• Hostopia acquired for $124M

    Hostopia (TSX: H) has entered into an agreement to be acquired by Deluxe Corporation (NYSE: DLX) for $124M. Hostopia, with operations in Toronto ON, Miramichi NB, and Ft. Lauderdale FL is in the business of providing private label web, email, and application hosting. Customers include ISPs, telcos, cablecos, and domain registrars. Hostopia had received venture funding from Telus Ventures.

    Hat tip to Chris Pyper, Cofounder and Developer of MyWebVine.

  • 17 Mistakes Start-ups Make

    John Osher discussed What Not To Do: 17 most common mistakes start-ups make and how to avoid them in Entrepreneur Magazine. Each of the mistakes are a topic on their own, for example, I?ve trying to provide examples of high level market and financial analysis. Mistakes 1-8 focus on the market and financial requirements of a startup. Mistakes 9-10 focus on hiring and corporate management. Mistake 11 is about product design and technology. Mistakes 12-17 are about focus and vision. It is a very interesting read for building an appropriate mind-set for entrepreneurs.

    1. Failing to spend enough time researching the business idea to see if it’s viable. "This is really the most important mistake of all. They say 9 [out] of 10 entrepreneurs fail because they’re undercapitalized or have the wrong people. I say 9 [out] of 10 people fail because their original concept is not viable. They want to be in business so much that they often don’t do the work they need to do ahead of time, so everything they do is doomed. They can be very talented, do everything else right, and fail because they have ideas that are flawed."
    2. Miscalculating market size, timing, ease of entry and potential market share. "Most new entrepreneurs get very excited over an idea and don’t look for the truth about how many people will want to buy it. They put together financial projections as part of a presentation to pump up their investors. They say, ‘The market size is 50 million people that could use this product, and if I could only sell to 2 percent of them, I’d be selling a million pieces.’ But 2 percent of a market is a lot. Most products sell way less than 1 percent."
    3. Underestimating financial requirements and timing. "They set their financial requirements based on Mistake 1, and they go ahead and make a commitment to this much office space and this many computers, and hire a vice president of sales, and so on. Before they know it, based on sales projections that were wrong to start with, they have created costs that require those projections to be met. So they run out of money."
    4. Overprojecting sales volume and timing. "They have already miscalculated the size of the market. Now they overproject their portion of it. They often say ‘There are 200 million homes, and I need to sell [to] x number of them.’ When you break it down, though, a much smaller number of those are really sales prospects. That makes it impossible to make their sales projections."
    5. Making cost projections that are too low. "Their cost projections are always too low. Part of the reason is that they project much higher sales. There are also unknown reasons that always come out that usually make costs higher than planned. So on top of everything, their margins are now lower."
    6. Hiring too many people and spending too much on offices and facilities. "Now you have lower sales, higher costs and too much overhead. These are the things that you see every day in companies that fail. And they all grow out of that first mistake: failing to research the size and viability of the opportunity."
    7. Lacking a contingency plan for a shortfall in expectations. "Even if you’re realistic in your estimates to start, there are things that happen when you start a new business. Your sales ideas may be no good; bank rates may go up; there may be a shipping strike. These aren’t the result of poor planning, but they happen. More often than not, entrepreneurs just feel that something will come along when they need it. They don’t have contingency plans for it not working out at the size and time they want."
    8. Bringing in unnecessary partners. "There are certain partners you need. For instance, you often need money, so you’re going to need money partners. But too many times, the guy with the idea takes on all his friends as partners. Many people don’t provide strategic advantages and don’t warrant ownership. But they’re all going to get 25 percent of the company. It’s totally unnecessary, and it’s a mistake. Before people are made partners, they have to earn it."
    9. Hiring for convenience rather than skill requirements. "In my first business or two, I hired relatives. It was easy to do, but in many cases, they were the wrong people [for the job]. And it’s hard to fire people, especially if they’re relatives or friends. More time needs to be spent handpicking people based on skill requirements. You really need super-skilled people who can wear more than one hat. It just bogs you down when you hire people who can’t do the job."
    10. Neglecting to manage the entire company as a whole. "You see this happen all the time. They’ll spend half their time doing something that represents 5 percent of their business. You have to have a view of your whole company. But too often, the person running it loses that view. They get involved in a part, and they don’t manage the whole. Whether I do this product or that product, whether I hire somebody, [I consider] how they [will] fit long term and short term in the big picture. Constantly try to see your big picture."
    11. Accepting that it’s "not possible" too easily rather than finding a way. "I had an engineer who was a very good engineer, but with every toy we developed, he would say, ‘You can’t do it that way.’ I had to be careful not to accept this too easily. I had to look further. If you’re an entrepreneur, you’re going to break new ground. A lot of people are going to say it’s not possible. You can’t accept that too easily. A good entrepreneur is going to find a way."
    12. Focusing too much on sales volume and company size rather than profit. "Too much of your management is often based on volume and size. So many entrepreneurs want to say ‘I have a company that’s this big, with this many people, this many square feet of space, and this much sales.’ It’s too much [emphasis] on how fast and big you can build a business rather than how much profit it can make. Bankers and investors don’t like this. Entrepreneurs are so into creating and building, but they also have to learn to become good [businesspeople]."
    13. Seeking confirmation of your actions rather than seeking the truth. "This often happens: You want to do something, so you talk about it with people who work for you. You talk to [your] family and friends. But you’re only looking for confirmation; you’re not looking for the truth. You’re looking for somebody to tell you you’re right. But the truth always comes out. So we [test] our products, and we listen to what [the testers] say. We give much more value to the truth than to people saying what we’re doing is great."
    14. Lacking simplicity in your vision. "Many entrepreneurs go in too many directions at once and do not execute anything well. Rather than focusing on doing everything right to sell to their biggest markets, they divide the attention of their people and their time, trying to do too many things at [one time]. Then their main product isn’t done properly because they’re doing so many different things. They have an idea and say they’re going to sell it to Wal-Mart. Then they say they’re going to sell to [the] Home Shopping Network. And then the gift market looks good. And so on."
    15. Lacking clarity of your long-term aim and business purpose. "You should have an idea of what your long-term aim is. It doesn’t mean that won’t change, but when you aim an arrow, you have to be aiming at a target. This [concept will] often come up when people a
      sk ‘How do I pick a product?’ The answer depends on what you’re trying to do. If you’re trying to [create] a billion-dollar company with this product, it may not have a chance. But if you’re trying to make a $5 million company, it can work. Or if you’re trying to create a company [in which] family members can be employed, it can work. Clarity of your business purpose is very important [but] is often not really part of the thought process."
    16. Lacking focus and identity. "This was written from the viewpoint of building the company as a valuable entity. The company itself is also a product. Too many companies try to go after too many targets at once and end up with a potpourri rather than a focused business entity with an identity. When you try to make a business, it’s very important to maintain a focus and an identity. Don’t let it become a potpourri, or it loses its power. For instance, you say, ‘We’re already selling to Kmart, so we might as well make a toy because Kmart buys toys.’ If you do that, the company becomes weaker. A company needs to be focused on what it is. Then its power builds from that."
    17. Lacking an exit strategy. "Have an exit plan, and create your business to satisfy that plan. For instance, I am thinking I might run my new business for two years and then get out of it. I think it’s an opportunity to make a tremendous amount of money for two years, but I’m not sure [whether] it’s proprietary enough to stop the competition from getting in. So I’m in with an exit strategy of doing it for two years and then winding down. I won’t commit to long-term leases, and after the first year, we’ll start watching the marketplace very closely and start watching inventories.
  • Zoomii – Book Browsing

