Archive for strategy

Missed Groupon deal could be Google’s Stalingrad

// December 6th, 2010 // 0 Comments // Industry, Startup, strategy

The news today is that Google’s attempt to acquire GroupOn for a massive US$6B has failed. Ten years ago, I was working for an industry-dominating technology giant when a similar thing happened to us: we tried to buy our way into a smokin’ hot new web startup category way too late, only to be roughed-up and shown the door by a team of young punks a couple of years out of college. Why did this deal fail, and what could it mean for Google? It could mean the beginning of the decline.

IR23 :: THE LAND IS NOT FOR SALE

All the tell-tale signs are there: Google, whose next-biggest acquisition was for online advertising powerhouse DoubleClick for a mere US$3.1B back in 2007, has US$33.4B in cash and securities with which to rule the world, and yet was prepared to throw a reported US$6B at the deal. That’s 18% of Google’s money pile. For a startup only three years old which earned an estimated US$350M in the past year. A 12x valuation. Why? (more…)

Turn a small step into no step at all

// October 15th, 2010 // 0 Comments // strategy

The superbright and always working Dave Cheong and I were talking about converting visitors to customers and he asked me if I thought Traindom needed some help with its homepage copywriting. Well, yes, I think “your information marketing business” is about as obtuse and unemotional as copy can get. With the exception of the headline, the rest of the homepage is cluttered with product features and details instead of engaging you with benefits — examples of how the product can change your work/life.

Information Marketing Business in Minutes - Traindom

Still, my gut says the biggest problem is not homepage conversion rates but actual use of the product. I bet they find too few new signups get all the way to creating and marketing something they’ve made using Traindom. In fact, I think I could build a bigger business teaching people *how* to make this kind of material and inspiring them with examples they can cut up and use as templates.

Here’s what I mean:

Another friend, Yorke Hinds, started Bed And Breakfast Institute, selling an online course for people who’ve always wanted to own/operate a bed-and-breakfast. He’s smart: he could try and build a web platform to help people operate their B&B, but because there’s so many steps of investing commitment and time in those sorts of decisions, a tiny percentage of the people who dream about doing a B&B ever actually start one.

The principle is: avoid business models that depend on convincing people to take a big step. Until they take that big step you’re either waiting to bill them, or you’ve billed them for something they haven’t used and so won’t pay for when their free trial expires in 30 days.

Even if you’re taking that big step down a few notches by giving them a web platform, it’s still a big step and you can spend a lot of time waiting for them. If you can build a platform that lowers the height of stairs, then apply those skills to lowering the height of a low stair, so that you’re taking it away altogether. Then there’s no barrier, no hurdle, no reason not to, no reason to wait until you’ve thought about it some more, and every reason to come back and back again.

Steps by Jan Tik

'Steps' by Jan Tik

Yorke’s online education course addresses a small step: it helps people decide whether they really want to start a B&B by teaching them about what it’s really like. It’s marketed as a course that will teach you the insider secrets of the most successful operators in the B&B industry but that’s the justification the customer needs to sign up. The benefit he’s offering his customers is to help them make a big decision, so he’s not waiting for them to make that big decision before he’s able to sell them something. He’s grinding down that small step so it’s level with the ground, so you don’t even pause before you decide to buy.

Lowering the conversion step

If you want no barriers to conversion, start with a smaller barrier.

These days, web platform design and development is so cheap and fast to do, there’s  not much downside if a startup idea doesn’t get traction. And we know it’s possible to test many startup ideas without doing much coding at all. It’s worth building an MVP and seeing what testers think of it. But test a MVP as soon as you can so you can test whether you’re trying to shave a few centimetres off the top of a huge step, or whether you’re levelling a step only a few centimetres high.

I don’t want more iPhone apps, I want better iPhone apps

// November 18th, 2009 // 0 Comments // software, strategy

Fred Wilson writes in The Power of Instant Approval that Apple is risking its lead in the smartphone app market by forcing app developers to wait on approval from Apple before publishing their apps on iTunes Store. It’s a growing industry concern — does Apple risk being overtaken by competitors? I think Apple understands the consumer relationship better than any competitor in the smartphone market and that’s why in this case, the cathedral can win over the bazaar.

The greater risk is that the industry may turn away from Apple if groupthink decides that Apple’s strategy is flawed. We’ve seen it before.

Could Google's Android Market really overtake Apple's iTunes Store?

Could Google's Android Market really overtake Apple's iTunes Store?

