• Zombie Factories

    We like to give out a Zombie of the Year award in our annual Unicorn Awards. The Unicorn Awards are the far more lucrative and weighty cousin of the upcoming Spotlight Awards (are you going?).

    In 2013 Danielle Morrill wrote Zombie Startups and the gem is stuck in the middle, which I just noticed called out in this post today.

    Are you a Zombie Startup? Here are the top 9 hints that you may be running one:

    How do you know if you startup is falling into this trap? Here are some hints:

    • You don’t want to get out of bed in the morning
    • You don’t want to go out in public for fear you’ll have to explain what you do
    • You haven’t hit 10% week-over-week growth on any meaningful metric (revenue, active users, etc)
    • You’re working on the same idea after 12+ months and still haven’t launched
    • You’ve launched a consumer service and have less than 2% week-over-week growth in signups
    • You’ve launched an enterprise service and have less than 2% week-over-week growth in revenue pipeline
    • You are the CEO and hole yourself up in the offices so you don’t have to talk to employees and can read TechCrunch
    • You’ve hired consultants to figure out revenue, culture, or product in a company of less than 10 people
    • You’re at SXSW right now reading this post and trying not to cry

    I think there is a Canadian context here as well. We have two more hints:

    1. You will miss payroll if you don’t get your SR&ED cheque in the next two weeks, and this has happened more than once.
    2. You spend more time meeting with and filling out forms for government economic development agencies than you do speaking to customers, angel investors and/or venture investors.

    Being a zombie startup in 2008 was one thing… Frankly that was probably good enough to just pass the time, but if you are treading water today you are missing out on one of the most founder-friendly and lucrative financing environments we’ve ever seen.

  • Products are Lines, not Dots

    I see a lot of founders and startups struggling with explaining what they are trying to accomplish. Many are just focused on how they are going to do the next thing. The next release, the next pitch, the next campaign.

    Releasing a product is not an accomplishment in and of itself. Launching isn’t either. Getting a feedback and signs of traction never quite feels like enough.

    Why are you doing all this?

    Mark Suster wrote an important blog post in 2010: Invest in Lines, Not Dots.

    The tl;dr: Relationships are important.

    It’s easy to think that when you meet someone once, you’ve MET them. It just isn’t true. A relationship is that line that is formed across a series of encounters.

    Products are no different and the sins that we commit are the same as those Mark describes.

    Mark says:

    “[ . . ] I tell entrepreneurs the following: Meet your potential investors early.  Tell them you’re not raising money yet but that you will be in the next 6 months or so.”

    Screen Shot 2015-01-20 at 1.01.31 PMIn a world of fast iteration and Running Lean, it’s easy to think of products as the entire picture. It’s one big giant dot that we hope brings us success and a mass of users.

    It’s never like that though.

    Your Product  is a relationship with your users. Like Mark (and the rest of us), Users invest in Lines, not Dots.

    When you have that first meeting you need to not only make a good impression, but you have to tell everyone where you are going. We call it Vision.

    Release Early, Then Release With Purpose

    Fast product iteration is important: You listen to users, you monitor and assess metrics and you make changes that bring your product closer to perfection.

    Perfection is not what you need: Purpose is. Why are you releasing and why should users and customers continue to invest in you and your product with their time, money and feedback?

    In looking for perfection (product/market fit?) it’s easy to think it is something that *just happens* and then you are instantly successful. It’s never like that. It takes work and focus, and a vision for how the future is going to be different for your customers because of it.

    Screen Shot 2015-01-20 at 1.23.18 PM

    Vision is what defines the future you see for you and your customers. It’s why they try things for the first time and it’s why they will stick around even when you don’t quite get things right.

    It’s easy to miss and it’s easy to get bogged down in the day to day, but if you have it and if you can articulate a vision, then you have a better business plan than you could ever put in a doc or deck.

    When you iterate on your product and deliver releases, it should be about taking the customer closer to your vision for your product and why it’s important.

