nick.vc

Permalink

Consumers don’t want warez, they want solutions

Transactional payments have already shifted from cash to smartphone, but transactional purchases are going away altogether. We are going to be like the POTUS–without a wallet.

My credit card statements used to list dozens of merchants, but my spend is becoming increasingly consolidated to only a few: Amazon, Google Express, Uber, Mealpass, Blue Apron, Netflix, Apple (phone, carrier, and apps), utilities, and a gym membership. I rarely make purchases that aren’t recurring or ordered through Amazon, Google Express or the App Store.

When you are walking around and browsing stores, you are increasing your awareness of products and services. You don’t do this in a web browser. You type exactly what you are looking for–what you already know. Amazon, Google, and the App Store are search driven, and as more products and services move to those platforms, they will become ever increasingly difficult to browse.

People are looking to solve problems, not make purchases. With recurring payments, once a consumer has solved a problem and is satisfied, they stop looking for other products and services. People need to be clothed (Amazon and Google), fed (Mealpass and Blue Apron), entertained (Amazon, Apple, Netflix), and educated (working on it). Businesses need to create new categories of needs we don’t know we have, or be better, faster, and cheaper like Uber.

Permalink
Angel Investing is Hard
Now in the first quarter of my fifth year investing in startups, I have enough longitudinal data to begin deriving some lessons from my portfolio. I achieved my goal of keeping a pace of ~1 investment per quarter and as a...

Angel Investing is Hard

Now in the first quarter of my fifth year investing in startups, I have enough longitudinal data to begin deriving some lessons from my portfolio. I achieved my goal of keeping a pace of ~1 investment per quarter and as a result I’ve invested in 12 companies. Yesterday, the first of my portfolio companies failed. It wasn’t my first investment. That company, Able, has successfully raised follow-on financing. So how am I doing?

Half of the companies have raised follow-on financing

  • 5 were up rounds
  • 1 was a down round
  • I invested my pro-rata in 3/6

4 companies haven’t raised follow-on financing

  • 1 is a recent investment (Q12015)
  • 3 are generating revenue ranging from 20-200k MRR

1 company exited and returned 1x cash plus an equity interest in the acquiror

1 company failed

Based on the marks and where I think the rest will end up, my portfolio’s expected return is probably above average for the venture asset class. That’s because average venture returns don’t even return invested capital (see chart).

So what have I learned?

  • On founders: Invest in founders with skin in the game. Founders that self-funded or raised a lot from friends and family are more likely to keep going when the going gets tough, which it always does.
  • On convertible notes: Angels should avoid them. There’s little upside and lots of downside. Invest in deals with a lead investor willing to price the round.
  • On pivots: If the dogs aren’t eating the dog food, try different dog food. Time won’t get customers to like your product. 4 of my portfolio co’s pivoted, and 2 sold their previous business assets to extend their runway.
  • On management: Founders should be replaced if someone else is better for the company. 3 of my portfolio co’s replaced their CEOs, and all are better for it. This isn’t non-founder friendly, this is about doing what’s necessary for the company to succeed. This happened to me at my first venture-backed startup and it was the right decision.
  • On acquisitions: Take the first offer as it is probably the best you are going to get. Once you have a signed term sheet, your entire focus should be getting it closed. Make sure the term sheet includes a breakup fee.

It will take a few more years to determine if I’m better than average as a venture investor and I’m not entirely sure how to apply my learnings (especially since only two can be applied at the time of investment) which is why I’m shifting my venture capital asset allocation to being a limited partner in venture funds. I recently invested in frontier tech fund and hope they’re one of the 6 in 99 with 3x+ returns. I’m directing deal flow to them and will be evaluating other LP investments as well. I do not anticipate making follow on investments in my portfolio and will recycle returned capital into LP investments. I’d love to hear your feedback on these learnings and my revised investment strategy!