(more…)

Let your users show you the money

// October 22nd, 2009 // 0 Comments // platform, Products, Startup, strategy

To paraphrase William Gibson, “The street always finds its own uses for things.” If you’re starting an online marketplace, or a social messaging platform, or an online community, one of the big challenges is to stay in touch with your users, to learn more about how they use your platform.

Why? Often ‘the street’ (your customers) will use your platform for surprising purposes. Likely, purposes you didn’t have in mind. Should you ignore their preference and try to force customers to bend to your will, or bend to theirsand try to find a commercially successful model for what they’re doing? (more…)

In product strategy, faith is a handicap

// October 16th, 2009 // 0 Comments // Startup, strategy

(This story originally ran on the Pollenizer blog and is re-published here because it’s on my mind right now and it still has legs… the story, not my mind.)

You remember the future we were promised, right? It had flying cars, robotic housemaids, one-piece shiny suits and meals in convenient pill form. We don’t live in that future because the people planning utopia fell in love with their own beliefs about what consumers wanted. They missed the gross and subtle cues that consumers use to indicate that this is not something they want, need or are prepared to pay for. It’s important to learn how to read those cues or your own startup vision may turn out to be as popular as nuclear flying car.

But first, let’s look back on the brighter, shinier future we were promised. As an impressionable adult I look back on when I was an impressionable boy and remember how deeply I had bought-in to that utopian future. At the age of 12 I had decided I’d be working as a journalist in a bustling colony on the Moon by the age of 30, flying to work, my only wardrobe choices the silver one-piece or the bronze one-piece, working late each night on a dinner pill. I’m a geek and I bought it wholesale. This was the future I wanted. Turns out, I was in the minority!

In the future, utopia will be something you can climb on. Also, pigeons may poop on it. (Photo: a href=

What happened to our bright utopian future? Real consumer behaviour happened. Society did not and does not really want a utopian future. Consider this: each of those emblemic utopian products kinda/sorta exists today:

Flying car: the Terrafugia Transition is more of a driveable airplane than a flyable car but it’s roadworthy, and once it has approval from the authorities you can drive it to an airport and fly it to another airport. The future we were promised included nuclear fusion-powered saucers, so where did the utopian product manager go wrong? He Underestimating the bureaucracy of the FAA, sure, but really the big mistake was an unfounded optimism that if consumer demand was high enough, the nascent nuclear industry would be able to solve the safety and disposal problems of nuclear energy. Turns out, no amount of commute time saved is enough to offset the fear of contaminating your neighbourhood with radioactive waste for the next half a million years. Almost always emotions (fear) beat logic (we’ll solve this) in the consumer mind.

Meals in pill form: turns out in reality meals are more easily delivered in powder form, and you can even get something better than a meal, if what you want to do is lose weight. Turns out the powdered meal replacement marketplace is quite a bit bigger than the market for flying cars but it’s not something most people choose to do. What went wrong? If asked, “Would you like to be able to save time by consuming a meal in pill form?” most consumers will say yes: sometimes they would like that. But the unasked question is, “how often?” and our utopian product manager either didn’t ask that or didn’t want to hear the answer.

Shiny one-piece suits: you only have to go to a fashion show, a car race, or buy one online to debunk the idea that these are somehow more practical and comfortable than jeans and a tee. Our utopian product manager was on happy drugs for this one.

Robot housemaid: the robot housemaid could be easily the most mainstream utopian product that exists today, yet consumers just won’t go for it. The iRobot company of Massacheusetts makes a whole range of the things. I pitch the joys of Roomba ownership to almost every visitor to our house — I’m famous for it — and I’m not too shabby at the art of the pitch. Anybody who doesn’t believe me need only check Amazon – this is a product that gets a 5 star review from nearly half the people who’ve bought one. So why have I been unable to convert even one single person yet?

Two simple reasons: almost everybody who cares about a clean floor already has a vacuum cleaner; and without exception they actually prefer to clean their floor themselves to make sure the job is done to their own high standard. They don’t want to be freed of the burden of cleaning the floor. They might tell a utopian product manager that they would love to be able to trust the cleaning to a robot, but you know what? They never will. Their housekeeping ability is closely associated with their self-esteem. You would have to pay them to allow a robot to do it, and even then they would stand there and watch it work, waiting for it to fail. That’s not increasing quality of life, it’s increasing anxiety. The only product people are prepared to buy that increases their anxiety is tobacco, apparently.

Even good startup founders make bad decisions

As startup founders designing online services, what can we learn from the mistakes of the utopian product manager? It is this: the very faith that makes you a good startup founder makes you a lousy judge of what consumers truly want to buy from you.

