Big brothers willing to help

Before I get going, please note that I've syndicated my blog through FeedBurner. Look for the RSS chicklet (orange logo) and associated link to the right of the blog. This allows you to include my feed in your news reader and get updates. Note that you can also register your email and get the blog automatically the day after it is published.

I recently registered my company with the Ottawa Center for Research and Innovation (OCRI) and attended the first of many presentations last Thursday. Basic registration for a start-up is $300 which provides access to what seems to be a significant set of resources, events and networking opportunities.

The session I attended last Thursday consisted of presentations on the topic of early stage financing from a diverse group including a VC (Jim Laird) CFA/VP investments, Covington Capital Corp, a member of the Ottawa Angel Alliance (Irving Ebert), a lawyer (Michael Dunleavy, LaBarge Weinstein ... the firm that represents me), investment consultants (Raj Narula and Mike Manson, Taraspan Group ... assisting OneChip) and a successful serial entrepreneur (Jim Hjartarson now CEO of OneChip Photonics, formerly founder and CEO of Catena networks). If you are from Ottawa, you've probably heard of this last character. Note that Andy Weirich is also at OneChip (coincidence?).

I mostly went to heckle Jim and to do a bit of networking. I must say though, all the presentations were absolutely fantastic ... the best $85 dollar breakfast I ever had. There was lots of great and honest advice. I truly felt these guys took lots of time to prepare and were truly genuine in their quest to help young entrepreneurs. If there is anything to take away from this post is that Ottawa is a close and tight community full of successful people willing to help others. I have already been fortunate to have asked for assistance from many such people and they have certainly not disappointed. If you are an entrepreneur, get out into the community through organizations such as www.OCRI.ca , tie.org and/or contact entrepreneurs and other capable people in the community to ask for help ... don't be shy.

I will attempt to summarize the key take aways from the sessions through some short bullets. I'll try to come back to the key items in future blogs.

-rate of return for VCs has been pretty bad over the last few years which makes it difficult for them to raise large funds from which to invest - just fantastic!
-VC early stage investment sweet spot is ~3-5M in Canada and closer to about $9M in us
-if you're looking for something in $3M range, stick to VCs in Canada
-VC funds have a timeline for each fund in 8-10yr range, basically they need to invest and recover funds within that rough time-line
-before you go to a VC, make sure you know what stage their fund is at. If they are late in the fund, they'll be looking for an acquisition or IPO (fat chance) quickly which changes their investment decisions
-liquidity event is typically expected in 4-5 yrs
-ask for twice the amount of money you think you'll need
-kinda obvious but most companies fail when they run out of money :)
-go to VCs before you need the money ... build relationships, get to know them and how they make their decisions, the stage of their fund, the types of companies they invest in and at what stage ...
-this is actually how I ended up as an Entrepreneur In Residence at Skypoint
-give them a sense for what you are thinking about and where the market is going ... then come back in 6 months and show them you were right ... good for credibility
-qualified angel investors invest a significant amount of money and have helped a very large number of companies get off the ground ... definitely worth a serious look
-angel alliances, such as the Ottawa Angel Alliance www.ottawaangels.ca/, are generally much more successful than individual angels (their rate of return seem better than most VCs too)
-angel investors are hands on and local (within ~1hr) ... as Irving put it, angels with faster cars invest in a larger geographic radius
-important to pick the right investors ... don't take shotgun approach
-very wise to do lots of research on each VC before attempting to pitch
-look for short list of 10-12 VCs
-wise to consider getting help from consultants such as www.taraspan.com (they are working with Jim Hjartarson's new company, OneChip Photonics).
-have fun, have fun, have fun
-investors are diversifying out of telecom (no big surprise here .... darn gotta scrap my next DSLAM idea!)
-don't look for investment until you are completely ready ... bootstrap like crazy to get going


I have more stuff but for the sake of brevity, I'll save the rest for the next post.

Cheers,

Allan Isfan
Founder

are angels really angels?

My 10 year old daughter still believes in the tooth fairy. I give her about $5/tooth and a note written with my left hand so that she doesn't recognize my hand writing. She has whispered to me a few times that she knows the tooth fairy is not real and I don't try to convince her otherwise. We both know it's a game and since it benefits both sides, we continue to play it. She gets money and I get to have fun writing the note and giving her an incentive to keep her teeth clean since the cleaner they are, the more money she gets. You have to know how to play the game such that both sides get something out of it ... a basic win-win.