Permalink
@stormspotco: Weekend hack with @arjunblj, @ericdfields, @elizabethducoff, @grgmyrg and @jon4fish
“Founding story” here

@stormspotco: Weekend hack with @arjunblj@ericdfields@elizabethducoff@grgmyrg and @jon4fish

“Founding story” here

Permalink

New Ventures

After moving to Boston in early 2012 I was very lucky to meet Brian Balfour through my friend Noah Kagan. Brian and I connected and I learned about his new startup, Boundless, and how they were innovating in higher education. The company was just a few people and a beta product but I was excited about its promise. The mission–universal access to high quality, low cost textbooks and teaching resources–resonated with me. I joined as VP Content and over the next two years recruited an incredible team and hundreds of freelance writers to grow our content to over 20 introductory college level courses that are now read by over 3 million students and teachers. It is clear that this is the beginning of a once in a generation change in how education is delivered, and Boundless is at the forefront of that change.

As rewarding as it has been to catalyze that change at Boundless, I’m thrilled to share that I will be joining Northeastern University as VP New Ventures to create new global opportunities and revenue streams that support Northeastern’s strategic growth and expansion. Northeastern has understood for over 100 years that higher education should be delivered at the intersection of work and study and is uniquely positioned to leverage that know-how as students increasingly look for ROI. I will work closely with the university’s senior leadership and faculty to develop and launch innovative initiatives that advance the university’s position as a leader in higher education. If you are part of the Northeastern community or interested in helping shape the future of higher education, my door is always open and I welcome all ideas. I also look forward to staying in touch with all of you, across industries, to build an exciting future together.

Nick Ducoff
@nickducoff

Permalink

AIDAARRR doesn’t have the same ring to it…

Startup Metrics: A Simple 5-Step Model (AARRR!)

Dave McClure has popularized the AARRR startup metrics for pirates marketing funnel, and for good reason. This is how online products and services with traceable online acquisition should think about marketing. But what about channels for online products and services that aren’t traceable (e.g. word of mouth, direct, offline advertising, etc.)? In other words, what happens before “Acquisition”? Well, “Awareness”, “Interest” and “Desire” do.

When I went to business school before traceable online acquisition was commonplace the purchase funnel acronym was AIDA, or:

  • Awareness
  • Interest
  • Desire
  • Action

McClure’s funnel really only replaces the “Action” step. “Awareness” can take place online or offline and can be traceable or not, and “Interest” and “Desire” are often internalized. It is only when a user takes an “Action” step that they enter the traceable AARRR funnel.

Data-driven managers don’t like the vagaries of awareness marketing, and as a result, I see too few companies taking the time and effort to understand the value of investing in true top of the funnel marketing activities.

My wife, Elizabeth Ducoff, wrote a post titled, “If you’re not a growth hacker, what are you?” and she is right to call attention to the 7+ touches it takes on average to get a visitor to your site in the first place.

Companies don’t get to interesting scale on internet marketing alone and thus more attention needs to be paid on the “AID” part of the AIDAARRR funnel.

Permalink

3 Business Books Every Entreprenuer Should Read

  1. The Lean Startup
  2. Getting to Yes
  3. The Goal

The three books listed above are a combined 920 pages and I recommend that you read them from cover to cover as they will help you: 1) build the right product, 2) get what you want from people and 3) get to scale.

To summarize each book in a sentence:

  1. Do customer development before you build product.
  2. Be reasonable in negotiations; don’t take an extreme position.
  3. Increase productivity by preventing bottlenecks.
Permalink
Failing Fast Is Not A Winning Strategy (or Why Experience Wins)
Failing fast is celebrated in lean startup circles and Silicon Valley but shouldn’t be. By way of example, let’s look at the paths above and assume in each path the triangles are...

Failing Fast Is Not A Winning Strategy (or Why Experience Wins)

Failing fast is celebrated in lean startup circles and Silicon Valley but shouldn’t be. By way of example, let’s look at the paths above and assume in each path the triangles are isosceles, but not equilateral, with the legs each equaling 2. Path A and Path B might look to be the same length but the perimeter of A is 3X as long. When you veer off path it causes the surface area to increase unless you are able to veer back at precisely the same degree by which you went off path.

