Hot chicks, of course! What else can I say, as a guy? And really, I always wanted to start a blogpost with “Hot chicks!” No, truth be told, I’ve been looking at fashion for some time, during the writing of my, now retired, food and retail blog, and a little afterwards too. As I mentioned before, industry-research is an important part of my job-application process, online, preferably on location at similar businesses, and through my conversations with the management. I’ve visited a number of fashion-retailers also, Zara and a more very upper-class fashion-retailer, and had some thoughts about it, which I’ll share here.

Zara & H&M

Two of my “business-heroes” in this industry are Zara and H&M, who have dramatically different organisational structures, but similar objectives, and a very strong technological foundation for managing their logistical complexities, which also helped them in their online strategy, I imagine.

If fashion can be characterised by anything, it’s that intellectual property doesn’t matter. Rather it’s the company that combines creative (or creatively copied) designs together with a strong execution (across the value chain) that wins the game. Zara, a vertically and horizontally integrated fortress, is strong in constantly renewing its collections (and hardly does any marketing), while H&M, a company that’s similar to Nike or Apple, only really does the designing and the marketing, while outsourcing pretty much everything else.

You can read a few more thoughts about these two on my retail-blog.

The online fashion-game

When you think about it, a store doesn’t have to be that different from a commerce-website; you have the enticing outside part of things, which can be marketing and the shopping window, and you have the interactive inside part, which encourages you to mix and match, try and (impulse) buy. A good website will understand (or learn) the way customers think and appeal to the right drivers from the marketing and the interactive part of things.

Fashion is however a somewhat complex consumer-good. The way a piece of clothing is judged (based on my opinion) is on three levels:

• The visual: how does it look?
• The sensory: how does it feel?
• and The social: what reaction do I get?

The web is getting more creative every day about the visual, e.g. you have sites like Etsy that use elaborate colour-matching techniques, of which there are several different versions elsewhere.

On the sensory-side, this should kind of be approached like you’re convincing a very sceptical person of a risky project. Everybody has been burned by some bad-fitting clothes before! On the one hand, extensive information matters, e.g. Styleshake’s size guide. On the other hand, support matters very much, e.g. Zappos‘ customer service approach, which Fidji wrote about before.

The social dimension should be something that the web is good for. On the one hand, celebrity-marketing like H&M and many other stores do, is a good enticement to get people to buy your clothes. On the other hand, what matters more to people like me is what clothes will look like in my social circle, and not everybody has Tom Cruise’s body-type (I’m twice as tall ). But you can definitely imagine a Hotornot- or Facebook-styled fashion-store, with some creative techniques.

To summarise

The attraction of fashion is still the hot models for me, but really, in the online domain it’s much more.

• Fashion is a global and dynamic industry, and technology is definitely an enabler in that business.
• The lack of IP makes the industry a somewhat easy one to enter, but also requires very strong executive skills.
• There is still plenty of smart innovation left in addressing the right visual, sensory, and social needs of customers.

From a job-perspective, I found out that the fashion-business is not that easy to get into. You need either a related degree and/or (preferably together) relevant experience. That said, if you got a fashion-business or are thinking of starting one, preferably online, and are in need of a creative business-guy, give me a buzz! I’m always up for some brainstorming!

For the commentators:

• what do you think are the drivers for fashion shopping?
• What innovative e-commerce sites have you come across?
• Where do you see fashion going, hybrid, more off-line, or more online?

Vincent

Continuing our short(!) screenshot-series on geeky innovations… Thank you, Skitch, for making it so easy!

I was really missing a collection of my Loved Tracks in Last.fm and it looks like the new version delivered. What we need next is a way for ratings in iTunes (and more specifically my iPod) to automatically register as “loved” in Last.fm, and for that to create a TheFilter-like service of creating custom playlists that I like.

*Sigh* why does interoperability of web-to-real-world-to-web have to be so complicated?

Vincent

Relevant, useful, has a business-model. Enough said!

(Picture links to the app in Facebook. Facebook-account required)

What’s your favourite app on Facebook (or other social networks) and why?

Vincent

Context: I’m currently in discussion with a number of companies that are involved with SOA-vending & -consulting. As a result, I’ve been studying up a little on this market and hope to learn more by writing about it. Note: Since I know, judging by the response to other articles on enterprise-software, this isn’t exactly the most sexy of topics, I expect the number of comments to be minimal.

Jeremy has already written about this topic (primarily in terms of Software-as-a-Service (Saas) and Software + Service (S+S)) before (here, here, and especially here), so I won’t go very deeply into it, but SOA is roughly defined as:

“guidelines that allow software developers to design systems in stand-alone chunks of computer code, each specifying the critical outcomes, performance metrics, and interfaces between a discrete activity and other services.” (Src: HBR, June 2008)

If that’s a little abstract, I see it as a selling you a ticket to Lego-land, where you can play with legos all you like, those lego-blocks representing individual applications that can be used by businesses through a web (SaaS) or hybrid (Software+Service) interface, and Lego-land being the SOA-system that integrates all of them for you. This is opposed to the historical approach of buying a lego-box, which you eventually replace by another and another (side-prediction: we will eventually see Lego-world online).

