Archive for April, 2007

New articles on raising venture capital and entrepreneurship

Friday, April 13th, 2007

We’re fortunate here in Southern California to have a wealth of people who are willing to share their expertise and help the community. To help spread their knowledge and expertise, we have recently been posting articles to our Startup section which are helpful to startups and entrepreneurs. We’ve just posted two great articles to the section which entrepeneurs might find useful to read.

The first is Think Like An Investor: Developing the Right Mindset for Successful Fundraising by Matt Ridenour of Momentum Venture Management. Matt talks about some key points when looking for venture capital, including targeting your investors, tailoring your approach, and getting in-person time instead of mailing off a business plan.

The second is Planning for Your Business: A look at Business, Strategic Marketing and Information Technology Plans by David Gadish, Ph.D. David talks about some of the different kinds of plans used by businesses to run their operations.

New Southern California angel investor blog

Thursday, April 12th, 2007

Sid Mohasseb, a member of the Tech Coast Angels and managing director of Venture Farm, has put up a new blog, with the first post on venture capital and angel investing.

Buzzword compliance

Thursday, April 12th, 2007

I’ve noticed over the years that there is a tendency of companies to try to be trendy in their use of buzzwords. Consistently–across different industries and sectors–there’s a tendency for marketers and executives to try to jump on the bandwagon on the latest and greatest trend. Usually, this isn’t done so much by actually doing something related to the trend, but suddenly re-defining that buzzword to include whatever you are currently doing.

For example, if you’ve always allowed people to log into a message board on your site, suddenly you’re at the forefront of “user generated content”.

Or, if you have any sort of a consumer-facing web service, you’re suddenly “Web 2.0″.

Or, if you’re in a really, really narrowly defined niche, you’re a “long tail” company.

Finally, if you have any sort of a web site that people can buy a product from, you’re now an “ecommerce” company.

I recently came across a press release where a company called themselves an “business process outsourcing” company… And after some careful digging, it turned out they provided building inspection services.

What a lot of entrepreneurs don’t realize, is neither the press (nor venture capitalists) care if your Powerpoint or press release is “buzzword compliant”. Throwing in the latest and greatest buzzword into your pitch–while it might be tempting–is not going to make it more likely that you will either get funding, or any attention. The vast majority of venture capitalists will ignore whatever buzzword of the day you are attaching to your company and dig into what you really do, and the press is naturally skeptical and more likely to ridicule you for using the buzzword than write a glowing article on it.

What a lot of companies really mean when they use these buzzwords nowadays:

  • Web 2.0 - we run a service which you can access using the Internet
  • User generated content - we’re too lazy/cheap to create or pay for content, so we’re hoping users will do it for us for free
  • Mashup - we found some cool tools from Google/Microsoft/someone else, plus some data from Craiglist/Ebay/elsewhere, and put it together, and now we are going to pump it up for some press
  • Citizen journalism - see “user generated content”.
  • Wiki -we found this neat software, it allows people to post their own content, but it doesn’t seem like anyone who is technical enough to post content on a wiki would want to post anything on our pages anyway
  • User community - we have an Internet message board!
  • Social network - see “user community”

Guest Post: The Future of Lead Gen

Wednesday, April 11th, 2007

Jim Armstrong, Clearstone VentureToday’s post is a guest commentary from Jim Armstrong, Managing Director of Clearstone Venture Partners.

There has been a lot of commentary over the past year about the lead generation market. At its simplest, the market can be explained as follows: Today, most businesses that are ready to spend dollars marketing online have little interest in traffic. Either there are very few sophisticated places to send it if they had it, or most businesses couldn’t monetize the traffic on their own. It isn’t their core competency. However, these same businesses do have an interest in reaching ready to buy customers. Currently, this market is served by hundreds of small, highly profitable garage shop businesses that buy keywords around a vertical or two, syndicate offers through advertising networks focused on those verticals, and drive that traffic back to a network of sites whose sole focus is to convert that traffic into an interested customer who is willing to share their contact information along with their indication of interest. This live “lead” is now very valuable to the majority of companies who already have processes in place to prospect for customers, not clicks and not impressions. Today lead generation is looked at as a profitable market filler and the main driver of the keyword market dominated by Google and Yahoo/Overture and numerous ad networks. The market is considered by many to be nothing more than click arbitrage, bound to evaporate in the near future. However, a closer look reveals why “lead generation” has a very powerful and differentiated future.

To understand where this market is going, you have to analyze where it has been. Historically, the first industries to adopt the internet as a lead generation tool were the industries where there was a) already off-line direct marketing, b) a highly considered, usually high ticket, purchase and c) a well understood cost of customer acquisition figure. Automotive purchase and home finance have led the way.

The market has moved rapidly beyond the automotive and home finance verticals as the informational attributes of the internet have convinced more and more people to realize that the web should be there first point of education for nearly any purchase. In the consumer realm this includes cruises, time shares, travel, classifieds, real estate, insurance, investing, leisure, luxury, education, entertainment and consumer goods. Additionally, we are seeing growing traffic seeking information and education around business to business goods and services such as office equipment, VOIP services, office leases, consultancy, outsourcing, component sourcing, off-site functions, and hiring. If you look at the traffic patterns of the web you will see sharp spikes in usage M-F 9-5. Consumer internet usage behaviors in the home and at work are melding into one.

With massive new internet usage patterns and category expansion, and low barriers to entry for individuals to participate as market intermediaries, the past two years has seen a rapid overheating of the market. As each new internet marketing tool is becoming more understood, they are also becoming rapidly “overbought”. The keyword market today is more than fully priced and each day more arbitrage is being wrung out of the process. Lead arbitrage players have found commercial keyword prices skyrocket in price as a result.

