Written by Jay Turo on Monday, May 23, 2011
The typical wisdom regarding the appropriate financing course for a new company goes as follows:
1. An entrepreneur starts a company in classic "bootstrap" fashion - with a combination of sweat equity and their own financial resources. This usually consists of personal savings, credit cards, and small loans from relatives (Mom, Dad, Uncle Bob, etc.).
2. Through connections, or through a chance meeting at a networking or social event, an angel investor hears the entrepreneur's story, likes them and their technology, and on the spot, writes a check to provide the company with its first outside financing.
The angel then introduces the entrepreneur to his or her wealthy friends and business connections who, based on the good reputation of the referring angel, also invest.
3. With this seed capital – more often than not totaling between $100,000 and $1,000,000 - the company accomplishes a number of key technical milestones, gets a beta customer or two, and then goes on a "road show" to venture capitalists around the country for capital to “scale” the business.
This venture capital financing - usually between $3 and $10 million - is the first of a number of rounds of outside investment over a period of three to five years. With this capital, the company propels itself to $50 million+ in revenues, and to either a sale to a strategic acquirer or to an initial public offering.
4. With the exit, the entrepreneur and the original angel investors become fantastically rich and are lauded far and wide.
5. The cycle is then repeated - with the original angel investors now joined in their investing by the once impoverished but now wealthy entrepreneur.
6. All live happily ever after.
It all sounds wonderful and it is. The only problem is that it almost always a fairy tale.
What really happens is more like the following:
A. The entrepreneur pours their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor into their company- at great personal sacrifice to them, their families, and everyone connected to the enterprise.
B. A "black swan" investor appears out of the blue and backs the company - less impressed by the technology than by the talent, desire, and grit of the entrepreneur.
Technical progress and market traction are much slower and cost a lot more than anticipated. There are a lot of dark, hard days.
C. There is considerable internal debate around whether or not to solicit and/or accept outside venture capital. For most companies, it is simply a non-starter. Management has the wrong pedigree, is geographically undesirable, competes in the wrong industry, and/or has a business model that lacks "scalability credibility" with the venture community.
D. Usually unbeknownst to all, the decision around pursuing or accepting a venture capital round will be the most important factor in determining the investment return for the founder and the original angel investors in the company.
But here is the key – contrary to popular wisdom it is negatively correlated.
Yes, you heard me right – multiple research studies, including from the Kauffman Foundation, have shown that when you remove a follow-on venture capital round from a founder or angel investor-funded company, that expected returns skyrocket.
This is very counter-intuitive but critical insight for emerging company entrepreneurs and those that back them to grasp. It is driven by the following:
• The Best Metric for the Health of a Company is Cash Flow. By definition, companies that receive venture capital cannot fund their businesses from operations, and thus need to seek outside capital.
This leads to a lot of negative selection with venture capital - backed companies – whereby the sample of companies that need venture monies are by definition weaker companies.
• Venture capitalists Have Very Different Objectives than Angel Investors. Venture capital funds are usually 7 - 10 year partnerships whereby the general partners - the “VC” - manage the capital of the limited partners, usually institutions (endowments, pension funds, etc.).
At the end of the period, all profits and proceeds are distributed to the various partners on a pre-determined split. These splits are normally such that the VC needs to obtain a “highwater” return for their limited partners before they, as the general partners, see any return.
In practice, this creates a significant incentive for the general partners to hold on for an extremely large investment return, and to be reasonably indifferent regarding smaller (less than 3x returns).
As a result, the VC will often block a portfolio company from harvesting a very attractive, but not home run, return.
• Venture capitalists Cut Tough Deals. Venture capitalists for the most part are very nice guys and passionate about entrepreneurship, but they are not shrinking violets. And they hire very aggressive securities attorneys to represent their interests.
This combo all too often leads to various forms of deal unpleasantness, like cram-down rounds, liquidation preferences, and change of control provisions, which in turn, often lead to unhappy founders and angel investors even in somewhat successful exits.
