Category Archives: NYC Tech

B2B: Large Partners and Deals

Closing deals early and quickly can make or break your startup. It is great to have a pipeline of deals, especially strategic, larger deals that can help you scale faster than you could on your own. However, you have to be able to walk a fine line when signing a much larger partner because of the risk and pressure it puts on your team AND technology. Here are some things to keep in consideration, especially for enterprise:

Push your limits: Large partners are great to have, especially early. Your initial reaction would be the opposite because of the risk involved and the fact that you may not be 100% ready. You have to realize that this pressure is great for your startup because it gets you moving faster than you would on your own. It will help push the threshold of what both your team and technology are capable of if you can balance their demands with your capabilities.

Understand needs: It is critical that you clearly understand your partners needs and intentions. Their needs are more transparent because they will have to explain what they are looking for. However, their intentions are not always aligned with their needs. Since it is uncommon for large partners to work with early stage startups, they obviously have intentions that may not be aligned with your long-term goals. You need to make sure during the negotiation process that you are candid about where you are taking your company to make sure both parties are completely aligned.

Your technology is key: At the end of the day it is all about your technology, which is a huge function of the quality of your team. Large companies cannot iterate and build new technology or platforms as fast as a startup can. That’s the beauty of the large opportunities out there in enterprise. However, you absolutely have to have the foresight to build your team and your technology with the long terms needs of larger partners in mind. You have to make it bullet proof and scalable. Very scalable.

One last thing to keep in mind when working on closing a big deal. Don’t look desperate or too excited. Keep calm and play hard to get. You and your team are the ones with the advantage in that you have either superior or complementary technology. Keep those cards ready.

The Real Reason NYC Is Better Than Silicon Valley

I’m just going to put it out there. NYC is better than Silicon Valley. Whether it’s how SoHo is better than Palo Alto or any of the myriad reasons why the Big Apple will eventually win out, the East Coast’s rising tech Mecca is just flat-out better than the Valley. Am I biased? Of course. But I have also thought this for a long time now. However, my sentiment was taken to the next level after I stumbled upon this article.

If you’re unable to take a look at it, essentially, the author is bemoaning that entrepreneurship in the Valley has become productized, as groups like Y Combinator attempt to commoditize the startup process, thereby derisking it. She laments that there aren’t many “game changers” in the Valley, and everyone just wants to create a Groupon clone or another Angry Birds, ultimately concluding that the problem with Silicon Valley is itself.

Now maybe it’s my bias coming in here or the fact that NYC is relatively young as a tech / startup center compared to the Valley, but I can’t imagine a NYC-based blogger / journalist writing a piece with such a tone. Accelerators like Y Combinator, or in the NYC case TechStars and DreamIt Ventures, are phenomenal programs that help take startups to the next level by providing invaluable resources (a little capital, office space, and, most importantly, mentors). Yes, these programs are doing their best to derisk the startup process and may be “commoditizing” the process to a certain extent, but at the end of the day, aren’t these good things? You shouldn’t start a business because it’s risky – you should want to lower the amount of risk you’re taking on, which is substantial to begin with. And regarding the commoditization point, shouldn’t entrepreneurs benefit from the patterns that these accelerators have come to recognize by incubating dozens and dozens of companies? Isn’t the goal of investing in these companies to see a return on the investment? So why not refine the process, so the entrepreneurs learn as much as possible and make as much progress as possible in the most efficient manner? Given the nature of startups, no matter how much one tries to standardize the process, it’s always going to be slightly different with various hurdles to overcome.

Regarding the author’s second point of contention, during the last several months of getting entrenched in the NYC startup ecosystem, every person I met recognized how privileged they were to be part of such an incredible community of creative, bright, genuine people regardless of whether the person in the co-working space next to him was building a product to map the human genome more easily or creating another mobile, social app. Everyone recognizes that they are part of a passionate community of thinkers, doers, hustlers, and helpers with something to share with and learn from everyone else whether you’re a serial entrepreneur with multiple exits under your belt or a fledgling founder seeking a technical co-founder. This gratefulness is the same for investors, and I have seen it firsthand from the VCs with whom I’ve met. Just look at Dave Tisch’s blog post from yesterday regarding his investment in GroupMe (his first exit) and his belief in investing in the people first, and one will understand how great the NYC tech scene is.

All of the above equates to one thing: appreciation. Appreciation for entrepreneurs, appreciation for investors, appreciation for the opportunity to be a part of such a vibrant and amazing community. I can’t imagine this appreciation ever dissipating in NYC like it seems to have done in the Valley (according to that article). And that is the real reason why NYC is better than Silicon Valley – because we’ll always remain appreciative and, in turn, always remain hungry.

Passion-Founder-Product-Market Fit

A lot of people have been talking about product-market fit and founder-market fit. In fact, Chris Dixon wrote a great post on founder-market fit that brought it all together.

I wanted to take this a step further. Over the last few weeks I have read some great posts and witnessed a few things here in the NYC that I think should be shared. This post is mostly inspired by the actions and words of Joe Yevoli, and Scott Britton’s excellent knowledge bomb posted earlier this week.

In addition to having founder-market fit and product market fit, I think its absolutely crucial to have passion-market fit. One could argue that founder-market fit and passion-market fit are one in the same, however, I see them as separate channels that are both just as important as the other. I believe that they both have to exist in parallel in order to truly be successful.