To even get a break as a startup founder you need an idea; more than idea, you need a dream, preferrably an unshakeable one. You need to evangelise not just consumers but sceptical investors, employees, industry and media. You can walk in with a meter-high stack of convincing-looking qualitative and quantitative research meant to back you up, but at best that’ll help with the post-purchase rationalisation. People will get on-board because they believe you, and they will believe you only if you have faith. And faith does not require facts. In fact, the more you have faith, the less you need facts and the more likely you are to select the facts that reinforce your faith.

The successful startup founders I know often have the uncanny ability to go to bat — and hit a home run — for ideas they don’t have much faith in. It’s a psychological makeup that is useful in sales roles; perhaps that’s why I know many successful startup founders from a sales background. Faith can really get in the way of building products consumers want. Not having faith in your product and your strategy requires you to apply reason, it allows you to subject a business to the strictest scrutiny, to make 110% sure that consumers aren’t just being polite to the nice young man who asked them if they’d be interested in buying a nuclear-powered flying car.

If you have faith, perhaps you have the wrong product, or you are the wrong person for the job. Get yourself a CEO (stay on as founder) an equal partner or an advisory board who don’t need faith and then pay close attention to what they’re telling you about what the market is saying.

Sadly for those of us who’d still love to be flying our robot housemaids, if you don’t have faith but everybody believes you anyway, you’re well on your way to success.

(That’s a depressing note to end on, so here’s a very funny skit about flying cars and what you should — or shouldn’t — be prepared to do to get one.)

On the importance of owning your web platform

// December 9th, 2008 // 0 Comments // platform, Startup, strategy

 

Who cares how the platform works? This is the subtext to a lot of web startup business plans I see
“Who cares how the platform works”? This is the subtext to a lot of web startup business plans I see. At this point, you’ve lost me.

For web businesses, web platforms are not like phone connections and photocopy paper, they are tightly woven into the fabric of every aspect of your company

But first, big props to Balsamiq, the mockup tool I used to do the image above. It costs $79, comes in Mac, Windows, and Linux versions, or you can use it from within ConfluenceJIRA and XWiki wikis if you use one of those to manage your product process. It’s the best quick mockup tool I’ve ever used – quicker even than pencil and paper, and after about a month of use, it’s an essential part of my paper prototyping and developer briefing toolkit. Product people: if you have a customer or business process owner who’s always bugging you, give them this to use and tell them if they can sketch it, you’ll build it. It’s so easy to use even the dumbest marketing manager can figure it out. It’ll teach them more about web development than a week of workshops and you can get some real work done in the meantime. More about Balsamiq later.

If you’re starting a trucking company, you need at least one guy who knows about trucks. If you’re going to franchise a network of muffin bakeries, better get yourself someone who can make great muffins. Have a guess what kind of skills you need to have before you decide to open a scuba school… give yourself a gold star.

Late last week I met with a potential client (yay, I love potential clients, sometimes even more than actual clients.) The potential client shall remain nameless to protect their identity.

We met. They stepped me through an impressive and well thought-out introduction to the business, all the way through a detailed business plan, laboriously detailed spreadsheets listing costs to be incurred in the first three years, introduced the entire executive team and… uh oh…

…there was no Chief Technology Officer on the executive team. There was no budget line for recruiting a top-line team of web developers, product manager, interaction designer and customer service manager. They were planning to outsource the whole lot.

Common mistake, but critical mistake nonetheless.

Let me be absolutely clear on this: if you are a web business, you need to own your own web platform. You need to have the people responsible for the web platform represented at director level in your company, aligned with your business goals and sufficiently motivated to bring onboard a web platform team of the highest calibre.

If you’re starting a trucking company, you need at least one person who knows about trucks. If you’re going to franchise a network of muffin bakeries, better get yourself someone who can make great muffins. Have a guess what kind of skills you need to have before you decide to open a scuba school… give yourself a gold star.

In other words, web businesses are usually not businesses-that-happen-to-have-websites. When you outsource a web platform you not only incur additional cost and add to your relationship-management burden, you miss out on all the intellectual property of actually running the business.

For instance, if you discover a better way of helping customers choose and add something to a shopping cart, you can act on that learning lesson more quickly if you own the team that implements it, and crucially you keep the IP on not just the business process but the platform code used to build it, which lets you get better and faster at making other improvements in the future.

If you’re a web business, how well your web platform works defines the success or failure of almost every metric of your business: converting consumers to customers, average revenue per customer, customer churn, competitive moves, and most crucially of all, time-to-iterate. Name a big, successful web business that is still on an outsourced platform.

