As many of you know, I work with entrepreneurs to help turn their ideas into funded companies. I love the art of the start and working with great people. Beyond my 3 boys, it's what gets me up in the mornings.
So what's the latest project I'm working on? Take a look at Cc:Betty which is being masterminded by Michael Cerda and Ben Dean, who were co-founders at Jangl (now Live Universe).
If you stay tuned I'll be sure to give you the first heads up when things go live. But for now, feel free to go to the Cc:Betty splash page and add your email to the Beta list.
I'm certainly excited about Cc:Betty and think you'll find it useful as well.
Only those who dare to fail greatly can ever achieve greatly. (John F. Kennedy)
Developing products that fail is always a humbling experience. But, if you work in the consumer Internet space you're bound to have your share. 50% of the typical small businesses fail within the first few years and I suspect that number is much greater in the Internet space.
A year and a half ago I set out to build a new type of Facebook application around location based recommendations called 'Where I Hang'. Think Yelp but leveraging your social network on Facebook. It failed miserably. There were many lessons in my failure but none greater than the common KISS principle...or Keep It Simple Stupid!
Keep it Simple Rules...Especially in Chaotic Environments
During the early days of Facebook's application platform (F8), it was the simplest applications that succeeded. No where was this more apparent than with the Stanford Facebook class taught by BJ Fogg where 80 students built 40 apps that grew to 10 mil users in 10 weeks. If you look deeper, their most successful applications were built around a single action (i.e. Kiss Me, Hugs, Bless You etc..). Michael Weiksner (who was one of the TAs for the class) developed a model to characterize the Six Patterns of Success. Bottom line...To succeed, keep applications simple around various persuasive patterns.
Strategy Implication for Startups: Build a Wedge First
Taking the lesson further, it's most important to figure out the 'wedge' solution in the market you are attacking. This is the minimum feature set that will drive users to adopt your service. By focusing on the wedge entrepreneurs will be able to succeed or fail more quickly. Once the wedge takes hold, the product can be extended...but no sooner.
Anyway, you won't find 'Where I Hang' on Facebook any longer because we pulled it down several months ago. Funny thing though, is that the failure of Where I Hang led me to another business idea that is currently in development. This leads me to another thought which is, 'Don't throw out an idea...morph it.' Maybe I'll cover that thought in another post.
If you study trends on the Internet you've probably run across Morgan Stanley's Internet analyst Mary Meeker. Every year at the Web 2.0 Summit, she gives her view of the Web, and the technology industry. There's always a lot of meaty stuff in her thoughts.
This year she focuses on the potential impact of the economic downturn and singles out the mobile industry as the one area with the most
opportunity in the short term.
However, it's her closing thoughts that should resonate the most for startups because it identifies a key mega-trend in what consumers will be looking for on the web. Specifically,
"Companies with cogent business models that provide consumer value should survive/thrive -- consumers need value more than they have needed it in a long time...and the Internet should be the best place to find it" (Mary Meeker, 2008)
She further identifies that the Internet (commerce, ads, search) has a ton of growth left...the current situation will slow down the growth but the trends are all in the right direction.
So what are the problem areas that will drive consumers to the web in search of value? I'd be interested in your thoughts. Mary Meeker Web 2.0 Presentation
If you are like me and millions of other internet users you've receive a ton of spam from services like Myluvcrush.com. It starts with an e-mail that tells you "There are (4) people who have a crush on you. Click here to find out who". The service then takes you through a series of tactics that strips you of your name and cell phone #...all while charging your cell phone bill $9.99/month for a service you really never understood you were buying. Going through the process feels and is slimy.
Slimy Lead Gen Tactics were the Norm
Many online services have survived on these debatable tactics for a long time because it was enough to just bring consumers to the buyer. The problem with pure traffic arbitrage models, though, is that the focus of the solution isn't on what's best for the user. Instead, the affiliate focuses on what's best for themselves...even to the detriment of the service provider.
New Breed of Lead Gen delivers to the Whole Value Chain
Over the past few years I've seen the emergence of several Web 2.0 lead gen players that deliver value to the whole value chain (user, affiliate and service provider). The sites aren't the usual hit and run sites. They are well thought out services that strive for repeat users by building trust. In essence, these sites have added efficiency to the matching of consumer and companies by focusing on building real services for consumer. Here are a few examples:
Mint.com Mint has built an online Quicken competitor that provides suggestions on financial services based on your actual household spending, saving and investment habits. Their design is slick and intuitive. Most interestingly, the lead gen is a component but not the primary objective of the service.
Billshrink.com Billshrink is an online personalized financial advice engine for mobile phone and credit card service. By linking it to your services you get feedback telling you if there are less expensive alternatives. Again, simplified information for the consumer that can drive decisions. Billshrink gets paid to enable the decision.
In the end, I believe services like Mint and Billshrink are changing the face of lead gen and will be the ones that survive. I'd be interested in any thoughts you have in this area.
A few minutes before Obama took the podium in Chicago’s Grant Park, I got an e-mail from him thanking me for his support and telling me he was just about to take the stage to address the crowd with his victory speech. A few months earlier I received a text message from Obama giving me and other supporters first notice that Joe Biden had been selected as his VP candidate...even before the press broke the story.
"Obama's rise to the presidency will be studied for years to come as the
textbook example of a new kind of electioneering driven by people and
technology", says Ralph Benko, a principal of the political consulting
firm Capital City Partners, in Washington, D.C. (AFP, Obama Surfs The Web To The White House)
This new kind of electioneering drew upon text book OnlineCommunity Management techniques to draw in supporters and grow their support through personalized messaging and the use of social media.
In the end, the innovative internet fundraising system
attracted more than three million donors who contributed about $650m - more than both presidential contenders in 2004 combined. (BBC, Why Barack Won)
Online Community Management Was the Tipping Point
From the surface, both the McCain and Obama campaigns used the Web for fund-raising but no one will question that Obama had monumentally more success, pulling in hundreds of millions of dollars more
than McCain online.
What was the difference? Both campaigns had websites, cultivated bloggers and made heavy use of YouTube. But the Obama campaign took its efforts further by creating a massive grass-roots online network of volunteers.
Like me, you may have received emails and text messages about Obama's campaign. You might have even friended him on Facebook. This was novel. But, it was the sophisticated microtargeting in his campaigns that made it brilliant. The Obama campaign used personalized emails to
communicate with people delivering messages relevant to their districts and the issues that they cared about. Beyond getting them to donate this also got them out to vote.
What Obama's campaign realized from the beginning was the power of the social graph and the tools that could spread ideas virally on the web. It wasn't just about informing participants in a passive way, though. It was also about getting them to do something...donating money, time etc. for the campaign. The tactics drew upon human nature...If you saw others doing it, shouldn't you get involved too?
The tactics were brilliant because the campaign tapped heavily into the college and post college crowd that were versed and comfortable with these techniques.
But Obama's electioneering is not new to the web. In fact, web companies have been using the same tactics for years now. The question I have for you is will the techniques ever achieve the level of success that was generated in this campaign? I'm assuming all campaigns will try to use these techniques in the future.
With that said, I want to leave you with an inspiring video...my first introduction to Obama online. It's Will.i.am's (of the Black Eyed Peas) Youtube video 'Yes We Can'.
When I last looked, the video had over 11 million views and inspired
many like myself to learn more about the man who is now the next
President. This video wasn't generated by the Obama campaign but
demonstrated the power of new media to lift a political campaign into
the limelight. Yes We Can!
