Are You Building Something That Will Move the Ball Forward?

Written by Ariel Seidman on November 27th, 2010

My co-founders (David and Matt) and me are embarking on building a new company called Gigwalk.  The experience got me thinking about why we start companies.  I was going to write a long post about this but came across a Tim O’Reilly interview where he captures it perfectly while commenting on some of the TechCrunch50 companies “I don’t really care if they succeed or not, they are not really moving the ball forward in any meaningful way”

Ultimately life is too short to work on something where I could make a bit of money but really didn’t care for.   If my only goal was to make money I would be working on Wall Street (as a few of college professors encouraged me to do so). Wall Street is a great place to make tons of money working on stuff that doesn’t matter much.

If you take a much longer perspective – say 100 years – companies that move the ball forward succeed in changing what people do and how they think.  They change the course of history. Each of these companies dramatically changed billions of people’s lives over the past fifteen years.

  • Microsoft and Google changed how people work.
  • Facebook and Yahoo changed how people communicate.
  • eBay and Amazon changed how people buy and sell things.
  • LinkedIn is changing how people manage their career.
  • PayPal changed how we pay for stuff.

As Tim says these companies clearly created more economic and social value than they captured – the founders and investors did pretty well along the way.  I have no idea whether we will create a company on the same level as some of these — only lots of hard work and a bit of luck will determine that; yet this interview got me thinking on why we should start companies.

The OpenTable Ecosystem

Written by Ariel Seidman on November 2nd, 2010

I meet with a lot of investors these days raising capital for my startup and the best ones are by far those that spend the time to understand the product we are building.  Fred Wilson has some good advice – the faster you get to the product the better.   An elevator pitch is the appetizer, but the main course is the product vision, how the product is sold, and how it works. In today’s Business Insider I ran into an example of an investor who clearly doesn’t understand the dynamics of the OpenTable product.  Witney Tilson (a hedge fund manager) argues that OpenTable is overvalued in the slide below.  One of his key reasons is the lack of natural barriers to entry in the OpenTable business.  If you spend the time to understand the OpenTable product and ecosystem this becomes a rather odd assertion.

Why OpenTable has massive barriers to entry:

  • OpenTable is a two-sided marketplace which have significant barriers to entry, see eBay.  Lets say a competitor magically gets 10,000 restaurants to use their OpenTable clone — you have only one side of the market.  Restaurants need new customers making reservations to make this interesting – which OpenTable delivers by virtue of its strong position in Google search results, integration with all the major online local reviews sites like Yelp.com, and increasingly popular mobile applications.  Generating the traffic to drive to restaurants takes years to develop.
  • Selling, installing, and maintaining an OpenTable system is not a simple or quick process.  Selling to small business is time consuming and expensive.  Once OpenTable is installed, it’s akin to installing SAP or Oracle Financials for an enterprise – nobody wants to rip it out.

Why OpenTable is undervalued:

  • Significant barriers to entry — you would need a minimum of a $50M and 3-5 years to start chipping aways at OpenTable business.  This assumes that OpenTable management is fairly incompetent and does not react.
  • Flash sales:  They have an audience and deep merchant relationships enabling them to layer a Groupon like flash sale – very lucrative.
  • Mobile:  The volume of reservations will increase significantly as their mobile applications reach critical mass.
  • New lines of business: Once they wrap up the restaurant market their is no reason why they can’t do spas, hair salons, and even car-services.

The iPhone Camera Grows Up

Written by Ariel Seidman on September 7th, 2010

The iPhone camera and video always felt like a checkbox feature.  A feature Apple half-heartedly shipped so no competitor could say hey “but they don’t have a camera.”

Those days are over.  With the iPhone 4 and iOS 4.1 Apple decided its time to double-down.

The improved iPhone 4 camera and video permeates every aspect of the device’s design.  The industrial design borrows heavily from the famous Leica camera while up the stack the iMovie video-editing app is the first multimedia content creation tool that actually works.  In between are a new front-facing camera, more megapixel, LED flash, and more. See the full details below.