The same goes for the start-up & VC game. I saw lots of games played over the last few days. I just returned from a few days in Silicon Valley where I attended the "DowJones VentureWire Consumer Technology Ventures" conference. This is a great conference and a fantastic learning opportunity I strongly recommend for anyone considering a start-up, although the turnout this year was weak due to a Web 2.0 conference in San Francisco happening at the same time. The conference is small, but very well run. Each day starts with a keynote followed by panels and interviews with key people. The rest of the day is broken up into eight separate rooms and companies have 50 minutes to do their pitch. There were quite a few VCs attending, sharing their thoughts and advice. I'm definitely going to shoot for presenting here in the next year or two. If you're interested in knowing more, I would be happy to share more details.

The overall pitches and presentations were weaker than I would have expected for the valley, although there certainly were some that were excellent. There are some well documented things you need to cover and many missed major components which was shocking to me. There was too much focus on the idea itself and little on the management team and how the company was actually going to make money. Many of these companies need very experienced leaders, consultants or advisors with deep VC knowledge to help them raise money. A good idea simply isn't enough.

As a consumer, I saw lots of things I would probably use but with my VC hat on, I left many of the presentations being unconvinced they were real VC opportunities. Many were too small to be real standalone companies that VCs would invest in and would be better off sticking with angels, bootstrap like crazy and get profitable in a hurry to survive before flipping their companies to a bigger player. Some of these thoughts were echoed my many VCs. Having said that, there certainly were some that have significant merit and will hopefully get funded. I'll provide a summary of the highlights for my next post on Monday. Be sure to check it out because I'm convinced you'll find some services you'll want to use.

If you'll need VC money, start early

Many companies were of the right size and scope for a VC but started off with angel money, typically a few hundred thousands but sometimes more. They stretched the money extremely well and I was amazed by what they managed to develop with so little money. However, they now need VC money to take it to the next level and the lack of early engagement and experience with VCs showed. Because they haven't been talking to VCs up to now, it is a little late to start learning when you need money in a few months. Things just don't move that quickly. The way I figure it, if you're going to need VC money eventually, get involved with VCs as soon as possible and ideally even at the seed stage.

I know it sounds like I'm biased because I'm an EIR with a VC firm. This is really not the case. I've been considering looking at angel investing as well but as some of you know, I don't do things on a small scale. I think big and I know I'll need significant investment that will have to come from VCs. It is super critical to never ever lose sight of that, even if you do get a bit of money from angels to get things going. Getting money from VCs is RADICALLY different from working with angels in nearly every respect, including timeline, so the sooner you start talking with VCs the better.

Most VCs I know work much slower than you would think. If things go well, you'd be lucky to close anything within 6 months of first contact. The reality is that you'll start pitching to VCs and it will take many months before you'll get even a small nibble from a couple of them. Start-up teams often believe so much in their concept that they think it will sell itself and VC will immediately sign on but it is so much more complicated than that. I'll share a few tidbits to think about although it is definitely not a complete list.

Thing to think about when going down the VC route:

-do you have a fundable team, and especially a credible CEO
-the idea is great but probably wrong ... need a team that will adjust as necessary and have strategy to penetrate the market
-I have heard the following comment many times "good idea but they don't have a CEO"
-what is the exit strategy? M&A, IPO?
-it's fine to make piles of money but if the VC can't pull it out, it doesn't help much
-I would contend that you need to think big and be able conceive of an IPO in 5 years or so. If that is clearly never an option, that's a really bad thing
-is there is a history of IPO and M&A in the space you are entering and if so what were the valuations?
-VCs often start with the end in mind. Basically ... the VC needs to have a sense for the value of the company in 3-5yrs (i.e. what you could sell it for or raise in an IPO) and work backwards from there. Examples of similar companies that were acquired or did an IPO are very useful. YouTube is probably not a good example!
-timing timing timing
-you need to hit the market with your product just before the hockey stick inflection. The timing of the investment will depend on many factors. If it is S/W, you can fund closer to the inflection, perhaps 1-2 years. If it is hardware & software, you need to invest at least 2-3yrs. If it is silicon ... god help you. You need to invest at least 3yrs ahead in my opinion and need huge $$$
-VC partners often decide by consensus
-it is extremely important to find a champion and you therefore should do some research to find the right partner to pitch to initially but keep in mind that the others will need to be convinced as well.
-are there other companies in their portfolio that are in a similar space? That can work for you and against you.
-people like to place bets in a variety of different markets and types of opportunities
-does the VC have experience in the space you are pitching?
-if the answer is no, they will have a hard time with the due diligence required to make a big decision. Furthermore, they won't help open the doors you need. You may also get steered from one play to another. For example, they'll steer you from a consumer play to an enterprise play simply because it is closer to their experience, even if the market is not nearly as good.
-who are the other VCs investing?
-chances are, you'll need multiple VCs and working with VCs that have a history of working together is important (not absolute requirement though)

