be measured in money or time saved in the future or happiness or momentum.  In prioritizing these task you are implicitly giving values to each.  If I choose to spend $50/month for a good outsourced email service in order to avoid the time and aggravation of setting up your own, I have placed a dollar value on time and aggravation.  I usually make these kinds of decisions based on my “gut feeling”, which means there is a good chance I make them wrong.  I would guess that I lean towards doing it myself vs. outsourcing in most cases.  This means I probably undervalue my time and aggravation.

To solve this, I need to try to put a value on my time to do a specific job.  To help out further, I am going to factor in aggravation, to come up with something like this:

  • To do work where my mind is in a normal state, my time in worth X / hr  (example: coding)
  • To do work that I don’t enjoy, my time is worth 2X / hr  (example: accounting)
  • To do work I hate and will make my growl stare at the ceiling, my time is worth 4x/hr  (example: debugging a boot error after restoring a system from an image)

Now, all I need to do is define X and I can bring my old friend math into play. I don’t have to gut feel these. If I can outsource my email for $50/month and save 1 hour of crappy work per month, I just have to value my X at 12.50 to make this call.  That is an easy call.

To further complicate things, I need to factor in context switches.  If debugging an email server is something that interrupts whatever I am working on, it ruins focus and flow. For this, I need to factor in some kind of value. Maybe a useless context switch is worth $10 each.

A couple things to take into account.  First, I have to be the one to do certain things whether I like them or not. These include things I need to understand to keep the company going.  So, even if I don’t enjoy learning about firewall configurations, it is imperative that I know how these works in order to keep the site up.  Also, this only applies to things I am competent in.  The example of accounting only holds true if I can do as good of a job as the accountant I would hire, or close enough.

Anyway, I don’t think you need to literally apply these numbers to every decision.  Its just something to keep in mind when making these choices.  Don’t undervalue your time and focus.  Make sure you are working on things in your core competency and don’t sell your focus and flow for a couple bucks.

Microsoft should give away all development tools

I have been saying this for years. It probably started with the “developers, developers, developers” rap.  Microsoft needs to give all of its development tools away. MSFT has a huge vested interest in getting start-ups to build native apps and as such should remove all roadblocks. Microsoft’s development platform is outstanding and has always been my favorite IDE and debugger. But paying $5k for MSDN for every developer forces all the lean and mean start-ups to use either the watered down version or simple not use Microsoft at all.  Eventually this is all moving away to non-MSFT platforms and the web, but they need to do anything they can to delay that movement.

Copyright © Jim Determan
Current projects and notes

Built on Notes Blog Core
Powered by WordPress