It’s OK to be the founding team and not have a senior technology guru there with you from day one, just as it’s OK to not have your CFO or even your CEO hired yet. But recognise that you will need that person, and you will need that person to hire a team, and that team, while it may use off the shelf and SAAS and hosted components to build your web platform, will ultimately deliver something unique that your competitors can never hope to imitate; something your suitors will pay an arm and a leg to get to… the experience that comes from building and  operating a successful web platform.

HTC’s Android handset: the little droid that can’t

// November 10th, 2008 // 0 Comments // strategy

HTC's first Android handset: as fun to use as an early Linux install

As fun to get to know as an early Linux install, for all the same reasons.

I’ve got no mobile clients at the moment but I’m a mobile geek so I’ve been watching with great interest to see what the market makes of the first handset to ship with Google’s Android mobile OS. I’m not surprised that it’s gotten a rave review by people who like to overclock their PC and a ho-hum review from people who just want something as easy to use as the iPhone but not from Apple. I’m surprised that Google and its partners really believe they can create an open architecture for mobile handsets that can compete with the seamless nature of the iPhone. I don’t think it can.

To borrow Eric Raymond’s seminal definition the fundamental difference is that iPhone is the ‘cathedral’ and Android is the ‘bazaar.’

Everything that makes the iPhone such a revolutionary user experience depends on Apple’s ‘cathedral — its absolute control over hardware, operating system and applications. Even third-party applications are developed using Apple’s tools and marketed and delivered in a market tightly controlled by Apple.

Everything reviewers find disappointing about HTC’s first Android handset boils down to the difficulty in making a ‘bazaar’ product work – not controlling every aspect of the product and its software makes it harder design things that work smoothly.

Will the cathedral or the bazaar approach win out in the mobile handset market? Apple’s incredible success in the music player market suggests the cathedral is the model to adopt whenever you’re shipping high volumes of units to consumers who aren’t geeks – they just want something that works.

Google and its handset partners will probably garner a large and sustainable market of customers who like to take pride in their ability to configure, tweak and debug their Android handset, but that will always be a vastly smaller market than the number of people who just want to be delighted by how easy their phone is to use.

Android handsets will get better and better, but the capabilities will drift further apart over time, so that Android handsets will get better at specialist field applications – the sorts of things tablet PCs often do now — while the iPhone gets better at entertainment content and services.

People sometimes forget that Apple now owns a controlling stake in one of the biggest Hollywood studios, has very powerful relationships with what remains of the music industry, has a great set-top box (AppleTV), a robust delivery platform (iTunes) and is rapidly funding (presumably eventually to acquire) iPhone application developers.

Android may put price pressure on Apple, but we’ve seen with iPods how ready Apple is to crush competitors when it comes to price.

Could Google outmarket Apple? The word-of-mouth hype that created the Google behemoth was mostly an accident — byproduct of a bunch of people working really hard and keeping their heads down while the market watched with fascination. Google’s got no clue when it comes to marketing – how else to explain why they left their mobile platform with its original codename when they launched it? Is “Android” accessible? Cute? Sexy? Fun? Yeah, maybe if you like fiddling with code, but otherwise, probably not.

iPhone App-onomics and prospecting for gold

// September 4th, 2008 // 0 Comments // software, Startup, strategy

Thirty minutes after installing 2.01 on my iPhone 2G I had purchased and downloaded 21 new iPhone apps. The whole experience – from finding to buying to downloading and installing – was so quick and easy that my credit card barely warmed up as the money drained away. I had to force myself to stop before I blew it. It was clear there was going to be quite a market for iPhone apps.

iTunes.jpg

Later, I was talking to some friends who had a mind to start an iPhone App development business – would I like to be a part of it? Well, yes! Though the volatility of any new market can be a challenging place to start a business.

Weren’t they worried about planning for their business before the economics of iPhone apps was really clear? Beyond the obvious risk of not yet knowing how long it takes to build apps, how do you know what to charge and what your revenues are going to be? What the hot categories will be? How best to market your apps?

Their response was the right one: we don’t know, but the opportunities are as big as the risks – if we happen across a successful formula we could have a great business. I think that’s a great attitude and I hope to tell you more about this new Aussie iPhone App developer when the time is right.

Meantime, the volatility of a virgin App economy (“apponomy”?) trying to establish itself is becoming clear. Average prices for apps started way up, and now developers are concerned that prices for some apps have been cut in half, others have gone from paid to free. I think Marco Arment, the lead developer at Tumblr and developer of the iPhone App Instapaper, has it right when he predicts that app pricing should turn out to be fairly inelastic – that it shouldn’t matter whether you’re charging $2 or $10, the challenge is in getting someone to pay at all.