SOA’s value-proposition

While traditionally it has been so that in order to compete in a technological world, you have to be technological, the idea of SOA is to remove that element, instead allowing individuals and businesses to focus on what they do best. I, personally, like that very much.

Other, more measurable advantages are that it is dramatically more cost-efficient. If you imagine that 5+ years ago, every company had to either invest into a powerful wide-area network (WAN) to be able to centralise IT-services, or replicate islands of IT-systems for each business-location, SOA removes that idea entirely, using a freely available infrastructure, the internet, and removing the need to build IT anywhere, instead paying-as-you-go for singular services that an external provider hosts and distributes. Added to this is the idea that performance now becomes accountable, in the sense that it is covered by contracts (e.g. QoS or SLA), something that was much harder to do with a permanently employed IT-staff.

With all these advantages and several more, it is no surprise that, in 2007, over 50% of mission-critical IT-projects were estimated to be SOA-based, a figure which is believed to increase to 80% in 2010 (these figures are from Gartner and may be US-only).

SOA’s hurdles

While this sounds pretty great, anytime you’re talking about system-wide change, you have to consider that this will meet resistance and involve a great many stakeholders, i.e. take a lot of time. And the question is here, who will you talk to as an SOA-vendor? Will it be the business-side of your client, as you are selling easy-to-understand lego-blocks, or will it be the technology-side, as you are selling technology? This is a serious question, so please answer it in the comments!

Added to this, a SOA-deployment is a strategic issue for your customer, meaning that your selling-proposition will also need to include the option of strategic support, aka consulting-services. This means that technology-only SOA-providers (vendors) will likely have to work with third-party consultants that pick-and-choose the best SOA-package for their client.

Related to this, the lego-like quality of SOA, which promises values like agility, flexibility, price, and reuse, and several more, all very important in this recession-prone time, also mean that someone can quite easily replace your service with someone else’s legos. Arguably this is much less the case if you provide an architectural framework and focus on building ecosystems (create lock-ins). But that is easier said than done, and as such this is a field dominated by few big players that buy up smaller ones.

Some more things, which I haven’t researched, are the degree that open source is a factor/issue here, and different revenue-models.

Grasping the paradigm-change

On the customer-side, there’s two ways of seeing this trend. On the one hand, extreme efficiencies, which also follows Nick Carr’s view that IT is no longer a competitive advantage. On the other hand, you’re giving away a lot of responsibility, which can be bad in two ways.

One, you’re giving away a lot of power to an industry, which will continue to consolidate. It’s something that may not be a problem now, but may become one.

Two, delegating a problem does not necessarily solve it. Taking the retail-industry, the biggest problem here is logistical inefficiencies, caused by delays, unnecessary replication of processes, or otherwise. Here, SOA, as long as it spans across the value-chain of manufacturers-transport-retailers-customer, is clearly a good thing. But it still requires a solid understanding of how IT does and can help your supply chain reap better results, something an independent SOA-vendor may not do as well. My opinion here is purely hypothetical, but it may be worth investigating how the masters of retail (Wal-Mart, Tesco, Carrefour, etc.) solve it. And if this is a problem, I imagine it is elsewhere too.

The SOA playing field

This post is getting a little long, so I’ll briefly go into this. Following Forrester-graphs show the players in the integrating corner of things (consultants) and, on the right, the vendors (also note the time-difference (the second one is Q4 2007) and region). You can find the originals here and here.

Clearly this industry is very layered, with some offering the complete package, including strategic assistance, and others providing either the SOA or a part of it (SaaS or similar). There is a lot of movement in this field with players buying each other out or moving into related industries, either on the hardware or software-side.

Final thoughts

Because I’m not a soft-/web-ware guy, I’m still very much undecided whether to head in the software-only direction myself, though I see much merit for an integrated business-consulting + software-deployment approach, and I also prefer selling Lego-blocks to rubber-trees. Feel free to convince me of your points of view.

All of this was initial thinking of course, and as such I’m happy to hear if you have anything to add or if I made some obvious mistakes. Again, considering the relative unsexiness of this area, I don’t expect too much

Vincent

Premise: A while ago, Fred Wilson, a (possibly biased) tech-investor, wrote that he was bullish on the tech-industry. Recently, the New York Times reports that e-commerce is up because people want to travel less (fuel costs). And previous stories reported on the migration of advertising revenues from traditional media to online media.

A note: I don’t know that there will be a recession. I know that the real-estate bust in the US is a pretty big deal, and that banks from Europe and Asia have been pretty heavily invested in that supposed goldmine. And any fall-out in the US, i.e. banks shutting down or otherwise, will likely have global repercussions on the banking-sector, and affect other industries also.