My suggestions for the investors seeking emerging companies to back?
First, look for "one and done" financings - companies that need just one round of outside capital to propel them to positive cash flow.
Second, look for companies that have short and realistic liquidity (exit, IPO) timelines.
And third, don’t get star-struck by big venture capital interest in your deal. It is often a double-edged and very sharp sword.
Written by Jay Turo on Monday, May 16, 2011
At my company Growthink, our mission is "to help entrepreneurs succeed worldwide.” When I share this with folks, they often come back to me with "Who are these entrepreneurs that you help succeed?" Touché.
So who is and who isn't an entrepreneur?
I like Professor Arthur O'Sullivan's definition, from "Economics: Principles in Action" the best:
"An entrepreneur is a person who has possession of a new enterprise, venture or idea, and assumes significant accountability for the inherent risks and the outcome. He or she is an ambitious leader who combines land, labor, and capital to often create and market new goods or services."
Building on this, let's list out individuals that obviously fit this description.
First, the "obvious" entrepreneurs:
Individuals STARTING New Companies. New companies, startups of all shapes and forms, across all industries, all around the world. The classic "man (or woman) with a plan" entrepreneur.
In the U.S. alone, this represents the more than 6 million new businesses started every year, and the many, many millions more contemplated.
Thank heavens for all of them - according to a famous M.I.T study new business starts account for more than 2/3 of all net new job creation.
I was on a panel this last week with Mr. Marco Lucioni, CEO of Financiera Confianza, which focuses on making the kind of microfinance loans here in the United States that have completely transformed the jobs landscape in many developing countries.
Marco talked about the experience of Peru, a country where over 1.5 million jobs have been created from microfinance loans in the past 25 years, and the unemployment rate in that still very much developing country is now less than that here in the United States. Now that is the power of entrepreneurial job creation!
Individuals LEADING Small Companies. Per that M.I.T study, the other 1/3 of net new job creation comes from "gazelles," - the 641,000 U.S. firms with between 20 to 1,000 employees. They, along with startups, account for more than 62% of all private sector employment.
Anyone that has spent even a day at a growing, middle market company can literally breathe the entrepreneurship in the air. The best of them are led by deeply ambitious men and women walking the talk of American business.
Now very importantly, not all small business people are entrepreneurs. The key phrase in Professor O'Sullivan's definition when evaluating whether one is, or is not, is ambitious leader.
All of us know small business men and women - that while certainly possessing many wonderful attributes - it would be a big stretch to describe them as ambitious leaders.
The "Non-Obvious" Entrepreneurs
In some ways, those that demonstrate entrepreneurial leadership in the contexts of bigger business, philanthropy, and government are even more impressive than our obvious entrepreneurs. Examples include:
Individuals that are Accountable for Change and Growth at BIG companies. Into this category falls Executives like Wal-Mart’s CEO Mike Duke. Mr. Duke is certainly an ambitious leader with very, very significant accountability for risks and outcomes - $420 billion in revenues, 2.1 million employees - and to grow Wal-Mart even 5% annually requires creating a company every year that would rank in the top 100 largest companies in the country.
Individuals with Leadership and Change Responsibility in Organizations of All Types. The challenges of leadership and accountability exist in ANY organization taking on meaningful and challenging objectives.
Bono, arguably the world's best known philanthropic celebrity, is an entrepreneur on two fronts.
First, via his commitment to world-class creative output as the leader of the mega-rock band U2.
And he is an entrepreneur, via his unique effectiveness as an activist and spokesperson for big projects - third world debt relief, and AIDS and African development issues, among others.
Other examples of “philanthropic” entrepreneurs include Gary McDougal - former Partner at McKinsey - who later in his life re-engineered the broken Illinois welfare system and made it a model nation-wide.
Or how about Gail McGovern - President of the American Red Cross - thinks and works entrepreneurially everyday to expand the brand and effect of the organization beyond disaster relief.
