JumpStart: IdeaExchange Blog

When JumpStart was started, the leaders looked across the country for models to emulate, and Innovation Works in Pittsburgh was one of them. Innovation Works (IW) is five years older than JumpStart but served as the model for many of our operational choices. While we have some important differences (including funding sources and the specifics of our local geographies), we also have many of the same elements: business community, deal flow from multiple partners including universities and service providers, inspired and supported entrepreneurs, and a model which ties various amounts of funding with business assistance.

IW had its annual meeting last Thursday and John Dearborn and I were in attendance. WOW. If you ever needed proof that the model we are both pursuing can work to create incredible economic transformation, a thriving entrepreneurial economy, positive internal brand image, and jobs, take a look at Pittsburgh and the work of IW. As just one example alone, the annual meeting was at McKesson Automation. The company that was the predecessor to McKesson was brought to IW by its three founding entrepreneurs. With the initial funding and business assistance from IW, the company grew from three to 800 employees in the Pittsburgh area. It was sold to McKesson and continues to employ over 500 hundred people in the Pittsburgh area and thousands of people across the U.S., while those three entrepreneurs have gone on to start other companies that have created hundreds of jobs (or lead IW, in the case of Rich Lunak). And that’s just one example.

To learn more about the results that IW has achieved in Pittsburgh, and to be inspired by what can happen in our region too, take a look at their 10 year anniversary annual report.

Cathy Belk is the Chief Marketing Officer of JumpStart. She specializes in branding, marketing communications, and business management. She brings 16+ years of experience in a variety of marketing and business roles, but gets her energy from working daily with entrepreneurs and their growing companies.

Albert Einstein once said “If, at first, the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it.” Here is my list of the top ten most absurd and hopeless ideas I have heard about in my lifetime:

1. Coffee shops? The world hardly needs more coffee shops. Plus, coffee shops don’t scale.
2. A Maine-based line of natural products that are made with bees wax? Last time I checked, the “bee” supply chain wasn’t that scalable.
3. Overpriced, finely made historically accurate dolls that will teach children about history? Seriously? I don’t even know where to go with that.
4. An algorithm that will improve upon Yahoo’s web search technology? Fatal flaw: why couldn’t Yahoo just do that themselves?
5. Packages overnight? The infrastructure required to make that happen is prohibitively expensive. Nice idea, but too much capital risk.
6. Growing a technology business in Seattle? Cow town, and too far away at that: investors want to be able to drive no more than four hours from their home. Plus, there’s no entrepreneurial talent in Seattle.
7. You want to trade collectibles and knick-knacks on the web? That’s maybe, like, a $1,000 market on a good day.
8. Your children have an “orphan disease” for which you want to find a cure? OK, so what don’t you understand about the healthcare industry(?): orphan diseases are unfundable.
9. Sell books on the Internet? People want the experience of touching books, opening the covers, being in a bookstore. Sorry, but the need just is not there.
10. You don’t want to develop computers but you do want to (basically) assemble them? There’s nothing novel or even very protectable about that. If you had invented a new microprocessor or something, I might be interested. But just putting the boxes together isn’t going to generate sustainable gross margins.

These are unassailably awful ideas. Every one of them. Laughable almost. I wonder what the poorly thought-out, misguided, ill advised…OK, can we all just agree to call them patently absurd?…ideas of the next decade will be:

• Making cost competitive oil out of algae (been there, tried that; plus, the whole algae industry is too capital intensive, don’t you know)?
• Competing with Google (ok, can you say naïve)?
• Starting a great company in Cleveland (too cold; no talent — seriously: none, anywhere in the entire state in fact)?

I confess that I do not know. But, I have the time of my life working with entrepreneurs trying to figure it out.

(So, the terrible ideas listed above are examples so well known to most Americans — never mind you fair, brilliant readers steeped in innovation history and always seeking contrarian ideas — that they are almost trite. But, to my mind, they bear repeating because they remain stalwart, iconic reminders of how visions and dreams become great companies in spite of a slew of reasonable obstacles and well reasoned protests. In case you didn’t recognize one or two, here they are:

1. Starbucks, founded in 1971 and a market cap of $17.2 billion today
2. Burts Bees, acquired by Clorox for $913 million in 2007
3. American Girl, founded in 1986 and acquired by Mattel Inc. for $700 million 1998
4. Google, founded in 1998 and a market cap of $184 billion today
5. FedEx, founded in 1971 and a market cap of $27 billion today
6. Microsoft, founded in 1975 and worth $274 billion today
7. eBay, founded in 1995 and a market cap of $29 billion today
8. Novazyme, acquired by Genzyme for $225 million in 2001; see Extraordinary Measures, which came out last week
9. Amazon, founded in 1994 and a market cap of $55 billion today
10. Dell Computers, founded in 1984 and a market cap of $28 billion today

Also, it should be noted that angel and/or venture capital investors believed in and invested in almost all of these companies. Each entrepreneur in question was able to get someone, and in some cases numerous someones, to believe in and put money behind the entrepreneur’s harebrained, crackpot — and I mean that with all due respect — idea.)