With that out of the way, three problems/phenomena I associate with these times are:

• A lack of accountability in investments (e.g. currently real estate and previously startups & Enron), also accompanied by emotions like fear & greed.
• Rising input-costs (the market should normally adjust for that, but the explosive growth in demand from emerging countries + the lack of an alternative for, in this case, fuel, make this a pretty big uncertainty)
• Changing paradigms, such as the rise of webware, the (expected) fall of hardware-prices, the possible fall of software-sales, the continuing displacement of brick & mortar business models, businesses being forced to go & think green, and much, much more.

So, there’s probably a few more symptoms (throw them out in the comments!), but it seems to me that the internet is pretty well placed to deal with some of these problems.

Let’s start with accountability. The strength of the web is that everything on it is digital and, in theory, nearly (*) everything can be measured (*: I am quite sceptical about the measurability of video & audio, though arguable the serious data is still in text). Added to this, there are technology-shifts, like digital television, mobile computing, and E-Ink, which make it easier to have a wider reach as a data-gatherer, not to mention that business are increasingly placing their data online, again facilitating data-exchange in partnerships. This should make it easier for businesses to base their expense on actual data, the same for investors and advertisers. Together with the consequences of the last internet-bust, I think that everyone is pretty careful to base their decisions on information, not hopes and dreams (well, I’m still sceptical about Twitter).

Next, rising input prices. Having blogged on the topic of food and retail for about a year, I’ve obviously had to follow this trend/reality quite a bit. The NYTimes heading I linked to above summarises my feelings quite well, customers are looking at the opportunity cost of fuel (as well as the cost of being green) and alternatives like e-commerce may seem much more attractive. In the long-term, people like James Howard Kunstler are calling for more and more “locality,” i.e. that people will be willing to migrate less for work and, I guess, shopping, which opens up opportunities for e-commerce and ways of working across a distance.

Finally (?), changing paradigms. Well, whatever the new world looks like, a pretty warm place is reserved for the web. Web-apps and -services are maturing, offering more and better features, and providing individuals and businesses with a comfortable ecosystem to operate in. The OLPC, the Asus EEE, and other cheaper systems (when Dell comes in, it will be mass), may be less powerful, but they will be optimised to use the web most of all. Societally, it may eventually become the logical choice for the mainstream to spend less than $500 for a laptop, in which case hardware-makers and, possibly, software-makers will suffer. But the web won’t. Similarly, while I don’t yet see brick & mortar disappearing, it is clear that eventually 99% of B&M businesses will have to have an online presence. About the world going green, I can’t sell everything, perhaps someone else can give the answer to that.

Is the internet recession-proof? My guess is as good as the next guy. But, more efficient use of computing, datamining, search, advertising, e-commerce, and logistics are all technologies I am extremely bullish on these coming years.

What do you think?

Vincent

The key to a fulfilling career is, I believe, not so much about choosing the right job, it’s about finding pleasure in the job that you are doing. Applying for jobs is a job, not a particularly well-paying one, but a job that can be extremely fulfilling nevertheless.

It is really a combination of two activities: consulting and sales. Or, to put it another way, it’s information-rich selling, i.e. you collect a lot of information about the market (the company & surroundings) and sell a complex product (yourself). Since both the ability to transform complex information into simple, understandable terms, and the ability to sell just about anything (even your monkey-self) are probably the most desired qualities on the job-market today, applying for jobs is an excellent training, which everyone should look forward too.

Following are a couple of the skills you learn in this job:

• Strategic positioning: this is the basic activity. Job-hunting is an activity that moves in concentric circles. In the centre, there’s you, your strengths & weaknesses, your niche. Then comes the company and how you fit into it. Finally comes the strategic landscape of the company and what its priorities are there. Positioning is, according to my basic marketing book, about communicating 4 C’s (Clarity, Confidence, Continuity, Competitiveness), matched to the needs of your customer.
• General market-research: finding interesting companies is like finding a needle in a haystack. Well, not really. But it does require using all the mediums available to you to get to that sale. And you may want to segment the market and focus on specific types of companies.
• Strategic market-research: it’s a jungle out there, and the more awareness you show for the company’s strategic (competitive, current & future) landscape, the more she will trust you to do a good job. And, as a side-benefit, you’ll find out what other companies you may want to target if this one doesn’t bite.
• Functional market-research: your company/customer will be looking for specific features in you, and you have to position yourself according to what is required. The functional job-description = feature requirements.
• Targeted advertising: You CV and application letter are like a brochure about yourself. You’ll be competing with tons of other “products” and you have to speak the language of your customer.
• The pitch: your “marketing-brochure” may get you a foot in the door, but that’s only 30% of it. You need to present yourself to your customer, the way he would present himself to his customers. If those are a tough sell, he will be a tough sell, and vice versa.
• The negotiation: after finding your target, marketing to it, and pitching it, you’ll need to get a good deal too. That is a whole other science into itself.

Seriously, if this wasn’t a non-paying gig, I think I’d be doing this for some time. Learning a lot here. I’ll go as far as to say that if you were either a sales/marketing person or an entrepreneur, you’d be doing some pretty similar things.

