Feb 012008
 

As an entrepreneur, you are in constant “sell mode”. Each human interaction – a lunch meeting, a formal presentation or a surprise encounter with an old school friend while wandering down the street – is a chance to ‘sell’ your idea, product or venture.

I use “sell” here in a broader sense.

When it comes to potential investors, you sell in the sense that you are trying to convince them to invest in you. With potential customers, you sell in the sense of seeking a firm expression of interest – “Yes, I would buy that product/service” etc. Occasionally, you even need to sell family members (so they can “keep the faith”).

There are millions of books on selling techniques. Common to all of them is a single pearl of wisdom: successful sales people listen more than they talk.

Sure, there are exceptions. If you’re invited to do a 20 minute pitch to a group of investors, then you’d better cram that 20 minutes with as much solid and convincing information as you can muster.

Before you can prepare an effective 20 minute presentation, however, you will have spent considerable time understanding those to whom you are presenting.

In most “selling” opportunities, you won’t have time to prepare. That’s partly why I advocate memorising succinct “elevator speeches” that you can deliver on-the-go.

Yet, even the most effective elevator speech won’t get you past “Go” if you haven’t established the right context. How do you establish the right context? Ask a few questions and listen very intently on the answers.

What is the best context-setting question? It really doesn’t matter what you ask. More important is that you show you are listening. At the end of the day, however, what you want to know is what is the biggest “pain” in their life/business (because the best way to create an opportunity is to uncover a “pain” and create an innovative solution).

So you could start with: “What drives you nuts about your business?”

Follow that with a series of open-ended questions (Why? Why not? How? etc.), and very soon you will be hearing a cry for help (figuratively speaking). If your idea, product or venture provides a solution, then you have established the right context for “selling” it.

Jan 292008
 

I wanted to shed some light on why so many entrepreneurs find it difficult to “sell” their ideas or venture – especially in terms of obtaining funding.

Two words: information asymmetry.

Almost all business interactions involve information asymmetry: individuals on one side of the bargaining table have much better information than those on the other side.

In many instances, information asymmetry can work in your favour – if you have much better information, this can help you negotiate a better deal, get a better price etc.

When it comes to seeking funding, however, information asymmetry can be the “kiss of death”.

Information asymmetry often leads to what is known as ‘adverse selection’. If you’ve ever bought a “lemon” (i.e. a dud car) from a private seller, you’d know exactly what I mean by adverse selection.

When buying a car from a private seller, in almost all cases, the seller has the upper hand. S/he knows what is good about the car – and also what is bad. Unless you’re a skilled mechanic and have ample time to examine the car, you are largely at the mercy of the vendor to tell you all the pertinent information necessary to make an informed decision.

In a sense, when you deal with potential investors, they are in the same position as the car buyer. You, as the entrepreneur, know a lot more about your business, its future prospects and your capabilities, skills and experience, than they do.

Investors are very aware of this and, to protect themselves against being stuck with a lemon, impose high investment barriers.

When you deal with potential investors, it helps to understand their questions and information requests in the context of this information asymmetry. Investors want to rectify the imbalance, in the same way as potential car buyers will often request a test drive so they can drive the car to a mechanic to have it formally inspected.

Business plans, for example, can be seen as a “pro forma” disclosure document which provides an efficient mechanism for information exchange, bringing investors up-to-speed about your business and the market/environment in which it will be operating.

Viewed in this manner, much of what investors will ask of you is quite reasonable. Investors don’t know what you know. Prudent investors – like car purchasers – won’t assume the “seller” has told them all there is to know.

To increase your chances of securing funding, ask yourself what you would want to know about you and your business if, like the car buyer, you were a little suspicious of the vendor’s intentions.

Jan 262008
 

When making a pitch, you need to be very clear exactly what it is you are offering and exactly what it is you are expecting in return.

As mentioned in an earlier post, some individuals find discussing money uncomfortable. But fundraising requires you to be very, very precise. You NEED to get into the finer details of how much, when and for what.

One of the most common causes of breakdown in any relationship is what is left unsaid. This is particularly true of business relationships.

You may think you are communicating your position admirably, and that those on the other side of the table have 100% clarity on the issues. Often, however, each party brings to the table a different perspective, and view all that is said from that perspective.

I have always adhered to a simple rule when it comes to communicating/negotiating: it falls to the person doing the communicating to ensure the communication has been effective; that is, it is up to the person doing to talking to ensure that the listener completely understands what is being said.