Path A is what “failing fast and often” looks like. Path B is what an experienced team’s failures and course corrections look like, and since the hypotenuse is on the path, the length is the same as a straight path. Whereas a straight path takes 32 lengths, the “fail fast and often” path in Path A is 96 lengths! The fewer mistakes you make, the quicker you get to the finish line, and not just by a little, but by a factor of 3!

The argument for “failing fast and often” assumes time is infinite. It is not, and each failure in actuality brings a startup closer to death. We all make mistakes, and some are OK if they are small and you learn from them and are able to either avoid them in the future or veer back and make up the lost time. Experienced teams know how important it is to avoid mistakes and stay on course.

Ed. note: This post should not be read as “don’t take risks”. We all have to make decisions every day with imperfect data, some bigger than others. The key is to know when you have enough data to make what you think is the correct risk-adjusted decision. Lean startup conventional wisdom is to just make the decision quickly since you will likely never have perfect data. However, a short delay can sometimes yield significant returns if it informs you to make the correct decision. You might still be wrong, and in any event you should know and acknowledge the signals to determine that you *are* wrong and quickly course-correct.

Permalink

Everyone knows that stock options are awesome; what this blog post presupposes is, maybe they aren’t?


I have 3 main beefs with stock options:

1) They are hard to value for both the company and the employee

2) They are initially worth ~ nothing and probably will never be worth anything

3) They cost more than you think

1) Stock Options are hard to value for both the company and the employees


For pre-revenue startups that haven’t raised capital, this beef doesn’t really apply. It is generally accepted at that stage of the company that its stock and options are worth ~ nothing. As a result, founders and early employees often pay “par value” (often a tenth of a penny or less) for their stock and options. This is of course great if the underlying stock ends up being worth anything, and is what many people think of when they hear stock options. That however is not the reality for most option holders since most employees come on board AFTER the company has revenue or has raised capital. At that time, a company is required to issue options at “fair market value” which the IRS has made very complicated. Because it is complicated, a cottage industry has developed to value options for private companies (I recommend SVB), using one of a few methods. A heuristic is that options are often valued at 20% of the price of the last preferred stock round. There is typically a discount because of the liquidation preference of the preferred stock and uncertainty of the prospects of the company. When an employee joins a startup they do not get to negotiate the exercise price of their options but when they leave they must make their own determination whether the underlying stock is worth more than its exercise price. Employees, who are often not sophisticated or accredited investors, are typically given little to no information in which to make that valuation determination and are forced to come up with post-tax dollars to exercise their options (I’ll explain why this sucks later). It is a big gamble but often is not recognized as such.

2) Stock Options are initially worth ~ nothing and probably will never be worth anything

Because the option exercise price is the “fair market value” of the underlying stock, the option is worth ~ nothing at the time of grant. Let’s say the “fair market value” placed on the common stock is $1 and your exercise price is $1. That means you would be paying $1 to get $1 in value. Give a dollar; get a dollar. There is no value being transferred, and that is why options are not immediately taxable as income to the employee. (The gains are only taxed later if the option was exercised and if additional value was received for the underlying stock.) Therefore, generally-speaking employees should not assign much value to their options. If the underlying stock ends up being worth more than the exercise price, that’s great albeit highly unlikely; but trust me, you paid for them.

3) Stock Options cost more than you think

Often employees at startups are compensated at wages considerably less than what they could make at more established companies (e.g. IBM, Google, GE) or in service industries (e.g. consulting, law, investment banking, accounting). I previously explained that your stock option’s initial value is zero. That means any additional value created is somewhat dependent on you! It is important to understand opportunity cost(Note: I am only talking dollars and cents and not other benefits of working at a startup.) If you could otherwise make $50,000 and are being paid $47,500 at a startup with $10,000 “worth” of options (vesting over four years), then you need to MORE THAN DOUBLE the value of the company to break even. Since the options have no initial value, that $10,000 “worth” of options is actually zero and thus, you need to turn that $10,000 into $20,000 to get to $50,000 per year. Not only that, but to come up with the $10,000 exercise price, you had to make $14,000 pre-tax. ($40,000 income is taxed at 25%). Furthermore, your $10,000 gain is taxed at 15-25% or MORE (many states have state capital gains tax). Let’s assume it is taxed at 20%, so you pay $2,000 of taxes on your $10,000 gain. In other words, you paid $10,000 ($14,000 of earnings) for $18,000 ($20,000 - $2,000) for a real return of $4,000! The option you thought was “worth” $10,000 was actually only worth $4,000 and it took four years and a successful outcome to get there.