But beware! You shouldn”t use job-applications as an excuse to get your foot into the door to sell products & services from other companies! That’s like calling someone during dinner-time, because you know they’ll be home, and trying to sell them insurance. It’s Just Not Done!

Vincent

(I’ll write more about tech tomorrow, I promise)

Addendum: I predict, I won’t get too many comments on this one. Maybe it’s an age thing; 5 years ago, I would’ve felt differently about this process. But these days, pretty much any interview I go to ends up being a pretty interesting conversation about how to run a company, and the process beforehand, the homework, is pretty versatile too. Just thought, I’d add that.

So here’s a good problem to throw out to the group. It doesn’t matter if you’re an individual or a business, at some point in your life you probably had to pitch something or other, and very likely you used PowerPoint or one of its clones. But imagine you had a consultancy and you had to make a strong impression on a client. You know that all the other consultancies would be using PowerPoint and you wanted to do something different; you wanted to differentiate yourself. How would you do it?

I’m going to make it slightly more ambitious:

Imagine you had to build a competing product to PowerPoint. Knowing the parameters of the application—it’s easy to create content, it’s a standard so everyone can use it, it’s portable, cross-platform, visually strong, and cheap—what could a competing product look like to you?

The way, I’m thinking about this is as follows. An obvious way to differentiate yourself, is to be louder than other people. But that brings some problems in terms of sustainability. You could use multiple speakers and act out something, but this requires you to always bring more people to a presentation (as well as train them), which is not always feasible. You could create something in code or on video, again requiring significant time, expertise, and resources to make this happen, and it might not be very portable. Etc. etc.

No, if you wanted to compete with PowerPoint, the market-leader, you would have to appeal to the same economic sentiments, which lead people to choose that software in the first place: portable, easy to create content, cheap, etc.

So…

• what would you do?
• what do you do?
• or what have you seen done?

Really curious what you come up with!

Premise: this was a small part of an exercise, I had to do as part of an application-procedure today. It was pretty fun, my solution was pretty creative, though no one was really thinking about the sustainable part, about actually building a product. But it made me wonder… what if? Go crazy!

Vincent

P.S. I know about Presentation Zen. I just barely have enough energy to type this post, let alone read a website.

As I’m currently applying for jobs, I naturally often get asked what my dream job is. I hate that question, as there’s no simple answer. My dream “job” is to set up companies, which is really a great number of jobs. Following series of steps is the way I visualise this process, seen from a business, investor’s, and somewhat European perspective, and not so much a technologist’s one. As always, my articles are meant to be the start of a discussion and your feedback is appreciated!

My framework is somewhat inspired by the “Strategic Framework” on the right, which I got from an excellent, but fat book, called “Valuation – Maximizing Corporate Value.” Along with explaining valuation very well, including what all the financial inputs mean and where (!) they can be found, it’s really meant to be a tool for building sound business-strategies. A good book for consultants, if you’re interested in a simple book on finance, and a concrete book on strategy (hard to find in that combo)!

Let’s do it!

Step 1 – the idea

This can really be sub-devided into three separate parts: the vision, the mission, and the plan. The vision is like the cloud in the sky which you spot while taking a walk. You don’t know if and how it will work yet. The mission is a long-lasting platform for you to run your company on; it’s a set of parameters, which come from both your values, your strengths, and your objectives, e.g. “I want my business to be fast, honest, and affordable.,” or Google’s: “…to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful.”

The plan is not the business-plan per se, but the action plan that is something like this post here. It’s meant to be a set of steps that brings you from the idea to the business, and includes developing your business-idea, writing the business-plan, selecting the team, approaching investors & partners, where to locate, what technologies to use, etc.

Good knowledge to have at this stage: technical about your product, development, the industry; creative techniques; planning techniques.

Step 2 – a short market-research

Just to get an overview of the market and to what extent the problem you’re trying to solve is already being solved. I think step 1 needs to be quite far-developed before proceeding to step 2, because being confronted with a market filled with giants isn’t exactly a great motivator to develop your yet vapourous idea. The same applies to talking to other people (step 4), as those can be quite reality-distorting also.

So a short market-research, using mediums relevant to your industry. Google is always a good start, but sometimes you need to do a patent-search or a scholar-search for high-tech; at other times you need to look at Crunchbase for Web X.0; and sometimes a phone-book or the chamber of commerce databases for local stuff. And sometimes there’s no material out there (a very tricky situation!), in which case you need to look at substitutes for your product/service as well as new entrants from related industries. While that’s already substantial in terms of work, it helps with step 3: the pitch.

Good knowledge to have at this stage: marketing, both in terms of what to focus on, where to search for stuff, and how to write it up so that it makes sense.

Step 3: Pitch v. 1 – convincing your peers

The most important quality an entrepreneur must have is the ability to sell. And there’s a phrase in selling, which goes something like: you can’t sell what you don’t believe in… and vice versa. The more your idea is worked out, the more you know about the market, the more confident you can defend your ideas from the many, many sceptics that are out there.