To avoid miscommunication, unrealistic expectations and disputes, you need to crystallise all the “fluid” aspects of doing business together:

- How much is the investor investing?
- What amount(s) are payable and when?
- What is the investor getting in return?
- What rights flow to the investor following the investment?
- How much say does the investor have in strategy development?
- How much say does the investor have in day-to-day management?
- What activities and deliverables must be completed, when and by whom?
- Under what circumstance can/will further capital be raised?
- How is any “dilution” of equity created via further capital raising handled?
- How can the investor “exit” the investment?

Many entrepreneurs view investors in much the same way they view banks. However, mortgage lending (essentially debt finance) is a lot different to investing in companies (equity finance).

When a bank gives you money, all it really wants to know is that you can provide adequate security (collateral) and can meet your monthly repayments.

Investors, on the other hand, rarely receive “collateral”, in that they often invest in businesses whose sole assets are intangible – the entrepreneur and her/his ideas.

Consequently, many investors will wish to take an active role in their investment. They will want to monitor how the business is going and whether projections are being met. Some investors will look for regularly briefings (often daily).

This isn’t meddling. It is purely risk management. A bank manages its risk by taking a mortgage over your property and by only agreeing to lend less than it is worth. Banks know that, if all else fails, they can sell your property and recoup their money.

Few investors have such safeguards. Entrepreneurs are usually seeking money to start or grow a business. By definition, startup and growth businesses tend to have few (if any) assets, which means that if the venture fails, the investor usually loses the investment.

So it is quite natural for investors to want to keep an eye on their investment. Unless firm boundaries are established before the investment is made, this can lead to friction and tension. Many are the entrepreneur who misjudged the degree of involvement the investor sought in the investment.

Jan 132008
 

One point often overlooked by entrepreneurs is the importance of a polished presentation.

First impressions count. If you can’t generate interest in your proposed venture while simultaneously demonstrating your professionalism and the degree of thought and planning that has gone into your proposal, then you are pretty well dead in the water, and almost nothing you say will turn that around. You have, literally, minutes, not hours, days or weeks to make the right impression.

Every entrepreneur seeking capital should have at least two presentations committed to memory: an “elevator pitch” and a 10-minute blitz.

An elevator pitch is a clear and concise summary of your business proposal. It is called an elevator pitch because you will often find yourself giving it on an impromptu basis within strict time constraints (as can occur when you bump into a potential investor in an elevator, riding to their floor – yes, it does happen!).

With an elevator pitch, you need to communicate in broad terms the market(s) and opportunity that you’re targeting, your sustainable competitive advantage, what you are seeking from an investor, and how an investor will benefit from becoming involved in your venture.

Importantly, you need to say all this in no more than 300-500 words and within 2-3 minutes (that is, at an unhurried speaking pace).

Getting an elevator pitch down pat can be an arduous task of drafting, re-drafting and rehearsing. However, once you have mastered your pitch, it can dramatically reduce the pressure you feel when approaching a potential investor, as you can use your elevator pitch to catch their attention and open a dialogue. As elevator pitches leave a number of issues unsaid, they can help you gauge interest by the nature of the follow-up questions you are asked.

You should time yourself while you practice delivering the pitch. It can also be beneficial to present in front of a mirror (or record it with a video camera), so you can practice/critique your “non verbal” communication – making sure you pause in the right places, use the right facial expressions, maintain eye contact etc.

The 10-minute blitz is a more formal presentation (assisted with props, such as a prototype or Powerpoint slides), in which you present your proposal in greater detail, including the opportunity, your strategy for capturing that opportunity, the marketplace, your sustainable competitive advantage, how you will handle competitors, your financial plan and – of course – the anticipated return on investment.

Preparing a good 10-minute blitz is very hard. Most people shudder at the thought of trying to fill a 10 minute presentation. Once you actually try to prepare a formal presentation, it actually requires strict discipline to limit yourself to 10 minutes, especially when you are trying to communicate each salient aspect of your business proposal.

It is very important to focus on what an investor might want to know about your proposal. This requires that you be on top of your financial forecasting. You need to be able to justify the amount of capital you seek, have a solid idea of cashflow, when you expect to become profitable and whether you anticipate having to borrow further capital in future (to fund expansion etc.).

Do not laden your presentation with platitudes. Be factual. Don’t exaggerate figures to bolster your case. Never overstate the potential market, profits etc. Most savvy investors have built-in “BS” detectors – if they suspect one of your projections is fanciful, it will likely taint the believability of anything else you might say.