Why Buy a Flip or Poot n’Shoot Camera

If you intend to buy a smartphone in the next twelve months there is no sensible reason to buy a Flip (my four month old Flip found a place in the gadget cemetery) or point-and-shoot camera.  In fact, Apple is set to disrupt both of these markets – point and shoot camera and hand-held videos.

50 Million Photographer and Videographer Prosumers Equipped 90% of the Day

As the camera gets even better what market will they disrupt next – SLR?  I don’t know but I do know that this is an accelerating trend.  Over the next nine to twelve months fifty million plus people will be walking around with semi-professional quality camera and video equipment for most of the day.  If you add some of the Android devices this number will look more like 75M devices.  On this foundation new businesses will be formed that only a year ago were simply not possible.

Timeline of the iPhone Camera Improvements:

iPhone 1 photo quality

iPhone 1 (June 2007)

  • 2 megapixels
  • No flash or auto-focus
  • No video

iPhone 3G (June 2008)

  • No improvements.

iPhone 3G S (June 2009)

  • 3 megapixels
  • Added basic video

iPhone 4 (June 2010)

Camera Improvements
  • 5 megapixel camera
  • Auto-focus
  • LED flash
  • Backside illuminated sensor (lets more light in)
  • Faster picture snap-time (A4 + iOS 4.0)
  • Front facing camera for Facetime
Video improvements
  • HD video quality 720p
  • 30 FPSi
  • Movie App editing software

iOS 4.1 (Sept 2010)

  • HDR (High Dynamic Range) Photos – example below.  See the AppleInsider review.

iPhone 4 with HDR

What I Learned About Sales and Business Models Before the Age of 17

Written by Ariel Seidman on September 5th, 2010

I’ve never held a quota.  Truth be told, I’ve never had a job with the words ‘sales’ or ‘business’ in my title.  Yet, everything I do requires salesmanship and business development/strategy.

We now assign fancy words like business model, arbitrage, viral to describe things that a thirteen year-old looking to make a few extra bucks innately understands.  I was once that thirteen year-old kid and here is what I learned about sales and business models along the way:

What a Camp in France Taught Me About Arbitrage & Viral Sales:

Back in the nineteen-nineties Michael Jordan’s led Chicago Bulls were racking up multiple NBA championships. Thanks to Nike’s marketing of Air Jordan shoes Michael and the Bulls became the first internationally recognized NBA team.  Most summers my parents would send my brothers and me off to camp in France  – my mother is French and her entire family resides there.  Before heading off to France for camp one summer the Bulls had just won another championship so we went down to what was effectively a t-shirt warehouse and bought sixty Chicago Bulls championship t-shirts for about $5/each.

When we arrived at camp in France as any good twelve-year-old Bulls fan we wore our Bulls t-shirts – everyday.  As expected our fellow campers started asking us about our Bulls t-shirts.  Without doing a hard sell we would just mention that we had a couple of extra ones we could sell.  A few hours later and off to the side we sold them a t-shirt for anywhere between $15 to $20 – a 3x to 4x return for schlepping a duffel bag from Chicago to the French alps.

Early on we chose our customers selectively.  We targeted our sales at the cooler kids who in turn would wear their new Chicago Bulls t-shirts around camp.  The other kids started asking these cooler kids how they got these t-shirts, and pretty soon we had French kids lining up at our bunk-bed buying Chicago Bulls t-shirts.  Kids were desperately calling their parents asking them to send more money to purchase t-shirts while we were desperately calling back home Chicago trying to get a fresh supply.

That duffel bag of Chicago Bulls t-shirts netted us about $700 for the summer.

What a Carpenter Taught Me About the Power of Referrals:

Before heading to camp each summer I spent a few weeks working for a carpenter, Michael.  By far the hardest job I ever had.  I would be up by 5:30AM and at the job-site by 6:45AM working through the steamiest part of the day. 

We spent two weeks refurbishing a deck.  It was the most elaborate deck I had ever built with him. By the second week Michael told me that we were losing money on the deck.  I lobbied him to go back and ask for more money but he refused.  He lost a good chunk of change on the deck.

The following year his business had picked up – instead of just Michael he had a team of four guys.  What was responsible for this growth?  It turns out the lady whose deck we refurbished the year prior hosted lots of parties on her elaborate deck.  People asked her about the deck and she gave them Michael’s name, so now he had four people and three times the number of jobs.