A pitch v.1 needs to be a mini-business-plan of one to a few pages and include as much information as possible about the product, about how (you think) you will produce it, who you will (need to) hire, where you will be located, what need you are meeting, how you will market your product, how you will make money, how you will defend yourself from the competition. The more specific, the better!

And then that needs to be summarised into a pitch of ca. 2 mins, summarising all the vital data + a touch of personality & charisma!

Good knowledge to have at this stage: apart from the data from steps 1 & 2 (technical, marketing, your industry, your customers), you need some business-planning skills, which includes some (not much) financial techniques; as well as presentation skills & passion.

Step 4: find your team

There’s different philosophies about idea-generation (step 1), with many, I’m sure, arguing that you should be brainstorming with your friends on the idea from the start, that more heads have more/better ideas than one, etc. etc. I completely agree with this. But my philosophy is that without a clear direction, a team can quickly lose focus and follow political objectives, rather than pragmatic ones. While, I’ve been blessed with a few groups of people, where the chemistry was excellent and everyone was intelligent enough to be willing to listen & learn from others, many other groups have been a complete failure, because politics & brains definitely don’t always come hand in hand. So, I’m of the opinion, that an idea needs to be very well-developed & thought out before presenting it, after which it can be refined and adapted, and even rejected, according to the more specialised knowledge of group-members.

About finding team-members; for myself I have to say, after spending a long-long time on my thesis—a solitary activity—it’s not that easy. Again, networking, LinkedIN/Facebook, blogging, university (very important!), family, highschool-friends, former employers/co-workers, etc. , all good choices. Luckily for me, my thesis also brought me into contact with a large number of incubators, which are also good places to run into smart people; I worked for a venture-capital-tracking firm, ditto on the smart people; and there’s Tech IT Easy, Ditto 3x! So, really, never a shortage of smart people, when you look for them!

Good knowledge to have at this stage: material from steps 1-3; people-skills, in terms of choosing the right group of people; leadership & sales-skills; and the ability to form rational arguments & present your ideas well.

Step 5: write a business-plan

Read Jeremy’s post here.

Step 6: pitch v.2 – approaching early-stage investors

Somewhat different from later-stage investors, these are people you talk to, usually before launching your company (except maybe in web-world), and for which you don’t have that much tangible evidence to convince them with yet. So your pitch needs to be somewhat like pitch v.1 (step 3), but will include more data that you collected for your business-plan, but presented concisely and clearly showing how you will meet a need, how you plan to make your investors their money back + some more, how you will reduce the risk for them (very important!), and what you see their role to be in your business, apart from cash-cow—this only applies to active investors, such as business angels, not banks or subsidies, though not all business angels are able to be active (though they should always be able to help with contacts), and some bankers may surprise you.

Good knowledge to have at this stage: all the material from the previous steps, and similar skills as for pitch v.1. You need to speak a language that early-stage (!) investors understand!

Step 7: approaching early-stage investors

Banks & subsidies are easy to find, though sometimes you still need a little help and/or an intro; generally, banks want a lot of securities, sometimes already having a subsidy agreement and working with other, more experienced investors helps a great deal. Subsidies are a b*tch, as they make you do a lot of paper-work and impose some rules, and they generally work best for innovative, sustainable, or export-related ideas.

Business angels are a little harder. Usually, it helps going through trustworthy (& older) people that have built a network themselves. I can’t say more about that, except that entrepreneurs should avoid acting predatory and avoid predatory investors (both happen way too frequently), and you can mostly control the first (yourself), not so much the latter (though it helps going through someone you know).

Good knowledge to have at this stage: know your business-plan inside out; know how to present it and the financial data concisely; people-skills, in terms of evaluating the people you meet and selling yourself; having a network helps; having a good team in place helps a lot; having collateral helps with banks; having a tolerance for bureaucracy helps with subsidies, as does an association with a public research-institute (e.g. an incubator or your university).

Step 8: preparing an action-plan

Technically, this should’ve been part of your business-plan (step 5), but the point is that you now have money, you’ve made certain agreements based on it, and your objective is to use that money wisely to get your business off the ground. So now you need to decide what spending needs to be done, preferably as little as possible, and how to quickly get to the next stage. If you’re in web/software, you should already have a prototype, and focus on developing it, and build an early customer-base. In which case, you need someone to do the developing and someone to do the marketing/selling; usually technical staff outweighs the marketing staff at this stage, the latter often being the role of the entrepreneur himself. If you’re into high-tech, a prototype still needs to be built, which means technical work. This stage is really too specific to generalise; it depends on the type of product, business, and industry. Something in bio- or meditech, for instance, can take a decade to complete.

You also need to decide on whether your basement/garage will be enough, and on what type of legal protection your product needs, as well as the legal structure of your business. Which includes talking to lawyers, like this one.

Good knowledge to have at this stage: an understanding of what the new stakeholders in your business require; the ability to focus on what matters most for your business; a holistic understanding of a wide variety of business-matters, including hiring-practices, location-choice, development, legal & accounting tasks.