Global Entrepreneurs. Now more than ever ambitious individuals worldwide strive to not just be entrepreneurs per the American way, but to take the best of what we do and how we think and add to it and candidly, then to crush us. And I say more power to them.
Because entrepreneurship as its essence is about creation, and the success of one entrepreneur ANYWHERE results in a better life for everyone EVERYWHERE.
Written by Jay Turo on Monday, May 9, 2011
Noted author and entrepreneur John Warrilow in his great new book, “Built to Sell: Creating a Business that Lasts Without You,” offers entrepreneurs and executives running companies of all sizes fantastic advice as to how to build businesses with high equity and long-lasting value.
Given that 70% of the U.S. economy is services, Warrilow has particularly insightful comments on the “hierarchy of revenues” and their relative equity value.
Warrilow ranks them from worst to best as follows:
No. 6: Consumables – As Warrilow says, “disposable items like toothpaste that customers purchase regularly but that they have no solid motivation to be brand-loyal toward.”
No. 5: Sunk Money Consumables - like razor blades, which are similar to consumables, but have the additional stickiness of the consumer investing in a platform in addition to simple brand-loyalty as being of higher stickiness and thus value than a “no cost of entry” subscription as is typical for most publications.
No. 4: Renewable Subscriptions - like magazines;
No. 3: Sunk Money Renewable Subscriptions - Warrilow flags the example of the Bloomberg terminal, where traders first buy or lease the terminal and then purchase an ongoing information subscription;
No. 2: Auto-Renewal Subscriptions - like #4 and #3 above, but with the aspect of forced continuity, or “good-til-cancelled” subscriptions.
Most subscriptions are now set up this way, but when the subscription is for something, like document storage, that is extremely difficult to switch / cancel once established, the value of an auto-renewal subscriptions grows exponentially.
No. 1: Contracts - the gold standard of recurring revenues, where a customer is locked in, by contract and by law, into an ongoing, recurring revenue relationship.
Warrilow’s full description of each of these types of recurring revenue and their relative merits can be read here.
How about Investors?
While Warrilow focuses most of his book and his analysis from the perspective of the entrepreneur and how to maximize their personal equity value, his analysis is equally valid for investors seeking emerging companies to back.
Businesses that are too project to project based, or based on hard to sell, hard to deliver, customized “solutions”, or too dependent upon the skills and relationships of their owners are almost always characterized by little equity and exit value.
In contrast, companies led by entrepreneurs that understand the hierarchy of customers and revenues - and are constantly moving their businesses ever upward on it - are the sellable, and thus the backable, ones.
Written by Jay Turo on Monday, May 2, 2011
Younger workers – the so-called Millenials or those born after 1982 - with all of their creative talent and intellectual savvy, and all of their flightiness and senses of entitlement - offer unique challenges and opportunities for 21st Century managers seeking to build well-functioning teams that work and win together.
Here are five best practices:
Written by Jay Turo on Monday, April 25, 2011
On Friday Silicon Valley Bank released a survey of 375 executives at startup technology companies in the 4 core venture capital investment sectors – Software/Internet, Hardware, Life Science, and Cleantech. Here is what they found:
Tech. Execs. Are Bullish. Two of three of them say that business conditions are better than they were last year, and three out of four expect things to get even better in the next 12 months. And listen up Washington - 83 percent of them plan to hire in the coming year. Hooray!
And They Believe as I do, that America’s Decline has Been Greatly Exaggerated. More than three in four of them see America as still the world innovation leader and the BEST place to start and grow a business.
In fact, the main competitive advantage that these startup executives see for doing business overseas is cost. On every other measure – quality of employees, the quality of the higher education system, and overall entrepreneurial mindset and culture, among others - the U.S. still comes out on top.
Money Still Makes the World Go Around. The top challenge listed across all respondents was access to financing. While things certainly are improving, these executives rightly believe that the amount of dollars flowing into emerging companies is still way too low.