Assuming you have the product and market covered you are left with the founder, who has a certain set of skills along with a certain set of interests and passions. Having the right founder and team is critical and we all know this. I argue that we need to take it a step further. Passion for the product and market you are working on is just as important as the skillset you carry.  A great founder without passion for what he is doing is extremely ineffective.

As Joey wrote in his post he did not have a true passion for web video which is why he decided to work on Teamhomefield instead (no discredit to Shelby, I know the guys and love what they are doing). He was more than capable of working on Shelby and helping them kick ass, but he knew he would be even more effective by pouring his energy into a product and industry that he truly, truly loves.

My last point is your passion will influence your actions. Scott really drove home the point to screw the what if’s and go all in. You can only really do this for something you are passionate about. If that passion is missing you will always be jumping out the plane with a safety shoot. If you only have one foot in the door then you should rethink what you want to spend your time doing. Trust me, I experienced this myself for the last 3 years. If you do what you love, you will eventually find the product-market fit that works.

The Next Big Thing: Checking-In (Again)

I used to think there were three types of people in this world:

  1. Avid Foursquare users – those that check-in to foursquare religiously and have several mayorships, always vying for the top spot on their leaderboards;
  2. Casual Foursquare users – the check-in once in a while crowd, usually only at certain events, through other social apps that give you the option or when reminded by someone in group #1 ; and
  3. Foursquare non-users - those that have have either never heard of foursquare or think they are too cool to broadcast to the world where they are in exchange for points and digital badges.

With all of the hoopla around foursquare and its partnerships with deal sites over the last couple weeks, there’s no question check-in behavior is going to shift.. but how much?  I think the change could be significant, and here’s why.

The first thing you should know is that I very rarely use foursquare – you can throw me right in with the rest of group #2.  You might see a slew of check-ins from me once every couple of weeks at an event through @hashable, or bragging about being at the airport on my way to South Beach, but that’s really about it. 

Well something odd happened to me the other day: I found myself checking-in 2 times in one day (*GASP!*), unsolicited mind you, and using the actual foursquare app on my iPhone.  I couldn’t help but notice because there was a lot of extra effort involved in having to find the big blue checkbox icon buried deep in my app graveyard, somewhere amongst my collection of old beta tests and other seldom-used social apps (it was next to Color).  Something had tipped the scales in favor of making that effort. Actually, the scales never even existed before in the first place.  I’m just one guy and I could be wrong, but if they tipped for me, I think they just might start to tip for others as well.  

How it all changed: about two weeks ago,  I stopped by @WeWorkLabs Soho to say hello to @ScottBrit and @srcasm and see how Sfter and guyhaus were coming along (very well, if you’re wondering).  That’s when I was first introduced to Jason Fertel.  Jason (@fertel) is the founder of Freespeech, a group messaging app, but I didn’t know it at the time because he was enthusiastically explaining his new project - DealBurner (check out the story on BetaBeat here).  When I asked him what DealBurner was all about, he asked me first if I use foursquare (not a good start), and then Facebook Places (seriously?).

Just as I was about to write the whole thing off, he said something to the effect of, “you’re going to want to start”.  Ok, he had my attention… and I’m all the better for it.  If I could muster up the effort to check-in, DealBurner would send me notifications about deals going on near me, right then and there.  Google Now, LivingSocial Instant, ScoutMob, Tenka.. the list goes on.

A minute later I was signed-up, checked-in and, after a short pause (to let me bask in overtaking second-to-last place on my leaderboard, I was texted my first deal… And I was hooked.

Note: Foursquare has deals with Living Social, Gilt City, zozi, BuyWithMe, AT&T, and Groupon, but the Redemption Loop Issue still exists for all of them except for Groupon Now. In other words, you can get all of the regular deals through foursquare, but other than for Groupon Now, deals are not redeemable until after they close at the end of the day – which really makes this whole real-time, location-based thing foursquare does kind of irrelevant, no? Don’t get me wrong, foursquare is still a great distribution platform for daily deal sites, but when it comes to instant deals I would make sure I have DealBurner to get all of them sent straight to me after checking in.

So right after I get to experience DealBurner in action, something else really interesting happened.  Apparently my check-in had also sparked an alert from another promising NYC startup - Sonar had just notified me that I might want to reach out to someone else checked-in at WeWork because we have a mutual friend on facebook – someone named Jason F.

Touché foursquare, touché…  So now, I think there’s four types of people in this world and you can add me to a new group somewhere in between my original #1 and #2.  You still won’t see me feverishly competing for mayorships or the top spot on any of the leaderboards. Nonetheless, there’s definitely enough cool stuff now built on top of the foursquare API to bring me real value – and that means more check-ins… and a new spot for the app on my iPhone home screen.

Actually I should say, bravo foursquare.  It’s amazing that they’ve been able to capture such a large user base with so little in tangible incentives.  Now that foursquare and the applications that are leveraging their platform are finding ways to deliver real value in the form of financial savings and  serendipitous connections, it puts them in position to make some significant leaps. It also means they might be coming to a crossroads.

At the end of the day, for foursquare to truly obtain massive adoption, they need to ensure these types of “real world” value propositions become heavily coupled with the use of their application.   The big question is going to be: do they expand into these adjacent markets  and start providing these services in-house so they can extract more value?  Or, do they stay the course and continue building the platform to enable more of these services at the expense of diluting that value for something more down the road?  Or maybe they can walk the fine line somewhere in between?  I don’t know what the right answer is, and it’s probably a whole series of posts for another time, but it will definitely be interesting to see how this all plays out.