    Chris Thiessen just launched Zoomii, a new site for browsing best selling books available on Amazon. Chris has been building Zoomii for 16 months and he did it all with his own two hands. Quite a long haul working alone, so he must be feeling great to put it out there and get some feedback. Here is Chris on what inspired Zoomii and how he got it done:

    “Because I love bookstores. Spending afternoons wandering the shelves. Happening across great books I didn’t even know existed. But it’s an experience I never found online. Online bookstores are wonderful. They’ve got amazing prices, huge selections, and they’re open all the time. If you know exactly what you want, they’re perfect. But somehow I kept coming back to the bookstore just to browse. Zoomii is my attempt to bring online as much of the real bookstore experience as possible.”

    Will a new map like interface be enough to draw visitors who will then click through and make purchases on Amazon? That is the bet. No doubt, nice businesses can be built leveraging affiliate programs like Amazon Associates. Check out Zoomii and let us know in the comments if you came across any books worth buying while browsing the shelves.

  • It's not you, it's me!

    We are working away on a few new things, I have been wrangling some new co-authors and have been generally thinking about the direction of StartupNorth. It feels a lot like what Heri has been thinking about lately.

    I’ll be back in action soon, swear.

    In the meantime, get your butt back to work. That software isn’t going to write itself, and those pitch decks are terrible, just so you know.

  • $205M Ontario Venture Capital Fund

    Funding for emerging Ontario companies dropped from $1.5 billion in 2000 to $236 million in 2007. The number of Series A rounds has reached a 12 year low. Clearly there is a problem, one with long term implications. And so the Ontario Government has stepped up to the plate, investing $90M into a fund of funds in partnership with OMERS Capital Partners, RBC Capital Partners, Manulife Financial, Business Development Bank of Canada, and TD Bank Financial Group for a total commitment of $205M.

    This fund of funds will be managed by TD Capital Private Equity Investors who will in turn spread the $205M across Ontario venture capital and private equity groups who will be responsible for making direct investments.