The study notes that in 2010, venture capitalists invested $21.8 billion in 3,277 deals, and while this is certainly up from the death spiral period of the 2008-2009 period, it is still much less than the $30 billion average that venture funds were investing annually through most of the past decade.
And Government Just Gets in the Way. Next to money - and the related challenge of scaling operations for growth - the #1 challenge that startup executives point to is the regulatory / political environment.
Healthcare company executives in particular expressed deep regulatory exasperation:
“The FDA is by its very design killing innovation and entrepreneurship. Its very charter utterly excludes the notion of fostering development, opting instead for a one-way ratchet that can only lead to longer, more costly development cycles with no improvement in real safety for efficacy.”
“Our outlook is solely dependent on the FDA. We are doing well in Europe, but the processes for the U.S. FDA simply is broken and harming innovation.”
“I am 40 years in this business, and see an FDA approval pathway that will destroy our business, for no reason. I see futile attempts on our company’s part to obtain Chinese monetary support, while we give away our technology.”
In Sum, Startups Still Make the American Business World Go Round. As its executive summary notes, “High growth small business startups are the principal driver of net new job creation…they are responsible for creating entire new industries — from IT and semiconductors, to biotechnology, to online retailing, social media and cloud computing…”
“They improve our quality of life, by expanding access to information, providing higher quality goods and services, improving health care quality and access, and fostering a more sustainable environment and U.S. energy independence.”
I don’t think any of us could have said it better - the entire survey can and should be read here.
Secrets of Startup Investing
We just updated our white paper "Secrets of Startup Investing: Where to Win Now."
It provides tips and advice for those looking to invest in startups and emerging companies, including:
• How to Build Portfolios of Positions Efficiently and Rapidly
• How to Dispassionately Assess Risk
• How to Understand Private Equity Valuations and Exit Potential
• And much, much more!!
To download this complimentary report, please click here.
To your success,
Written by Jay Turo on Monday, April 18, 2011
The founders of wildly successful companies - with their world-changing impacts and their awe-inspiring wealth creation - receive much well-earned praise and financial rewards for turning their great entrepreneurial visions into reality.
But what about those with 1-2 degrees of separation who also benefit immensely? Angel investors like Andy Bechtolsheim - who put $100,000 into Google in September 1998, a position now worth more than $1.7 billion.
Or someone like Mark Cuban, who rode the Internet wave perfectly, to the tune of selling Broadcast.com to Yahoo for $5.9 billion in Yahoo stock. Even better, he had the additional good luck to sell nearly all of that stock near the peak of the Internet bubble.
For that matter, how about Mikhail Prokhorov, now with a fortune estimated at over $18 billion, and other rags to riches stories like his driven by having the right friends at the right time?
Prokhorov as a young man had as his sponsor Deputy Prime Minister of Russia Vladimir Potanin - just as many of Russia’s largest state-owned enterprises were being privatized.
Prokhorov parlayed this relationship into a controlling interest in the huge Russian nickel business before it became a stand-alone publicly traded company. And he, like Mark Cuban had the additional boon of turning his equity stake into cash at the absolute right moment (and the circumstances of which are high comedy to say the least).
These stories of great luck and fortune are timelessly inspirational for entrepreneurs, investors, and dreamers everywhere.
At the same time, they are frustratingly vexing and opaque to turn from descriptive narrative to prescriptive guide.
I.E. – if it were only so simple doing “A,” and then having “B” magically appear.
But of course luck and good fortune - as a whole lot of business philosophers from Nassim Taleb to Malcolm Gladwell to Joshua Ramo have opined - just don’t work that way.
There is, however, a LOT that entrepreneurs can and must do to “let luck in,” and a recent post from author and speaker Stephen Shapiro offers three great ideas to do so:
1. Grasp the Critical Difference Between the Probability of ANY Good Thing, versus a SPECIFIC good thing, Happening. To illustrate, Shapiro puts a twist on the famous birthday example:
“…if you ask the question, “How many people do you need in a room to have a 50 percent chance that two people will have the same birthday?” Some people immediately assume it is half of 367, or roughly 184. While that is a logical guess, it is actually incorrect. In fact, you would only need 23 people. Shocking? Try it some time and see what happens. With just 40 people you will have a nearly 90 percent chance that two individuals will have the same birthday.