     

     

     

  • An Investor’s Rendition of ‘Twas the Night Before Christmas

    by Travis Cocke (sourced from Seth Levine)

    ‘Twas the night before Christmas, when all through the land
    Not a banker was lending, not even “Gold-Man”
    Foreclosures were hung by the courthouse with care
    In hopes that Hank Paulson soon would be there.

    The Bankers were nestled all snug in their beds
    While visions of bonuses danced in their heads.
    And my teachers in their offices and me in my room
    Had just settled an argument about the depth of the gloom

    When out on Wall Street there arose such a clatter
    I sprang from my bed to see what was the matter
    Away to the computer I flew like a flash!
    Started up the ticker, and threw up some cash…

    The i-banks on the brink of another bad blow
    Sell all your stocks and look out below!
    When, what to my wondering eyes should appear?
    Green on the screen as the Fed interfered

    With the same old chairman, so ready to lend
    I knew in moment it must Big Ben
    More dovish than Greenspan, his governors they came
    And he printed and lended and called them by name!

    “Now Lockhardt! now, Lacker! now, Evans and Plosser!
    On, Geithner! On, Fisher! On Yellen and Krosner!
    To the Treasury! To the Mile High Mint!
    Now print away! Print away! C’mon now print!”

    As credit spreads that before defaults do fly
    When they meet with an obstacle, they drop green from the sky
    So up to the Capitol the governors they flew,
    With a chopper full of money, and Rick Wagoner, too.

    And then, in an e-mail I read from a friend
    Capitalism was dead, and this was the end
    As I sold my last stock and started to cry
    On the TV came Buffett and he said “Time to buy.”

    He was bullish on stocks, from Nike to CVX
    And his portfolio was tarnished with options and CDS
    A bundle of buyouts he had flung on his back
    And he looked like a genius, just following his knack

    His stocks how they fell! His returns how scary…
    Yet his cash-how it swelled! And His letters so merry…

    He was chubby and cheerful, a right jolly investor
    And I smiled when I saw him, despite my dreadful semester
    A twinkle in his eye and the use of his cash
    Soon gave me the know that stocks wouldn’t crash

    He spoke not a word, but went straight to his work
    Shoring up balance sheets, and buying preferreds
    And laying his finger aside of his nose
    And giving a nod, UP & UP Berkshire rose!

    He sprang to his NetJet, to his pilot gave a whistle,
    And away they all flew like the down of a thistle.
    But I heard him exclaim, as he drove into the sky,
    “Happy Trading to all, and to all a good buy!”

    Featured Image by Kevin Dooley

  • Founders & Funders: Nov 18, 2014

    It’s that time again – to bringing together the people that start emerging technology businesses and the people that fund them, early.

    Who should attend?

    Uhm, yeah. Founders & Funders.

    Founders

    You are a founder of a emerging technology company or a technology-enabled company. You are actively raising a round of capital or starting to think about raising your next round. Feels like we’re leaning to Seed and Series A – basically if you’re name is Tobi or Ryan most investors know who you are 😉

    Funders

    Space for funders will be limited. We have room for approximately 60 people. And we like to keep the ratio of 3:1 founders to funders. This means we roughly have room for 15 funders. We’re going to be picky, the target will be Seed and Series A.

    Why should you attend?

    Relatively small and intimate gathering of other emerging technology company founders and the people that fund them. The funder mix ranges from individuals that write first and very small cheques to larger institutional funds.

    • Social event – no formal pitches
    • Community is the framework – chance to talk to other founders about the current fundraising climate

    What to expect?

    It is a chance to have a bite to eat and a drink with other founders and investors that are actively investing in Toronto companies. It’s a chance to figure what has worked for others, to figure out which investors you want to spend more time with, and just connect.

    How do I attend?

    Submissions will end on Nov 10.

  • How we raised a $2MM seed round in 2 weeks

    This is a guest post by Mike Katchen, founder of Wealthsimple, Canada’s first online investment manager. He recently moved back from San Francisco where he led marketing at 1000memories (YC S’10, acquired by Ancestry.com).

    In May, we raised a $2MM seed round for Wealthsimple (and didn’t really tell anyone). It took us 2.5 weeks to raise from 15 amazing investors in Toronto including David Ossip, Dan Debow, and Roger Martin. Here are a few tips based on what I think we did right.