Growing a Lawn Mowing Business via Free-to-Paid:

This later become popularized as “freemium” but as a ten year old looking to make some extra cash my brothers and I would first offer our lawn mowing services for free.  Why free? Anybody who did not hire professional landscapers thought they enjoyed mowing the lawn, or at least that’s what they told us.  So, we pitched them on mowing their lawn for free twice, and if we did a good job we asked that they consider hiring us.  People thought we were crazy, and probably just thought I can get a few free lawn mowing services from these kids.  Chicago summers are brutally hot and muggy. Weather extremes worked to our favor.  Once our free customers tasted the pleasure of sitting in an air-conditioned house watching a baseball game rather than enduring the sweltering heat for an hour most became paying customers.  We had ourselves a nice lawn mowing service.  We then parlayed this into shoveling snow (known as cross-selling).

What a Chicago Bond Trader Taught Me About Chasing the Right Customer:

This was my one and only job in the financial services world.  I was a runner for a successful bond trader on the Chicago Board of Trade.  He traded for his own account and like most traders incurred significant profit and loss swings on a weekly basis.  I recall one day we took a big hit and lost  $250,000.  A mistake I made cost us an additional $15,000.  I was obviously very upset about the situation and at myself.

We came off the trading floor, had lunch, and all the while I am thinking as soon as we are done eating we are heading back onto the floor to get even.  After breakfast my trader turned to me, and said “see you tomorrow.”  I stared at him for a moment thinking it was a joke – he was a prankster.  It was not; he had no intention of chasing a market that didn’t suit his trading pattern.  He knew markets that move in slow motion are not his forte.  He needed choppy and fast moving market to make money.

For most of us when we see an opportunity to pitch and sell our instinct is to start chasing.  This taught me to take a step back (easier said then done) and chase the right type of customer.

What Ritz Camera Taught Me About Browsers vs. Buyers:

I learned this from my younger brother, Eytan, who sold cameras at Ritz Camera during high-school.  It’s pretty simple.  Buyers make eye contact or ask questions.  Browsers keep their head down and start touching things to avoid eye contact.  They rarely convert into a sale, and should be left alone.   I am reminded of this everytime I see websites trying to grab my attention in some unnatural manner.  Hint: If I provide you with a signal (question or eye-contact) it gives you permission to engage me further and it won’t feel so awkward.

P.S. Popular summer jobs that people mistakenly believe provide good returns:

  • Selling peanuts/drinks at baseball games. Sounds sexier than it truly is.  Requires years of climbing the ladder to sell the stuff that actually makes money (soda).  Furthermore, you are forced to buy the merchandise upfront – if the game is a blowout or gets rained out you are left with unsold inventory and very few or no potential customers. Unless you are in it for the long haul (4+ summers) the net returns are uninteresting.
  • Caddying at the local golf club requires multiple years of kissing the caddy masters’ ass to make money.  I am not a good ass-kisser, have no patience for the game of golf, and didn’t enjoy telling customers their golf game was improving when in fact they just sucked – all the time.  I was a total failure.

Why Talent is Limiting Supply in the Smartphone OS Market

Written by Ariel Seidman on August 17th, 2010

How many smartphone mobile operating systems can the market support? Wrong question. In a market of billions of potential devices with limited network effects [1] and hyper-growth demand the market could support lots of smartphone mobile operating systems – where lots is defined as greater than six and less than twenty. The limiting factor is not demand but rather supply. How many companies can build a competitive mobile OS? The fire sale of Palm and the launch of Blackberry Torch makes it clear that the list of companies that have the skills and resources to build, launch, and sustain a competitive mobile OS is getting smaller each month. Watching this playout feels like watching the top riders in the Tour de France fight their way to the top of Col du Tourmalet — each and every year only the most talented riders keep pace as the ride becomes absolutely grueling.

Companies are starting to fall by the wayside as the stacked teams of Apple, Google, and soon Microsoft take firm control of the race.
Lets look at a checklist of capabilities one needs to launch a competitive mobile OS. Half way down this list you will realize that very few companies have assembled a deep and wide enough talent pool to execute a smartphone mobile os on a global scale.