Now I’d like you to consider how many people you would need in a room to have a 50 percent chance that two people share a particular birthday? For example, I was born on April 25. How many people would I need to have in a room to have a 50 percent chance that there is another person with my exact birthday? Surprisingly, the number now increases to over 600.”
Shapiro’s business point? While specific goals and objectives are great, be careful to not limit the various permutations that a business journey might take to arrive at a desirous destination.
2. Understand the Difference between The Value of Planning, and being Wed to “A Plan.” Shapiro quotes General and Future President Dwight Eisenhower’s poignant quote that "In preparing for battle I have always found that plans are useless, but planning is indispensable."
3. The Great Ones Above All Else, Act. All of the stories of business success are many things, but above all else they are tales of ACTION.
Of writing the code. Of making the investment. Of going to the conference. Of striking up the conversation with that beautiful stranger.
They are tales like those of the man I consider the American of all time - Theodore Roosevelt - famously described by Henry Adams as “more than any other man living within the range of notoriety, showed the singular primitive quality that belongs to ultimate matter--he was pure Act."
Now thinking and being like this does not guarantee that you will become a famous General, or President, or Billionaire, or a successful investor, or build a sellable company.
But the opposite is assured - that without cultivating the mindset of boldness, of action, of positive expectation, one runs the serious risk of, as Roosevelt himself said best, of being “with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat.”
Written by Jay Turo on Monday, April 4, 2011
My company had its first meeting of its strategic advisory board this past week.
All I can say is wow – I benefited from it in ways that I barely could have imagined when first organized.
Here is what I got out of it:
That Often It is Better to Receive than to Give: While advisory board members, unlike a formal board, do not have liability nor fiduciary responsibility, their time and energy requirements to participate are significant.
And for most smaller companies, the financial incentives it can offer advisory board members are relatively little compared to the value of board members’ time.
A good if imperfect analogy is that for many senior executives their involvement with a smaller company advisory board is almost a philanthropic endeavor – where they give of themselves without expectation of direct reward – financial or otherwise.
Correspondingly, the owners and managers of the small company must approach the sage advice and good energy offered by their advisory board fully in “receiving” mode.
For businesspeople of the mindset of always trading value for value and reciprocal obligation, this is hard. But only by clearing this space can the board’s counsel be best received.
And somewhat counter-intuitively, often only by management fully accepting the “gifts” of its advisors will the board member’s experience be richest.
Begin with the End in Mind: For companies beyond the startup phase, its operating executives are naturally pulled to the shorter-term challenges and realities - this quarter’s revenue and profits, this month’s sales, the challenges and angst of a difficult employee decision, etc.
An advisory board discussion, however, by both its nature and by the kinds of folks attracted to serve on it, naturally pulls to the longer view - to the big questions that all businesses should be regularly asking themselves always but rarely do.
These questions fall into the big categories of “why” and “which.”
The "why" questions are hopefully embodied in the Company’s mission and its values, and need the regular attention of strategic planning sessions like advisory board meetings to keep them from existing only in “hot air.”
The “which” questions are in many ways the harder ones that an advisory board dynamic can specifically help address.
You see - ambitious entrepreneurs and executives, especially after they have a little success, are naturally drawn to expanding their sense of their market opportunity, and correspondingly their list of product and service offerings.
This naturally leads to a diffusion of focus, of trying to be all things to all people. A thoughtful advisory board will challenge management to more clearly define where they are aiming to be 1 year, 3 years hence and beyond, and from this vision where resources and attention should be focused today.
Speak Little, Listen Much: Managers and owners of emerging companies are often also the lead salespeople, the lead “evangelists” for their companies.