Becca Braun is President of JumpStart Ventures. She founded and led a number of early-stage companies and organizations, as well as worked as a private equity investor and management consultant. She received her MBA from Harvard Business School and her BA in Linguistics from Harvard University. She is keenly interested in the intersection of wealth creation and broad-based regional economic growth.

I’m back from New York with a whopper flu bug (not swine, don’t worry…), a faux orange Goyard bag and a working knowledge of Twitter. Using Twitter has been interesting, though based on my usage I can’t figure out how the company is ever going to make money. It’s free to sign up. There are no ads on the web page. There are no ads embedded in the tweets that come to my Blackberry. (I signed up for unlimited text messaging from T-Mobile in order to receive all those tweets, so I know they’re making money from me. But how is Twitter, the company itself, going to make money?) If anyone can think of a revenue-generating business model, please share . (NOTE: I realize that Twitter has raised a bunch of venture funding which gives them the luxury of time before they have to show revenue, but they’re in the minority for sure. Here’s a great post from Charlie O’Donnell of Path101 that speaks to the current funding climate and how it’s imperative for startups to figure out their revenue models quickly.)

I’m continuing here the theme of my last blog in which I mentioned a great article featuring “lessons learned” from a failed startup. That blog resulted in folks sending me some similar stories that I’m sharing here. I’m not trying to focus on the negative but, as most people say, there is much to be learned from adversity, perhaps more than from success. This article by Mark Goldenson of PlayCafe features great advice as well as tons of great click-throughs to even more relevant content; this article by Roger Ehrenberg highlights the seven deadly sins that brought down Monitor110; and this blog post discusses the story of Meetro, a failed location-based social network. Maybe Twitter’s management can find some useful info in these insightful pieces, as can you. And if you’re an active Twitterer (Tweeter?) let me know what you think of the service. Better yet, send me a tweet! (@lagries)

Lynn-Ann Gries is the Chief Investment Officer of JumpStart Ventures. She previously worked in the investment banking departments at both McDonald Investments and Smith Barney (now part of Citigroup), and in the sales and trading area at Morgan Stanley. She received her MBA from New York University’s Stern School of Business and her BA in Economics from Smith College. She currently serves on the board of the Fund for the Future of Shaker Heights, the Great Lakes Science Center and Summer on the Cuyahoga (SOTC).

One of the key attributes of many startups focused on an online offering is that you really can make it a long, long way towards your actual customer offering on very little money. This presumes you can either do the technical work yourself or have a close, understanding friend to help out. The other alternative is to get outside help (an individual contractor or firm) but this costs real $$ unless you can craft a way to do it in exchange for equity, presuming you have your company, cap tables thinking and documents far enough along to be able to do this formally. But that’s for a different post! My post today deals with the timing of seeking investment when you are developing this kind of startup.

So, you’ve been able to get your idea down on paper and have at least an outline of a project plan to work against. And, you’ve found that very understanding friend to help at night and during the weekend. Next stop — quit your job? Write a business plan? Fundraising? You’re excited enough about the idea, as are your friends and family — at least enough to convince you to “go for it”. Can that excitement and some mock-ups in PowerPoint get you in front of investors?

Maybe. But that would be a mistake, in my opinion. Given the stage the business is in (really still at the concept stage), most savvy investors outside of friends and family will see a lot of risk still inherent in your deal. My advice would be to keep your day job and get the product underway — as far along as you can while still garnering an income. By this I mean get your web offering developed and in front of real customers so you can both test its appeal as well as test your business model. Google analytics provides a great facility to better understand what visitors are doing as they come to your site. As you gain knowledge from this data and elsewhere (through things like focus groups), you will need to make iterations to your code and site and do it quickly. If you have the bandwidth from a development standpoint, you should be updating your site at least weekly.

These iterations should allow you to connect with your audience in such a way that you can either charge them, charge advertisers, or both in order to begin to see some revenue. If you’ve gained enough traffic to do either, then you may be at a point to be able to secure funding. As I stated earlier, since investors will want as little risk as possible, showing an increase in traffic and your vital metrics will give them hope. One thing that has drastically changed recently, for the negative, are advertising based models. Since the economics of these are such that HUGE traffic is needed to show viability, sites that count on advertising as their only source of revenue will take longer to gestate. I don’t say this to discourage anyone — just to get the point across that it may take more time for these kinds of sites to be ready for an investor to see the growth curve they want in order to be comfortable.

If you can stay lean while you iterate and find that growth curve (it took YouTube a while, after all, before they found their “hockey stick” of growth trajectory), you can make it in the long run. Any time you have an audience that is large, growing and enthusiastic about your idea, advertisers will come around eventually, as will revenue. Twitter is another great example of this, i.e. no real revenue yet but they still manage to garner great support from investors as they work out their revenue model.

It’s all about the product offering — make it compelling, prove it with metrics and with even a small amount of revenue that proves the model, you should be able to find an investor attracted to your “near-proven” idea. These basic statistics will help take a lot of risk out of the deal for them.

John Dearborn is the Chief Development Officer of JumpStart and brings experience as an entrepreneur, founder and CEO at companies across the US and Europe over the last 25 years to the pursuit of economic transformation in Northeast Ohio.