A number of entrepreneurs wrongly believe they need to present a “perfect” business opportunity, one that is risk free and highly profitable. Most investors will run a mile from a “risk free” investment opportunity, because it is usually a good sign that the entrepreneur hasn’t really thought through all the issues or, worse, they are trying to hide the true risks.

If you have identified risks, be up front about them and detail how you propose to manage or avoid the risks. Investors will feel more comfortable if you can show that you have examined all facets of your venture and that you have plans or strategies for overcoming foreseeable risks, competitor reactions and other potential hazards associated with the venture.

As you work on refining your presentations, you must read Guy Kawasaki’s thoughts on the optimal presentation structure when presenting to investors – the 10/20/30 Rule of PowerPoint.

Oct 022007
 

The Wall Street Journal Online published an interesting article last week titled Microsoft Fires Volley At Google in Ad Battle, which states in part:

Some industry executives believe the Internet today is facing the sort of turning point that the computer-operating-system sector confronted two decades ago: Whoever controls the technology platform for buying and selling online ads could hold tremendous power over the Internet industry for years to come — much as Microsoft was able to use its Windows operating system to shape the personal computer.

I believe this assertion is largely true – whoever has the dominant share of advertising distribution will be at the centre of power within the Internet industry, as they will essentially control the revenue spigot.

During the initial ‘dot com’ boom, the prevailing mindset (and, thus, business model) was ‘build your audience, and worry about monetisation later”. This mindset actually fed on itself, as many popular, free services launched in 1998-2000 were themselves predicated on the availability of free services (e.g. free web hosting, free comms, free downloads etc.). That is, sites that offered free services were built upon free services offered by others.

When, around 2001, the crunch came, funding dried up, and start-ups started trying to implement their (hastily devised) revenue strategies, the ‘free built upon free’ environment became a nasty accelerant for destruction.

Non-profitable companies attempted to implement fees for previously free services, with the result that those who used those free services had to implement fees to cover these new overheads. End consumers refused to bite, with the result that no-one in the value chain was actually able to cover their costs, and businesses collapsed left and right.

This time, of course, it is all different.

The dominant mindset is that advertising will pay for the services, so that they can be provided free to the end-customer. Recognising the value of this arrangement, consumers will (it is believed) be only too happy to interact with advertisers, and provide the necessary information to ensure advertising can be sold at a premium.

Whether this revenue model is the panacea many think it is is debatable. However, it is undoubtedly true that many emerging ventures will be heavily reliant upon advertising revenues to drive their business model. In this scenario, the owner of the dominant advertising publishing/distribution platform will control the levers that turn advertising revenues on and off – a very powerful position, not unlike the position of those wealthy merchants who sold picks and shovels during the early gold rushes. Regardless of whether you struck it rich or went broke trying, along the way the equipment merchants earned their fee.

No surprises, then, that Microsoft, Google and Yahoo! are fighting the good fight over who will be in the driver’s seat.

Apr 302007
 

This is an excerpt from a regular column I write – <strong>Neely Ready</strong> – which appears in <a target=”_blank” href=”http://www.australiananthill.com/” title=”Australian Anthill Magazine Web site”>Australian Anthill</a>.

—8<—

While sometimes apocryphal, start-up failure rates tell a sombre story: most start-ups don’t see their third anniversary. There are many causes of this high attrition rate, but a primary factor is poor cash flow management.

Some founders simply miscalculate how much capital is required to get their business off the ground. Others are overly optimistic when forecasting key milestones (such as the date of first sale or break-even point). Still others allow the heady exuberance of a new project go to their heads (and cheque book).

By following a few simple rules, you can stretch your dollar further, and enhance your chances of success:

Continue reading »

Apr 152007
 

I write a regular column – Neely Ready- which appears in an (exellent) magazine, Australian Anthill.

—8<—

How creative is your business?

Entrepreneurs and scientists use the concepts of ‘creativity’ and ‘innovation’ interchangeably. This is not surprising, as both play an integral role in the new product development process. They are not the same, however they do have a symbiotic relationship: each is largely useless without the other.

Creativity is the process of coming up with new ideas. Everyone is capable of being creative, and there is no single, definitive methodology for generating creative ideas.

Innovation, on the other hand, is a broader process of implementing a creative idea – or ‘applied creativity’. Innovation is intrinsically harder than creating ideas, and there is again no definitive methodology. However, it is the process of creativity – coming up with the spark of an idea that kick starts the new product development process – that most individuals and businesses believe they require assistance with (perhaps because creativity is seen as a behaviour, whereas innovation is seen as a process). Continue reading »