As a result, their default mode is to always be selling, always be pied-pipering their incredibly bright futures.
This is natural and good, but in a strategic planning session it is of equal importance that the challenges, the obstacles, the concerning risk factors be sat and grappled with long and hard.
Even if, especially if, so doing is buzz-killing and / or depressing.
Why? Because it is often only in the “low negative” energy state that a certain kind of reflective creativity can flourish, and completely new approaches to solving vexing problems can be discovered.
Brevity is Next to Godliness: Strategic planning sessions in a modern business context should be tightly scheduled to last not more than 2 hours. After this length of time, diminishing returns starts setting in fast.
A tight frame also requires all participants to come to the meeting prepared. And, in turn, that the meeting organizers select the right meeting homework and then plan and moderate the agenda with the proper balance of structure and free-flowing dialogue.
Doing all of the above requires work – a good guide is that for every hour of strategic meeting time there should be 5 hours of planning time by the meeting organizer and at least 2 hours of preparation time by each participant.
Conclusion: Given that the only way to increase the value of a business is to either a) increase its bottom line financials and/or b) to improve its strategic positioning and growth probability, creative planning sessions like advisory board meetings should be a FIRST priority of any responsible manager of a company with ambition.
They are classic Steven Covey, “non-urgent, extremely important” activities.
Ignore them at your peril, and benefit from them in ways, like I did and will, well beyond reasonable expectation.
Looking for Opportunities Now?
Each year, Growthink reviews hundreds of startup and emerging company opportunities and selects those with the best management teams, market opportunities, and financial prospects.
To learn more about opportunities we are following now, click here.
To your success,
Written by Jay Turo on Monday, March 28, 2011
Businesses that sell do 5 things very, very well:
#5. They Are Cause, and Not Money, Driven. Highly valued companies are culturally cohesive and have causes beyond money that motivates them.
Take a look at the famous mission statements below and how these company’s iconic brands align with them:
Google: “To make the world's information universally accessible and useful"
Facebook: “To give people the power to share and make the world more open and connected"
Zappos: “To provide the best customer service possible”
Southwest Airlines: “To fly safe, with high frequency, low-cost flights that can get passengers to their destinations on time and often closer to their destination”
Disney: “To create happiness by providing the finest in entertainment for people of all ages, everywhere"
An acid test of a business’ “above the line” value is whether or not its mission and brand have similar alignment.
Now if you have neither a brand nor a mission and yet harbor a dream of a business exit, then it is time to get to work.
#4. They Have Valuable Intellectual Property. Companies rich in intellectual property in all its forms – patents, processes, and people – attain purchase offers on factors other than last year’s earnings.
Try this on for size – an analysis of over 300 patents acquired between 2002-2008 found an average price per patent of $383,000!
The lesson is clear - whether you are in a low or high-tech business, ask yourself daily what is proprietary about what you do and how you do it and then work to protect it.
#3. They Communicate VERY Bright Futures. Businesses that sell for high multiples communicate exciting future, profitable growth.
The focus is on the word communicate. The value of a business can be doubled and tripled and more simply by credibly and excitedly forecasting its growth.
This is not easy – it requires managers to demonstrate deep understandings of the impact of the big 21st century “macros” – technology and globalization, and the micros, especially how their companies will become learning organizations that adapt and grow as change happens.
All this translates into a well-developed story that there is gold (and a lot of it!) at the end of their business rainbow.
#2. They Are “Cleanly” Managed and Run. A business, like a great product or service, must be cleanly packaged, neatly wrapped, to attract its highest price.
So if you are selling at a high price, no messy financial statements because of poor accounting, no incomplete or shoddy corporate records because of poor or non-existent legal counsel, and no boring or lacking in credibility “future stories” because of poor exit planning and investment banking advice.
And oh yes, it is very hard to “clean up” a business at the time of sale – to do it right the work must be done in real time and / or started years before a sale is contemplated.
#1. They Are Lucky. Entrepreneurs and executives that build sellable companies embrace the role of luck in business success.