I have other beefs with stock options that I will cover in another post, as well as a proposal for how to more adequately compensate startup employees, and more specifically, startup executives. I hope you found this helpful, and please comment if you agree or disagree with any of this!

Permalink

Be the 2nd best at every position on your team

I like to fancy myself a good manager, and it is because of one key attribute: the ability to put myself in each of my team member’s shoes. I’m not just talking about empathy- which I think is an incredibly important quality- but rather actually understanding what it takes to do their job. In order to successfully task someone with a project, you need to have a deep understanding how you would complete it yourself. What is the goal? What tasks and subtasks need to be done to achieve the goal? How long will each task or subtask take? What resources will be needed, etc. With the answers to these questions, you can accurately scope the project, budget and time, and help your team member if they run into any problems or have questions along the way. Nothing is more frustrating than being given a project with an unrealistic timeframe or outcome or without a budget if one will be necessary to achieve the goal. You might be thinking that this sounds like a lot of work. The trick is developing heuristics and archetypes of both projects and team members so you can get maximum leverage. Try to normalize the task and the person to how much time it would take you. For example, given any task, some of your team members might be more or less efficient than you- and their time should be discounted or marked up accordingly. This will help ensure you are right-sizing goals and projects and that each of your team members is fully optimized.

Permalink

Techstars is Austin’s Tipping Point

I was lucky to live in Austin for ~10 years before I moved to Boston. Over those years, I, and many other entrepreneurs, notably Josh Baer and more recently, Bill Boebel, did everything we could to make the Austin startup community more robust. While it has improved around the edges, with an uptick in the past year with Capital Factory’s new space (visited by the President last week) and Bazaarvoice’s IPO, no single event has served as a catalyst. Fast forward to today, and Techstars’ announcement of their new incubator there will be the event that pushes Austin over the edge.

I’ve been fortunate to be a mentor at Techstars Boston, and have seen the profound impact it can have on an ecosystem, even one as dynamic as Boston’s. For Austin, it will mean 3 things:

1) More startups


While Austin has many positive virtues, inertia keeps most companies from moving (though some do, including those fleeing high taxes in California). Getting into Techstars, however, is a reason in and of itself to uproot and move. Techstars usually has two classes a year, and with ~10 startups per class, that is 20 new startups a year! These startups come from all over, which I will talk about in 3) below, and in my experience I’ve seen many stay in Boston after they graduate from Techstars. This will be a huge boon for the Austin startup community as they all come out with some funding, and many go on to become successful businesses. Startups from the Boston Spring 2011 class, for instance, have raised nearly $58 million collectively and have 124 employees!

2) More investors


Crunching the data linked to above, the startups in each Techstars class, on average, have raised $17 million! Austin VenturesMercury Fund (our awesome investors at Infochimps) and Silverton can’t fund that by themselves. Money will flow in to fund these startups from all over. Who knows - will a West or East Coast VC open up a satellite office in Austin? This is how it started in NYC…

3) More diversity


I’ve been privileged to mentor a number of Techstars startups, but I’d like to give a nod to three in particular to exemplify the diversity Techstars adds to a community.

Eyal Yair of CartCrunch (aka Saverr) moved from Israel to join the Techstars program and stayed after they completed the Fall 2012 class, working out of Dogpatch Labs. Also from the Fall 2012 class, Alex Schiff moved the whole Fletchnotes team from Michigan and have set up roots in CambridgeCyrille Vincey moved his family from France to be in the current Boston Techstars class (demo day is next week) and will be moving his team here following fundraising. These are amazing people that have made the move to Boston because of Techstars.


Austin has always been a great startup town - and it is great to get the validation from Techstars. This is the tipping point.