There is much more I could say here but I hope you get the point. Getting money from VCs is possible and new companies are successful in getting funded all the time but it is extremely complicated and takes a huge amount of time. You really need to know what you are doing and getting people with direct experience and contacts to help is absolutely crucial. I'm not such a person yet but am learning the game with the help of many people and personal perseverance. It has already highlighted major holes in my own initiatives that I know I need to sort out before I have a chance in hell to get funded.

If you have opinions to share on this topic, I'd be extremely interested to hear your thoughts. If you are willing to post these in the comments so that other readers can see them, even better.

Next Monday's post will include a summary and links for many of the cool technologies and services I discovered over the last few days. Don't miss it!

Cheers,

Allan Isfan
Entrepreneur with an Iron Ring

crush crush crush!

Do you remember that "Kids in the Hall" skit in which Mr. Tyzik would crush people with his fingers? It still makes me laugh!

I've been dealing with people asking me "why won't Motorola, apple or any other Goliath crush you"? A very valid question which I have asked myself many more times than others have.

This brings up many important questions for a start-up, but two key ones keep me up at night ... not with worry but to figure out the answer. The questions are:
1) have all good ideas been thought of already? If someone has thought of your idea, are you screwed?
2) if your idea is more of a concept rather than a technology, how do you defend it?

Let's tackle the first one. You come up with what you think is an awesome idea. With the giddy excitement of a child on Christmas morning, you type in your key words with shaky fingers into google .... and 100 links come up in 0.01 seconds!!! SON OF A BEEYATCH!. All good ideas have already been thought of, with some associated patents in and many websites describing your great idea. Radio TIVO? Done. MP3 player with WiFi. Done. With all the smart, motivated people out there, this is bound to happen.

Of course this is not true. However, it is wise to assume this is the case so that you can build a truly defensible product or service. If you assume you're the only one that thought of a particular way of doing something and that is your only foundation, the false sense of security makes you extremely vulnerable. New concepts fail or don't get implemented for many reasons (two of many are highlighted below).

Execution is key. The last $100M/yr product I was a major contributor on was not that novel. In fact, a major telecom equipment vendor had teamed up with a leader in DSL at that time and came up with what turned out to be a complete catastrophe. Our solution was so much better, it's not even funny. We were in a life and death situation where the whole company depended on the success of the product. We set very high goals, hired people with balls, executed with unbelievable focus. Failure was not an option and it showed. Our second product didn't fare so well.

Incumbents don't care. Big companies need big revenues and need universal appeal to hit their numbers. Even big companies have limited resources. Can you imagine if Apple came out with the next iPOD and it only sold 100k units per month. Heads would be rolling. BTW, they sold 14M iPODs in the last quarter. If we could sell 100k units/month, we'd be snorkeling in a pool of champagne (I wonder how much that would cost?)

Lots more to be said but best move on. Ok, so what if your idea is more of a concept, such as a service, rather than a magical technology, how do you defend it?

Everyone is looking for the secret sauce or that one ingredient that makes the sauce secret. I remember going to restaurants, trying to guess how they made the sauce so I could make it at home. I came close a few times but mostly didn't quite nail it. The trick is to mix ingredients such that they build on each other. Each one brings out the elements of the other. You see where I'm going with this. Amazon doesn't just have access to huge inventory and low storage costs. Their recommendations, often contributed by users, help people find other stuff. I often buy books two or three at a time to minimize shipping charges. Amazon often doesn't store items in their own warehouse. They just serve as a storefront and products get shipped directly from someone else's warehouse to you ... $0 cost to Amazon. Freaking genius. Nothing secret here.

Few people believed in search when Google was pitching. A site for crazy, user generated content called YouTube? Well ... we now have GooTube which controls an absolutely ridiculous number of eye balls and the equally ridiculous ad revenues.

Ye must have faith ... and balls.