They cultivate a mindset of positive expectation – a firm and abiding belief that they will either find a way or make one.
Goethe said it best:
“Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one elementary truth that ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then Providence moves too. All sorts of things occur to help one that would never otherwise have occurred. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents and meetings and material assistance, which no man could have dreamed would have come his way. Whatever you can do, or dream you can do, begin it. Boldness has genius, power, and magic in it. Begin it now."
So how about you?
Written by Jay Turo on Monday, March 21, 2011
The elephant in the room when it comes to entrepreneurship and small business is FAILURE.
The statistics are only debated to their degree but not their overall thrust – a very small percentage of businesses ever become meaningfully profitable and a smaller percentage still are ever sold for a meaningful price.
In other words, the vast majority of businesses – by objective, financial measures – fail.
Even worse, a lot them fail badly –never achieving even one dollar in revenue and / or go so deeply in the hole that they have significant and negative financial spillover effects.
Like business and personal bankruptcies and investors losing all of their money.
In a word, business failure is traumatic. Now it is not the kind of trauma that survivors of war and natural disasters experience, but in the world of work it can be about as bad as it gets.
Yet…Americans today are starting businesses at a greater rate than at any time in the last 15 years. 3% of the U.S. adult population annually start one, and a multiple of that dream about doing so.
So what gives?
Well, in a previous column I offered the financial view, namely that the rewards of a business sale are so great and life-changing that having any probability of their occurrence make the grave financial risks of business - building more than worth taking.
This I call the “American Idol” theory of entrepreneurship and small business….:)
But this, at best, only explains half of the story.
No, there is something else going on here, and new research regarding of all things – Post Traumatic Stress Syndrome, points to what it is.
Ground-breaking research, done by among-others Dr. Richard Tedeschi of the University of North Carolina, shows that strong, negative experiences like war and natural disasters are NOT as scarring as once thought.
In fact, the exact opposite is true. Statistically, most survivors of traumatic experiences – think prisoners-of-war and tsunami victims – come out of them stronger and on most measures, out-perform those in their peer groups unaffected by the awful events.
All I can say is wow.
Now everyday all of us should count our blessings dozens of times as “there but for fortune go I’ and offer nothing but great compassion and empathy for those suffering trauma, especially when it comes through no fault of their own.
But we also should take significant solace and inspiration from the rest of the story.
Life, as it does, goes on. And according to the latest research, the old adage is true of that which does not kill you REALLY does make you stronger.
Now it would not be proper to equate a business failure with the physical and emotional traumas experienced by survivors of war and disaster, but entrepreneurs and executives can and should draw important wisdom from them.
Such as if you “fail” at this particular business, you won’t be broken and scarred forever.
And that professional and entrepreneurial growth is a participatory sport – learned only by doing and trying and striving and not by watching and fretting and waiting.
And then there are the related ideas of diversification and iteration.
Such as, in business, it is almost always far better to have four business “failures” and ONE success than it is to go zero for zero.
For the entrepreneur this does not necessarily mean running multiple businesses concurrently, but it does mean that the business strategy should be iterative and testing based. Successful internet companies get this intuitively – see Amazon and eBay and thousands of others - and you should too.
As for investors, they should take advantage of the incredible opportunity that the modern financial system offers to back multiple entrepreneurial companies, and not just one or a handful.
With the average return of the private equity investing asset class in some cases being over 27% annually (Right Side Capital), the odds are strongly in your favor if you both invest right and diversify properly.
So entrepreneurs and investors get in the game!
Failure is no way near as bad as advertised and if approached with the right spirit and strategy, it can truly be the ultimate blessing in disguise.
Written by Jay Turo on Monday, February 28, 2011
America is getting its risk-taking mojo back.
Driven by the return to normalcy in the stock market, at long-last signs of life in the residential and commercial real estate markets, and most excitingly by veritable boom-time conditions in “Web 3.0” technologies like social networking, mobile gaming, and interactive advertising, in 2011 new fortunes and legends are being made.