What you need What it gets you
User Experience
Multi-touch interface Parity
Visual appeal Potential differentiation
Multi-tasking Parity
Apps
Games, Games, and Games (1) Acquisition (great games sell devices)
(2) Lock-In (spend creates switching costs)
20,000 Quality Apps Parity
Discovery & Merchandising Easy & trust worthy
Media
Music Lock-In (spend creates switching costs)
Movie rentals Engagement
TV show rentals Engagement
Browser
HTML5 + CSS3 Compliant Browser Parity
Information Finding
Search Utility
Carrier financial incentive via revenue share
Voice Search Cool demo
Maps (limited number of suppliers) Utility + parity
Navigation (limited number of suppliers) Utility + parity
Communication Cloud
Mail Utility + parity
Voice Transcription Diffentriated
PIM Services Utility + parity
Payments
One Click Buy (micro transactions) Parity + Frictionless commerce
Global (90+ markets) Utility + parity
Fraud Mgmt Utility + parity
Launch Marketing
$250M consumer marketing Consumer awareness.
Percieved momentum for developers
$50M App developer launch Studio compensation to seed app library and app competitions
Devices & Distribution
#1 and/or #2 Carrier in top 20 markets (first yr) Market coverage
3 to 4 OEM’s building 8 million devices (first yr) Consumer choice of mid to high-end devices
Developers, Developers, Developers!
Popular IDE App quality
Time to market
Developer happiness
Deep SDK Device access (e.g. camera, acceleramator)
UI (e.g. animation, controls)
Service access (e.g. maps, contacts, mails)
Enterprise
Security Parity
Employee device & app provisioning Parity

[1] Limited Network Effects: During the PC war application developers propelled Windows PC to its monopoly position – users adopted the OS with the widest range of applications and developers adopted the platform with the most users. In the mobile smartphone OS war the top 20,000 apps that matter will be replicated to the top five mobile os platforms in each market or region muting the possible network effects because the development costs are relatively low.

Myth of the Month: Microsoft Windows Phone 7 is Too Late.

Written by Ariel Seidman on August 8th, 2010

Only two short years ago many thought Apple had built an insurmountable lead.  Android’s recent surge is proving that entirely wrong. Today, many believe that Microsoft is too late to the game.   This too is entirely wrong.  A lead of sixty million devices is not much of a lead in the mobile phone market.  To put this in perspective:

  • 140 million DVD units per year [source]
  • 360 million PCs (laptops, netbooks, tablets) units per year [source]
  • 100 million videogame consoles units per year [source]
  • 1.3 billion mobile phone units per year [source]

Mobile phones sell more than all of those – combined.  The two largest handset manufacturers Nokia and Samsung shipped 175M mobile phones (mostly feature phones) in Q1 of 2010.  That is more than 3x the total global PC shipments for Q1 2010.

The smartphone market of today is not what Google, Apple, Microsoft, HP, and Nokia are fighting for.   Today’s smartphone market is measured in tens of millions of devices per quarter across all the major players and by 2011 there will be 449M smartphone users (i.e. active subscribers).  The smartphone market of three to four years will be measured in hundreds of millions of smartphone devices per quarter.

Let’s be clear why Microsoft is not too late to this game:

  • Massive market.  An early lead of 60M devices in a 1.3B/yr shipped devices is not much a of a lead.
  • Device churn: People churn through phones rapidly (PC turnover is ~4 yrs and phones is ~18 months)
  • Weak lock-In:  Users are not spending hundreds or thousands of dollars on content (music, apps).
  • Weak network effects:  Given low cost of developing apps, the important ones are being replicated to the top tier platforms.
  • Carriers want Microsoft: They don’t want a Google and Android dominated market.  They want at least four major platforms each with 25% of the market, and believe Microsoft has the patience (i.e. warchest) and persistence to be one of them.

Full Disclosure:  I don’t work at Microsoft and I don’t own any Microsoft shares.  I simply believe the Android vs. iPhone conversation is myopic and ignores how insignificant of a lead both of them have established.