The problem with inelastic pricing is that it comes with significant momentum, both up and down. If consumers come to an Appstore and the average price for apps is $0.00, that makes it very difficult to charge even $2.00. If Apple had a problem with apponomics and decided to institute, say, a compulsory $2.00 charge for apps, that would set the expectation that apps are not free, and consumers would then be more likely to pay $5-$10 because of the perception that “apps are not free.”

The challenge for Marco and other developers trying to make a living doing this is: for most app developers, this is not a living, it is not even a main focus of work. Never mind the hobbyist developers doing it for fun, it’s the big businesses using Appstore as a marketing vehicle for their main desktop software that can really hurt your business. They don’t need iPhone customers, but they do need their desktop customers to have access to their software on their iPhone – those are two different things. A big software company that doesn’t really care about iPhone app revenues can really hurt your business if they’re in the same space.

Marco also talks about whether or not to make the iPhone version of Instapaper his main business and not developing any subsequent apps. His first app has been very successful: is he best to build on that success by developing more apps, or by improving the app he’s already built? Many would say to keep one foot in each camp, but Marco calls it right when he makes his decision: you double the complexity of your business and how it is affected by the volatility in the apponomy if you keep a foot in each camp.

The apponomy will settle down as it grows, though Apple may need to assist it in doing so – using the same email marketing it uses to promote music that will be popular on iTunes Store, featuring app developers on Apple.com and by supporting good developers with pricing breaks, free training and access to advice from the App platform development team. Whatever actions Apple takes, it needs to be fast, but subtle. Lots of small, incremental changes please – if they wear their hobnail boots as Apple sometimes does, it will only start the apponomy oscillating more wildly.

Meanwhile, this is a gold rush. Is there really gold in them thar hills, or is it just iron pyrite? There’s only so much you can learn from the greenhorns running out of the supply store with shovels and wheelbarrows. Sooner or later you have to buy your own shovel and go see for yourself… Marco, where’s the store?…

Mum’s the words

// May 22nd, 2008 // 0 Comments // Social Media, Startup, strategy, Writing

I’ve written before about the importance of developing great elevator pitches and business narratives, and about how often the best ones come from your customers, not your marketing team.

In the last week I was privileged to observe a group of passionate, involved customers do exactly this for Clay Cook, entrepreneur, angel investor and founder of Minti.com, an online support and advice community for new mums.

Minti.png

Clay had no budget to get some copy written in a hurry for a direct email shot out to a church email list. I heard about this when he Twittered, asking if anyone could help. I got in touch but I couldn’t really help.

It didn’t matter because in the meantime, Clay had a better idea: he already had an abundance of engaged, communicative, passionate Minti customers who would share a lot in common with the women on this group email list. Why not run a competition to see who could write the best email for Minti? (more…)

The next step in online banking: helping the customer?

// March 19th, 2008 // 0 Comments // Glocalisation, strategy

That’s a controversial headline, because the bankers I speak to say, "isn’t providing an online banking service helping the customer?" Well, not so much. Now every bank offers online banking, and most charge a fee of some kind, it’s less about helping the customer manage their money and more about helping the bank cut costs and increase revenue.

Yet banks of all shapes and sizes are striving to "engage more fully" with the retail customer, build a longer relationship, "broaden the relationship" . In other words, sell us more financial products and keep us as a customer for longer by knowing more about our financial needs.

So help me optimise every saving, cheque, term deposit, loan, credit card, lease, equity trading and piggy bank account I have. Help me learn where my money is going each month, help me balance my household budget.

The typical online customer relationship with an Australian bank is now almost entirely a task-oriented one: I need to pay a bill or transfer some money, so I click on a bookmark, login, do my transaction, and log-off again asap. Yet, other than perhaps the ATM machine, the online banking application is probably my primary touch-point with the bank’s brand and brand experience. For most of us, the ATM and the online banking application is my bank.

If I’m a bank, do I want an entirely task-oriented relationship with my customers? Definitely not.

Task-oriented relationships turn rich, diverse brands into utilities – the only time I care at all about my choice of gas provider is if I learn that I can get gas a lot cheaper from another utility brand. I do NOT want my bank to become just another utility. So, how can banks use that utilitarian touch point of the online banking application as leverage into a broader, richer, engaging relationship with their customers?

How about: help them manage their finances?

(more…)