Step 9: spend (wisely)

Hire the people that you need, try to find smart ways to get smart people for cheap, either through internships, summer-programmes, or stock-options. And some smart people obviously need to be paid more or less what they are worth.

Locate cheaply while developing. For software, I’d suggest Eastern Europe, close to software-universities, but a basement in Paris/Berlin/London/Amsterdam also works of course, though both the location and the people will come at a premium. Important is to consider that many investors prefer you to be geographically accessible, as do customers.

Find viral ways to market, if you’re at that stage already. Thank you, internet, for existing, but free press also helps. Find smart ways to acquire customers, e.g. involve them in product-development, use them for word of mouth and case studies, partner up with good companies, etc. This is again very product-, company-, and industry-specific.

Build synergies between partnerships & investors; again really a step 7 problem, but it helps when your lawyer or your US/Asia-based marketeers are also investors. I’m also a fan of synergies in the HR-department; giving employees stock-options is not only cheaper, but also serves as a motivator. Of course always be careful who you choose to give part of your company to!

Good knowledge to have at this stage: everything from the steps until now; people-, negotiation- & management-skills, guts to market & sell; the dedication to work as many hours as it takes; etc.

Step 10: pitch v.3 – approaching round 2 (series A round) investors

While building your business, you should also build your business-plan and have a much better idea of the inputs for your valuation and the (projected) revenue-potential. And you should have surrounded yourself with a nice set of advisors and “network-nodes” that get your business-plan to be placed on top of a pile somewhere. You’ll still need a pitch of course, but that shouldn’t be a problem anymore at this stage.

Good knowledge to have at this stage: everything from before, especially how to pitch and what to pitch; and a network helps tremendously.

Step 11: round 2 (series A) investors

Bearing in mind that over 80% of businesses don’t make it this far, in theory, a business goes through a number of stages, before ultimately going public or being acquired. Web-businesses have distorted that process somewhat, as has the Enron-aftermath. But many early-stage investors may wish to be bought out at this point, an exit for them, and you may even want to do the same. VCs like replacing entrepreneurs with experienced CEOs, especially if the entrepreneur is a technical person, who will then likely be “promoted” to something like CTO or CIO. Investors do this because they have to account for the money they invest in you, and hence have to show their “bosses” that they do everything possible to mimimise people-risk.

While there are cultural & VC-specific differences, the risks that you need to have already covered here are usually both technology- and market-risk, translating into a workable product and one that preferably already has customers (lined up).

Good knowledge to have at this stage: either the ability to grow with the business; i.e. become more of a manager, less of an entrepreneur; or the ability to step back.

Step 12: launching the rocket-ship

A good VC will take your business far, and that’s where I’ll end it.

Some further reading

If you haven’t read enough already…

• “Valuation – Maximizing Corporate Value.”
• “Crossing the chasm” – on tech-marketing, -sales, and -strategy.
• Venture Hacks’ Term Sheet Hacks – on investors, mostly
• Ask the Wizard – on lot’s of interesting entrepreneurship problems
• TechITEasy.org – on lots of interesting tech & business-subjects, if you dig deep, i.e. use the search.

This may qualify as the longest post on Tech IT Easy, I don’t know. I think I covered the main topics on a global level and obviously there are plenty of feedback loops and some short-cuts, but please let me know if there’s things I missed!

Vincent

P.S. I’m always interested in building great companies, as well as discussing this topic. So if you’re a smart (tech-)person, looking for a biz dev. guy, or you just want to discuss you idea in confidence, feel free to give me a shout.

This may qualify as the most ridiculous post, I’ve ever written. But it’s a Sunday. And I felt it simply had to be said. Headphones are, to me, a vital part of our society and, at the same time, they are so prone to failure, that it may very well be the biggest pain (read: need for improvement) I’ve ever felt during my life.

I’ve used headphones since I was 14 maybe, back when my first Discman was made out of metal, contained four batteries, and weighed about the same as a satelite-phone (if those still exist). I’m sure if I turned it on today, it would still work. Headphones, however, are a completely different matter.

Headphones have evolved and devolved in my life. I started with the sucker-buys: super-multi-tripple-bass-boosting Sonys. But no matter how many I bought (all earphones), they all broke after a few months, at the latest. That was, on average, a good €20 thrown away every time.

Finally, I got fed up and plunged down to €3 headphones, the kind that lie next to the chewing-gum in your super(tech)market. I figured, why waste money, and instead buy in bulk and replace every few weeks. It worked pretty well for a while… of course the sound is nothing to write home about.

Finally, when I got my first & only iPod, three years ago or so, I discovered the Sennheiser PX200’s.

The upside:

• Not too expensive; paid €60 on the first purchase, and €25 on the second. I generally don’t think people should spend more than that for what is essentially a perishable good.
• Came in white—matching the iPod.
• STURDY – that’s right. Except for a few design-flaws, these are the most sturdy headphones I’ve ever had, the first pair lasting nearly two years; the second about a year.
• Sound-insulating: that way I enjoy the music for myself, and don’t bother anyone else.
• Stay on when I jog—important, as I jog 4 times a week.
• Great sound.
• Very portable—fold into the size of a pair of sunglasses.