The rapid developments in this market have created great new opportunities. As for instance commercial keyword price increases takes lead generation out of the hands of the amateur arbitrage players, it has driven marketing budgets seeking qualified customers to reach out to professional, scale providers with entirely new, more sophisticated processes.


From the point of view of a marketer seeking customers online, the choices today is to either a) buy traffic to their own site and develop core expertise in refining it into actionable traffic, or b) contract with a small, unsophisticated shops without adequate controls on their processes to ensure a consistent source of leads. These shops are the same shops that rely on email spam, promotional ads (“win an ipod Nano by giving us your name”) and other even less sophisticated methods that rely solely on the low cost factor of the web. In short, very few have gone out as both the customer advocate (a valuable service consumers enjoy) and yet have the quality, professionalism, reporting and scale to service large marketing budgets. As an example, a large company I know well is now calling every one of its online leads to make sure they really exist and are interested in the product or service as indicated. Today there is no way for an online marketer to contract with a vendor to affect a desired outcome. For example, few lead generation outfits have the capability to help Countrywide switch their efforts from general mortgage leads nationwide to only credit scores of 600 or better in the Seattle area, or to help Ford identify customers for Ford products in Phoenix. They have neither the scale nor reporting nor policy management to affect such an outcome. That is a reflection of the state of the market today.

There are some very clear examples of what the future will hold. Zillow, the popular real estate voyeur site, is nothing more than a sophisticated customer identification engine which provides a valuable service to the consumer in hopes of passing them on while they are in the decision process. Lending Tree (”when lenders compete you win”) also provides an application like workflow processing value to consumers, sparing consumers the laborious vendor selection process, and instead quoting and reporting on their behalf. Lowermybills.com (purchased by Experien for $300MM) provides a similar value to consumers by asking them for their monthly bills and vendors and then tries to quote them a lower payment for similar services. Their main business is lead generation for mortgages, yet they provide an application like process to make your life better. These 3 companies point the way towards what customer identification across many verticals will look like in the next 36 months.

Out of these market developments, I believe, exists venture scale opportunities, namely the opportunity to build businesses that have the ability to become a high scale customer identification network and a correspondingly highly efficient monetizer of online customer interest both as a principal, and as an agent for the less professionalized “lead gen” player. The ability to monetize leads coupled with a fair affiliate program would mean a more efficient marketplace and a scale provider where thousands of smaller industry companies could go to monetize their “lead gen” traffic. This is where Google and Yahoo/Overture get most of their “traffic” today — and this was the model that Overture pioneered.

“Online Customer Identification” (OCI) is the future of today’s “lead gen.” It is about scale and professionalism and it is a big market very much differentiated from the current keyword (click) market. Importantly, Google and Yahoo and others have shown that the best online companies will provide real value propositions to both end consumers and to marketers. Today, in customer identification, neither constituent is being served.

Southern California’s Investment Diversity

Monday, April 9th, 2007

I’m often asked by people from outside of the area, what part of the high tech industry Southern California is known for–and people are surprised when I tell them that we really have a diverse technology base, and there’s no “one” industry that defines Southern California.

Often, the first thought is digital entertainment and media — because of the proximity and influence of Hollywood — but remarkably, if you look at the deal flow and types of companies starting here, that’s only part of the picture. In fact, I think the stereotype of Southern California high tech companies being only digital media firms is actually very wrong if you look at the deal flow.

There are pockets of companies in specific industries here and there in Southern California, but if you look at it collectively our wide range of investment deals include everything from biopharmaceuticals and medical devices, to hardware and semiconductors, software, digital media and entertainment, to consumer and retail plays. I think that’s part of Southern California’s strength–and future potential. Because different industries ebb and flow depending on the economy and cycles, our broad base gives us a much better diversification.

Just glancing at the last few deals in the area over the last few weeks, you see the diversity: A few biotech deals - Sangart, GenVault, Protemix, AutoGenomics; Four online services - Zaadz, YouMail, LegalZoom, Slacker; optical hardware - Xponent Photonics; medical devices - CoreValve; electronics - H2O Audio, Real D; Digital media - GoTV Networks; Telecommunications - Amp’d Mobile. Also, if you pick other months or times you’ll find the mix is entirely different.

On another note, I’m finding that, interestingly enough, people are running across this blog who aren’t familiar with socalTECH. So, at the risk of duplicating what you can get by just going to socalTECH.com, here’s a link to my latest interviews:

SoCal gets over $1B in VC funding in Q1…

Tuesday, April 3rd, 2007

We just posted the numbers this morning: according to our day to day tracking of Southern California VC deals, there was over $1 billion in venture investments in Southern California this quarter–an astounding number. When I first ran the numbers this weekend I had to double check to make sure that the numbers added up, but if you track all the venture deals in Southern California (which is pretty detailed), indeed, there was quite a bit of activity here and the numbers total to over a $1B in investment.

Looking through the list of fundings, the numbers were boosted in two ways: one was a very significant amount of biotech and medical product investments, particularly in San Diego; plus, a number of large deals (Amp’d Mobile and Altra come to mind)–Amp’d in the very capital intensive MVNO space, and Altra likewise in the capital intensive alternative energy area.

PricewaterhouseCoopers/NVCA and Ernst & Young/VentureOne will release their results in the next couple of weeks, and it should be interesting to compare. Their numbers are usually based on self-reported investments from venture firms, so it’s interesting to see the number of deals which were not announced or not yet disclosed (which we don’t catch), and what their own totals will look like.  Private Equity Week’s Dan Primack also alluded to the gain in venture investing here yesterday in his newsletter (snippet below). It should be interesting to look at the various numbers as they come out. Primack’s quote below:

…Venture capital data is still being compiled, but a quick look behind the curtain indicates that Southern California has beefed up its lead on New England….