Thankfully, this boom is fundamentally different from the one that drove the NASDAQ to dizzying heights in the late 90’s, or the “Web 2.0” social networking hype of 2006-2007. Here’s why:
1. Individual Investors, NOT Venture Capitalists, are Leading the Charge. So-called “super angels” – wealthy, technology-savvy high net worth individual investors - and NOT traditional venture capitalists, are now the preferred funding source for the most dynamic entrepreneurs in the hottest technology sectors.
The reasons for this start with the fact that most VC’s are suffering from that awful business curse that they look for in industries ripe for new entrants – legacy costs.
Quite simply, VCs have lost so much money for so long that they can only dig themselves out with massive investment wins. This in turn requires them to put very large sums of money to work in companies with huge - as in multi-billion dollar - potential exits.
But the modern technology world is just not built for this model of investing. Readily accessible, off-the shelf, open-source development tools COMBINED with the ability to launch a product extremely cheaply via creative social marketing makes it easy to build a big-time technology company these days without a lot of money.
The result? Most of the highest ROI opportunities we see need just a little money – sometimes just a few hundred thousand dollars or less – to “ignite” their business models.
Our favorites? Entrepreneurs that identify over-looked market needs, and then utilized out-of-the box creativity to inexpensively develop and market products and services that address those needs.
And oh yes, our real, favorite entrepreneurs are doing all this, AND are lucky, lucky, lucky to boot.
Straightforward, but of course not easy. But in a world of historically low interest rates, significant inflation risk and of a public stock market still trading on mostly a 10-year flat run, it is by far the best game in town.
2. Foreigners, More Than Ever, Are Investing Heavily in U.S. Technology Companies. Best evidenced by the Russian investment firm Digital Sky Technologies and their investments in Facebook, Zynga, and Groupon, foreign investors more than ever before are placing bets on early-stage U.S. technology companies. This is driven by a number of factors, not the least of which is that the relative liquidity in the world has shifted RADICALLY away from the U.S. to the rest of the world.
As importantly, because of the rise of global social networking - Facebook now has 300 million non-U.S. members – overseas investors can now connect faster and more transparently with deals and entrepreneurs than ever before.
And these investors feel that they can be higher value-added. Both in terms of outsourced development assistance and because the very act of their investing serves as the kind of high-profile validation that used to be the domain of only the most prestigious venture capital firms.
3. A Quick and Early Exit is By Far the Desired Outcome for Both the Entrepreneur and the Investor. The dirty little secret of modern business, best articulated by Scott Shane in his brilliant book, “The Illusions of Entrepreneurship,” that the real money in entrepreneurship is made in SELLING a company, not running it.
Venture capitalist Basil Peters describes this best as the Early Exit, “Today, the optimum financial strategy for most technology entrepreneurs is to raise money from angels and plan for an early exit to a large company in just a few years for under $30 million."
So look for companies with quick and early exit potential and with the smartest angels and foreign investors behind them, and you too can be a winner in this new boom.
Looking for Opportunities Now?
Each year, Growthink reviews hundreds of startup and emerging company opportunities and selects those with the best management teams, market opportunities, and financial prospects.
To learn more about opportunities we are following now, click here.
To your success,
If you want to raise capital,
then you need a professional
business plan. This video
shows you how to finish your
business plan in 1 day.
to watch the video.
"The TRUTH About
Most entrepreneurs fail to raise
venture capital because they
make a really BIG mistake when
approaching investors. And on
the other hand, the entrepreneurs
who get funding all have one thing
in common. What makes the difference?
to watch the video.
The Internet has created great
opportunities for entrepreneurs.
Most recently, a new online funding
phenomenon allows you to quickly
raise money to start your business.
to watch the video.
"Barking orders" and other forms of
intimidating followers to get things
done just doesn't work any more.
So how do you lead your company
to success in the 21st century?
to watch the video.