The downside:

• A few design-flaws related to the wiring. If you close it a certain way, it actually cuts into the wiring. Also I just broke my second pair, because the wiring at the base, close to the plug, somehow broke… very annoyed with that, and wires in general.
• Insulates you from the rest of the world. Don’t try biking on a busy street with this sucker.
• Insulates you by making you look like a freak. This picture from 2 years ago in Barcelona says enough (well, actually the gigantic sunglasses don’t help either). Wearing these kinds of headphones really shouts out that you don’t want to talk to someone.

After breaking the second pair, I’m saying good bye to perhaps all headphones. They brought me much wisdom—80% of my iPod consumption is from podcasts with interesting people and on interesting subjects. They made me high—running with them is not only super-comfortable, but the sound is excellent, and helps getting your endorphins pumping. But they also made me anti-social, where I should be saying hello to my neighbours, I put on my headphones when I leave the house, forgetting everything around me.

Maybe, I’ll get another pair, I don’t know. Maybe when the next episode of ‘Stanford’s entrepreneurial thought leaders’ or ‘iInnovate’ comes out and I just have to learn something new. Maybe… and maybe I have to go cold turkey, smell the roses, listen to the wind, smile at the nice people around me, and reserve my sound-consumption for a club or a stereo. I’m sad now; an era is perhaps over.

But maybe, you have discovered the ultimate, never-breaking, super-multi-bassboosting headphones yourself? In which case, SHOUT IT OUT in the comments, as I want in.

Vincent

I’m a big fan of the easily digestible book™ format, like “The One Minute Manager,” “…entrepreneur,” and “What the CEO wants you to know,” all of which are excellent choices, if you’re looking for one yourself.

Now it’s project management’s turn, and I’m thinking of this one:

“The One-Page Project Manager – Communicate and Manage Any Project With a Single Sheet of Paper.”

I was wondering if any of you had read it, can comment on it, or can suggest a better, but equally simple book to read? Articles or websites are also welcome!

Vincent

With both the launch of the app-store and the “global” (western) release of an affordable iPhone 3G, it is clear that the rules of the game are changing a little as far as adoptability of software is concerned. While, if you hang around the blogosphere, you’re exposed to a tech-crowd in a tech-world, many of which are anglophiles also, this is no longer so when you’re dealing with a consumer-targetted electronic device, like the iPhone, available in many countries, in all the major stores, and at a fairly appealing price & cool-factor.

No, instead you’ll be dealing with customers from countries like Germany, France, Spain, Italy, etc. many of which prefer to think in their own language. And you’ll be dealing with mainstream users of telephones, who are, let’s face it, often of a younger generation.

So the implication is: how do I, as an app-developer, reach out to both a global, non-english audience? And how do I appeal to the typical demographic (age, income, etc.) that will buy this phone?

The answer seems fairly straightforward: Games !

1. Games have the advantage that they can easily bridge the language-gap, by mostly focussing on visual communication.
2. Games appeal to the younger crowd.
3. And, let’s face it, the iPhone is not (yet) a business-phone, and hence again not aimed at the typical blog-reader & app-user.

Addendum: a possible fourth reason is that I’m personally not so impressed with the iPhone/iTouch keyboard; i.e. I won’t be writing a blogpost on it any time soon. Games are another matter.

So, if you ask me, all you people aiming to create or invest in the next “productivity” app, I would think again and focus on what the lowest common denominator is between your skills and demand.

Inspiration for this quick post: Fred Wilson on the iPhone app-ecosystem.

Vincent

P.S. don’t forget to check out some of the smart comments this post is receiving.

We always expected it to happen and now it did. The Ukraine, formerly part of the USSR, has opened up a local branch of Tech IT Easy. We are very happy that the philosophy of the techiteasians is being spread to a region that is currently in a high technology growth-spurt, promising many current and future geeks to arise from its ranks.

What will you find on TechITEasy.org.ua (translated version)? The nitty-gritty of mobile tech: the site has published extensively on the Asus EEE, as well as the Dell E, the iPhone, and more. The site is still young, only a few months old, but we feel it has much potential.

So, please join me in extending a warm welcome to TechITEasy-Ukraine and its crew!

Disclaimer: Neither TechITEasy.org, nor its members, are in any way, shape, or form affiliated with the producers of TechITEasy.org.ua, nor can they be held responsible for its contents.

Hi. By “process-coding,” I mean working out the processes in your business, like customer service, sales, marketing, other operations, etc., to such detail that nothing can go to chance.

I ask this because that’s what the “E-Myth revisited” is writing, and while on some level the perfectionist inside me agrees with it—customers like consistent quality, failure is a hard price to pay, etc.—I’m always sceptical of writers pursuing their own agenda, i.e. making things look a lot harder so that they can offer future consulting-services.