    Note: Table stakes for seed rounds are a good idea (in a massive market) and a killer team.

    1. Find your lead investor early.
    Most first-time founders I know make the same mistake. They think that fundraising is about convincing investors of the merits of your idea and the strength of your team. Unfortunately, that’s bullsh*t. Investors follow the herd. They care more about who else is investing than what you do as a company. When you start to fundraise, laser-focus on getting your first investor. Don’t go broad until you have your lead lined up.

    I met our lead investor the day we started fundraising. He is an icon in the financial services industry. We got him on board through a combination of special terms and appealing to him emotionally about building his industry “legacy”. It took 2 meetings over 1 week to get him to sign. Once he was in, it took 1.5 weeks to close the round.

    2. Your angel investors don’t have to be in tech.
    We closed our round with 14 angel investors, only 5 are from tech. The other 9 are from financial services. I see lots of entrepreneurs focus exclusively on local tech angels and VCs like those listed in this great post by David Crow. That’s a mistake. Look for successful entrepreneurs and executives in your industry – you’re likely to find a sizeable group of potential investors that actually know your business. A few industries with strong local investors include real estate, financial services, professional services, and healthcare.

    3. Most decks suck. Make yours good.
    A compelling deck is short, clear, and well designed. If you have a solid story (don’t forget the table stakes above), then tell it in 4-5 pages: (1) what you do, (2) market size, (3) team, (4) growth plan, (5, optional) competition. Here’s our pitch. You can also find great examples at bestpitchdecks.com. Keep it short, pretty, and exciting.

    4. Set a deadline.
    Fundraising has a nasty habit of dragging on. As soon as you have your lead investor, set a closing date (2-3 weeks out) and use that to drive urgency with other investors. You don’t have to stick to it, but you’ll find that things move way faster with a deadline.

    5. Put some money in yourself (if you can). It goes a long way.
    The Wealthsimple team were the first investors in our seed round. If you can afford it, investing in your own round goes a long way. It signals to investors that you are committed, aligned, and will be a responsible steward of their capital. Surprisingly few teams invest in their own rounds so it can also help you stand out.

    Let me know if you have any tips to add or want to discuss fundraising strategies – always happy to chat. You can reach me at [email protected] or @mkatchen

  • We Should Be Building Empires

    logo
    Last chance to get your tickets to this incredible event!

    We don’t build a lot of empires around here.

    Empires are big, they grow fast, and they use momentum to determine where to apply resources. Empires don’t respond, they set the new rules.

    Carnegie. Rockefeller. Gates. Zuckerberg.

    Lutke. McDerment. Baker.

    We’ve had empires come and go, but we haven’t built the sort that stick around for 100 or 1,000 years.

    We need to startup building empires.

    In 2008 we held a conference in Toronto. Some of you might remember it. We were going to call it something like StartupNation, StartupConf or something else,. but we decided to call it StartupEmpire. Why?

    We thought it was important to put a stake in the ground about the kinds of companies Toronto startups needed to think about building: Bigger, badder and more resilient.

    Next week we are re-doing it. StartupEmpire is taking place in Halifax this time, a startup community that is in much the state that Toronto’s was 5+ years ago. It’s time to focus our gaze out in to the world and to say ‘”I’m coming for you.”

    You can hear from some of the most ambitious and experienced entrepreneurs in Canada right now including April Dunford, John Baker, Dan Martell, Bala Kamallakharan and a lot more.

    Get your tickets now, there are only about a dozen left!

  • Making Canada SAFE

    It has been 9 months since PG announced the YC SAFE (Simple Agreement for Future Equity). The Winter 14 batch included Canadians: Taplytics, Send With Us, Piinpoint, Minuum, Gbatteries and others. (There have been an increasing number of Canadian companies since Chris Golda and Michael Montano headed down in 2008. Maybe there should be a new drinking game: how many Canadian YC companies can you name?). This usually means a trickle down effect of culture, term sheets and deal structure. But I haven’t seen a SAFE used in the wild.