As Fidji Simo wrote in her review before, Gerber suggests treating your business as a franchise, coding everything possible to make it easy to scale and delegate tasks. While it’s entirely logical to me, he wrote and researched this book in the 70s-90s, not only the era of McDonalds, Starbucks, and Disney (of which at least two today have lost a lot of personality because of exactly that uniform attitude to doing business), but also perhaps before the era of global business diversity, meaning that the “American way” of doing business may no longer be as universally applicable.

So the question stands:

• How applicable are Gerber’s lessons to your business today, and
• is there alternative (international) thinking out there, in the form of books or, preferably, business-cases?

Vincent

P.S. since Toyota is probably one of my favourite companies today, I may already have part of the answer.

P.S. 2: On a personal note, I have to say that the conversationlist writing-styles of both Micheal Gerber’s book, “E-myth…,” and the book “One Minute Manager,” get on my nerves after a while. Maybe this is an American thing, but the constant dialogues ending with “Oh, Mr. Gerber, you’re so wise!” and “Oh, Mr. One Minute Manager, you’re so smart!” are way too sugary for my taste… even though, on many levels, both books give great advice and do so in an easily digestible package.

Business is all about three things: generating income, generating growth, and making smart spending-decisions to generate both of them. Within that framework, it’s not surprising that business often make compromises as to the feature-set that they offer. This is especially true of web-businesses, who, while they may have built a relatively cheap business (compared to the physical alternative), also find it difficult to create sustainable business models. And, considering the barriers to entry are as low as ever, I imagine that this situation won’t change anytime soon.

My “rant” today is about relevance, which I define as targeting your app or service to work within the context of your consumer. Many internet-businesses focus on two things: building easy connections to other web-users and trying to prevent total breakdown when viral growth reaches a peak.

The fallacy in that mindset is that users are being treated like nodes, who connect back or connect to other users. A node, in a P2P network, is a static entity, one that doesn’t move. A user is, typically, a human being, one that not only moves, but exists on a different plane, the physical world. A lot of web-businesses fail to make that distinction and it has created not only the reality that we are being bombarded with connections whenever we sit at our PC, but we are expected to be connected 24/7.

I alluded to this last year, when I asked “what place does the web take?” The point of that article was really about the relevance of the web to real life. According to a theory, there are three places relevant to people: the first place, which is home-life, the second, which is work-life, and the third, which is leisure. The web, through email, blogs, work-apps, twitter, media, has become a hub in all three places, but its consequences are both information overload and obesity, both caused by passivity.

When you look up the word “break,” it’s defined as “a period of time taken out of one’s professional activity in order to do something else.” If the web is work and the web is home, then the break should not be the web.

Relevance is, once again, having services be context-driven, i.e. being relevant or shutting up at the right time and the right place and for the right person. A pretty complex task, but that is an ideal to live for.

Let me give some examples. Both TheFilter and Last.fm are services that both passively monitor media-life and actively provide services (such as radio-stations and the like). When I plug in my iPod after a run (a third place-activity), Last.fm asks me whether I want to “Scrobble” my tracks, which it in turn uses to make recommendations. TheFilter is not quite there yet, but it passively scans my iTunes-behaviour and creates custom-playlists for me if I want. You may think this is no big deal, but you’d be surprised how few services make even that tiny step from the web to the desktop.

A bigger deal, in my opinion, is NearByNow, which allows shoppers to search the shopping-malls that they visit, not by searching every store, but by entering a search-term for a product on their mobile or via the web, and having it search the retailers’ inventory. I wrote about it here before. This is just a first step, but especially in retail there’s much room still for merging the web with the shop.

Some more examples are the Nintendo Wii, which brings a physical dimension to gaming, and even the MacBook Air and the Asus EEE, both of which are clearly designed to not chain users to a location.

Relevance is something that a lot of commercial and non-commercial services are battling with nowadays. How do you sell a good online that you need to smell, taste, feel, or try on? How do you integrate virtual friendships into real life? How do you limit the amount of noise that your online customers are exposed to? How do you “synergise” the power of the web—information at a finger-tip—with a fragmented physical world? How do you create business models based on both the online and offline behaviour of consumers?

Those are the real questions to answer, not only for the web to become truly mainstream, but for it to stop treating us “users” like grey square boxes with a blue light shining out of it. We, the kids, the workers, the retired, are people dammit, with muscles (not just in the fingers), mouths, and other senses. We were not put on this planet to read 12/7 and type the other 12.

The next liberation-age is, I hope, about freeing ourselves from the machines and living life again as the hybrid entities that we are, producing both physical and mental energy.

Rant over.

Vincent

(The picture is the cover of the book “Snow Crash“—still the most relevant book about a very possible future of the information age today… if you ask me.)

Hello again. Yesterday, I was, rightly, criticised for diminishing the conversation. Perhaps I’ve been out of the game too long, but I don’t disagree.

Following is the Compete + Alexa scores for these services. If you ask me, it’s all about the people… and while Twitter clearly wins, Plaxo Pulse has more visitors than FriendFeed, and FriendFeed has a higher monthly growth-rate than both of them (according to Compete). So… make up your own minds.

Vincent