    Until now.

    Thanks to Aaron and Cobi at  Taplytics, Dan Debow, Jesse Rodgers at Creative Destruction Lab and Tom Houston at Dentons for providing a working draft for Canadian companies of Cap, No Discount SAFE.

    I have also seen angel deals using Laberge Weinstein and Cognition LLP that are using the SAFE as the starting points Canadian companies (h/t @ddebow). It seems like we might have a functional alternative to convertible debt.

     

  • You are supposed to break the rules

    Great entrepreneurs truly do not care about the rules.

    If you haven’t noticed, there are a lot of rules.

    Some come and go with the times, others never seem to go away:

    • You are supposed to dress a certain way
    • Finance your company this way
    • You pitch deck should look like THIS
    • You, in your industry, with your product, it’s not the way it’s done

    And there are the big rules, the regulations:

    Great companies are built by breaking rules. We call them ‘norms’ but they are rigid and they feel real until someone destroys our idea about ‘how it’s done’.

    • Marc Benioff decided to sell software as a service when everyone believed they had to install software on premise
    • Steve Jobs built expensive but beautiful machines when every other hardware company believed they had to be cheap.

    and so many more.

    And it’s happening, there are more great stories of breaking the rules and the amazing companies that result:

    • Figure1 is breaking the rules in Healthcare
    • Wattpad has done away with not only publishers, but with most of the old creative process

    Who else comes to mind?

    Sometimes a pure rethinking of technology can completely rewrite the rulebook. Bitcoin is readily looked at as an alternative to fiat currency, something that was unthinkable before a purely electronic currency was conceived.

    Breaking the rules goes by many different names like ‘disruption’ and ‘innovation’ but they all start with someone rethinking an old way of doing business. When we look back on what they’ve accomplished we often like to call these rule breakers ‘clever’, ‘brilliant’ or ‘strategic’. The truth is that they didn’t get ahead by adding complexity, or navigating what existed. Most of the time they were able to get ahead by pushing aside the rules and focusing on the opportunity.

    The rules almost always come to mind later.

    As the world becomes more and more ‘wired’ I believe that startups will run in to regulatory hurdles more and more often. Like uber, AirBnB, Lyft and others, the rules sometimes represent a massive opportunity to create efficiencies in a place everyone else thought was off limits.

    There are little rules, and there a big rules. No matter which stage a company is at, it’s the rule breakers who get noticed, they are the ones who crack a market open and feed off the the plump center.

  • One Post to Rule Them All

    Hard to believe that it has been 21 months since I wrote Don’t Panic: A Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Toronto Startup Ecosystem. There are parts of this post that are a little dated but it generally holds up as a meaningful introduction to the Toronto/Waterloo startup scene. The goal is to provide a curated list, it will not be comprehensive. 

    If I’ve missed anything, add a comment or ping me directly @davidcrow and I’ll make updates on the fly.

    People & Companies

    There are so many people and companies, it is hard to know what is important to whom. I will do a separate posting with the companies and founders that I’ve been following. The challenge is that this is a long, long list and there are a lot of amazing companies in Toronto.

    Angel Investors

    Institutional Investors

    There are a lot institutional investors that are active in Toronto. Entrepreneurs need to do a little diligence on their investors. You should be trying to figure out what type of companies do they typically invest in? How big is their fund? How much is unallocated? Who else have they invested in?

    Foreign Institutional Investors

    Banking/Financial Services

    Accounting/Tax/SR&ED/Bookkeeping/Reporting

    Legal Firms & Lawyers

    Journalists

    I think the biggest piece of advice is that generally the “we’re a startup and we launched” it just a shitty pitch to any journalist. You need to spend some time building a better message understanding who these journalists are, why their audience might possibly care about your story. This is a list of journalists that write about emerging technology companies. But you should also seek out journalists in your vertical or segment, this might might include moms, marketers or anything.

    Recruiters

    Office Space

    We all need office space. I have spent hours looking at listings on Craigslist, Kijiji and other sources.

    Maker Space

    Maker spaces are very different than flexible lease office space.

    Educational Programs

    Application Development Shops

    Design Shops

    PR & Marcomm Agencies

    These are the Toronto-based PR Agencies that I’ve worked with or seen their work first hand. I probably need to add a section for other international PR firms particularly NYC , SF and the UK. This can be a very expensive and very difficult for founders that have not found product/market fit.

    Coworking/Flexible Lease Office Space/Accelubators

    We can call it what you want. Incubators, accelerators, cyclotrons. It doesn’t matter. The activities range from education to local economic development to flexible leasing to coworking. They are a necessary part of the ecosystem. But it feels like at times rather than starting a “real company”, that many have decided that the path of rent some real estate and attract others with a few programatic offerings is a better business model (at least there is a defined market with a key pain that can be monetized). Let’s call it what is is, it is office space with benefits or office space ++ (office space # for you Microsoft peeps). The benefits range from flexible leases to access to advisors to educational programs to investment capital. Do your research. Focus on the outputs, i.e., the companies that have graduated from each.

    Events

    There are a limited number of Canadian events that matter. There are the big events. They are big, they are busy, and not a lot of business happens at the event. But you can be guaranteed that most of the major players above will attend and you can reduce the number of trips to connect with people. You should be going to events that your potential customers attend. I am pretty sure unless you are an investor, service provider looking to service the startup industry that you shouldn’t be focused on these events. They are interesting social opportunities to connect with these groups in a concentrated fashion. You should also be actively looking for those same opportunities in SF, NYC, Boston, UK and around the globe.

    If you’re going to travel and you want to stay in Canada there are 3 events where you can bump into most startups, founders and investors including some from outside Canada. These events are worth traveling for, but you need to have significant motivation/reason, like you are speaking or you have arranged a meeting with a specific individual.

    The rest of the conferences are regional in nature but they should be considered mandatory if you are looking to connect in one shot. These events include most of the local ecosystems, i.e., Montreal, Ottawa, Alberta, Waterloo, etc.

    There are smaller local events that happen more regularly. But I am not an expert at these events anymore. I recommend just subscribing to StartupDigest for a great weekly calendar email (you can also check out our Events page). Where are people finding really great opportunities to connect?

  • Former MaRS CFO saw problems in 2010

    scientists-have-figured-out-how-much-radiation-would-hit-astronauts-traveling-to-mars

    The following is a guest post from Mark McQueen, originally written on Wellington Financial’s blog


    Thanks to the fine folks here at StartupNorth, there has been a vibrant online discussion over several days regarding the “problems” with the Ontario government’s MaRS program. As of this morning, there have been over 300 contributions from a variety of players in the ecosystem, all prompted by the observations of Dan Debow, a highly successful local entrepreneur (Workbrain and Rypple).

    Before we get to the painful stuff, it must be said that there are many dedicated people within the MaRS organization and on the MaRS Board (such as Lawrence Bloomberg, Dr. John Evans and Richard Ivey) who are sincerely trying to help make the world a better place. The fact that some talented and hard-working former VCs have joined the staff in recent years speaks to the maturation of the organization and the shrinking number of real VC jobs available in Canada; but I have always believed that MaRS’ provincial benefactors (starting with former Premier Dalton McGuinty) saw the operation as a very helpful monument to their interest in innovation, first and foremost (see representative prior post “Brutal venture capital stats for H1 2007 part 3” Sept. 12-07).

    The kinds of complaints you hear about MaRS are largely the same, and generally foreign to the buzz around Waterloo’s Communitech. That shouldn’t be the case.

    14 years ago, I would trek down to Waterloo every few months and visit with the team there, back when it occupied a small space beside a Sunoco station. This was long before the Tannery project came together, and people like Paul Weber, Jane Jantzi, Greg Barratt and Judy Geraghty worked cheek by jowl in a couple thousand square feet. At its roots, Communitech was about helping entrepreneurs develop their business plans, find a customer, meet some mentors, and hopefully raise some Angel funding before charging off into the wild blue yonder. That’s why its early Board and network of supporters was made up of people like John Whitney, Tom Beynon, Jim Balsillie and Michael Stork. Folks who were integral to the K-W start-up ecosystem in some way or another.

    Even today, the Communitech Board is dominated by entrepreneurs and connectors, such as Desire2Learn’s John Baker, Ali Asaria (CEO, Tulip Retail), Dave Caputo (CEO, Sandvine), Joseph Fung (Co-founder and CEO of TribeHR) and Carol Leaman (CEO, Axonify), among others. There are no spots reserved for Big Pharma or Mega Bank. Not that Canadian bank CEOs are not by definition successful in business; it’s just that the personal network they bring to the table aren’t the local innovation entrepreneurs. Which means you as a Board member have no ability to personally gauge whether or not your “incubator” is effectively serving its denizens or would-be clients. I’m sure the governance is second to none, but…

    That’s a minor example of why Communitech has always worked in my view, and MaRS doesn’t — at least not based upon the financial resources deployed in each case. In 2012, I gave a speech to the Canadian Business Magazine Leadership Forum, and practically begged our governments to create a Communitech-like incubator in Toronto. I suppose that reflected my resignation that while MaRS was many things, it wasn’t succeeding — ten years later — at what the innovation ecosystem sees as its core mandate. Rather than try and turn the oiltanker around, you do what innovators do: start with a clean sheet of paper.

    That’s why Salesforce.com exists — because someone saw what SAP couldn’t do.

    Which brings us back to the StartUpNorth chat on Facebook. The first comment that caught my eye was from an entrepreneur named Bob Seeman from Clera Inc. This is what he had to say:

    Our company was a tenant of MaRS, and the facilities were terrible by basic lab standards and hilariously overpriced. We are globally regarded as world authorities on a rarefied part of neuroscience that my father discovered and for which he was nominated for the Nobel prize. Despite this, MaRS proclaims to have the ability to offer taxpayer-funded advice from bureaucrats to companies like ours. That is comical. Even 99.9+% of neuro-pharmacologists around the world will admit to not understanding my father’s groundbreaking work in dopamine receptors and its effects on the brain. The idea that bureaucrats can offer us advice is absurd.

    There are two sad realities here. First, that even the Ontario government can’t find marshal the talent to support ground-breaking work in science. Second, that even if you do chin up to the Bay Street real estate lease rates that MaRS demands, the labs are substandard. Perhaps Mr. Seeman’s situation would have been too much of a specialized challenge for even Communitech to have be useful to, but let’s hear from Charles Plant, a former CFO of MaRS:

    I have spent over thirty years in the tech startup community including 4 years working at MaRS, ending as CFO in 2010, 2011. I have a great deal of respect for the people who work at MaRS as they are trying to do what they think is right and I have hesitated to speak out as I don’t want to offend many friends who are still there. These comments though are things I said when I was at MaRS and have continued to say since.

    As with all organizations, MaRS does some things well and could improve how they do other things. The problem with MaRS is in its design. There is no customer feedback loop.

    Companies get feedback through revenue from customers who do or don’t buy their products. MaRS gets funding from the government to give services away for free so customers don’t give feedback in terms of payment. Real estate development companies get feedback from lessors and from lenders who deny funding unless customers agree to lease. MaRs though, gets tenants and funding through the government so once again there is no feedback loop.

    The problem with MaRS is exacerbated by the fact that there are absolutely no tech entrepreneurs on its board of directors and very few if any in senior management. Thus its leaders are not deeply connected into the tech community and they can’t get direct feedback that way.

    Communitech is successful because it has a membership of tech companies, a board populated with tech entrepreneurs, and a senior management team with tech startup experience. While it gets lots of funding from the government it gets its feedback from members and thus know what needs it must meet in order to keep them as members.

    MaRS needs a better feedback loop with its customers than a few surveys every year and a few blogs like this. It needs tech entrepreneurs on the board, on the senior management team and a membership that can give it feedback where the current feedback loop is missing. Maybe through a membership it could address the transparency and performance concerns that many in the community have expressed in this blog and elsewhere.

    That says it all, and confirms what many have been saying for years. Good people, wrong model.

    Let’s sell the fancy real estate and start over.