    A minimum of 80% of the funds will be invested into Ontario companies. 75% of funds will be allocated to venture funds who invest in emerging companies, the remainder being set aside for private equity funds who invest in mid-market companies. It is anticipated that the fund will be invested over four years starting this year. All this translates to approximately $123M to be invested in emerging Ontario startups.

    “The decline in Ontario venture capital has coincided with greatly lowered investment by institutions such as pension funds and insurance companies. In 2000, institutional investors represented 21 per cent of venture financings. This has dropped to one per cent or less in the period from 2005 to 2007.”

    It is rumored that the capital co-invested by the other limited partners is secured by the Government of Ontario’s $90M. If this is true, what the Ontario Venture Capital Fund is really addressing is the unwillingness of Canadian institutional investors to continue supporting Ontario’s venture capital funds. It seems dismal returns have soured LPs on the asset class or perhaps the venture funds they had previously invested in.

    In the last three months two funds have closed rounds almost as large or larger than the OVCF. In March iNovia closed on a $107M fund and in May JLA closed on a $150M fund. Unfortunately, the $123M is likely to be spread across the same old funds. No one ever got fired for making the safe bet. The question is, what does an additional $20M in five preexisting funds do for Ontario? I would hazard to guess that the best possible result of the OVCF would be the creation of 1-2 new venture capital funds based in Ontario.

    Ever the optimist, I suggest we focus on the bright side, three good things might come of the OVCF:

    1. Institutional investors rediscover Ontario’s venture funds and pleased with returns from the OVCF decide to increase the amount of capital they commit for investment in early stage growth companies.

    2. $123M is invested over the next four years across 15-30 Ontario startups. Some of who might not have been able to raise money otherwise. More money = More startups.

    3. A new crop of venture investors emerge, with greater skill, luck, or just plain old good timing and reinvigorate the ecosystem, going on to raise new funds to provide all the growth capital Ontario startups need.

    Ultimately the onus is on Ontario’s entrepreneurs to build companies that can scale. Money is everywhere. 59 per cent of foreign venture capital invested in Canada is invested in Ontario. Ontario’s venture funds are only as good as the companies they invest in. So get back to work! There is $123M more now available to fund your startup.

  • Follow a Canadian Startup Story

    Michael Parkatti and Michael Marrone, both from Calgary, have recently gone to Cambridge, Massachusetts to join the latest group of startups at YCombinator.

    They will be keeping a diary on globeandmail.com as they go through the journey of building their new company.

    We have also arranged with the guys to do a series of interviews with them here on StartupNorth. The first interview will be done by Austin Hill. Keep an eye out for it.

  • Lessons in Social Media, with MediaScrape

    We have covered MediaScrape a few times, and when I joked that they might be the next Capazoo, their CEO came through with a great reference to Cocain.

    Well, they are back. Since this post is not an opinion piece, I will just link you to a recent Montreal Gazette article and quote a few bits. In the interest of presenting the other side of the startup-ecosystem argument, I present the one… the only…

    He’d rather make deals with media conglomerates and Silicon Valley giants over fancy lunches than share ideas over blogs or hobnob with venture capitalists at technology happy hours.

    He doesn’t go to local networking events where entrepreneurs talk about their projects and share feedback:
    “Why would I go? There’s no money – there’s no content at those things. I’m busy. I’m making deals. And the times I did go I just heard a lot of whining that there’s no money in Montreal.”
    He doesn’t have a blog where he logs his company’s progress, details its challenges, and invites dialog from the tech community, in the hopes of increasing his Google cred:
    “I don’t need to be a destination site. For us to use social media gimmicks, to drive traffic to our site would put us as competitors with our clients.
    “We’re a behind-the-scenes enabler.”

    Yet this hardly seems to faze Cavell. He doesn’t feel he needs to satisfy doubting bloggers.
    “Screw them,” he said. “We’re a private company. I don’t have to tell them shit.
    “Blogs are great for open-source editorials, but they’re no substitute for researched journalism.”
    One could chalk up Cavell’s philosophy to his lineage. He’s the son of Charles Cavell, the former head of what is today Quebecor World Inc., when it was still a mighty printer, and former chairman of tabloid chain Sun Media Corp.

    An in case you are wondering, yes: Comments are turned on.

  • NYC Seed versus IAF

    Wow, NYC Seed is an interesting fund focused on seed-stage technology companies in NYC. It sounds familiar to the IAF program by the Ontario Centres for Excellence.

    The NYC Seed fund is a joint venture between ITAC, New York City Investment Fund, The New York State Foundation for Science, Technology and Innovation, New York City Economic Development Corporation, and PolyTechnic University. In addition to investing up to $200,000 per startup, the fund aims to give entrepreneurs support via a network of "notable entrepreneurs, technologists and venture capitalists," and plans to help the companies it funds seek series A round funding when they reach that stage?

    The fund currently has $2 million under management.

    The Investment Accelerator Fund (IAF) is similiar, it allows up to $500,000 in the form of convertible debt for early-stage companies.

    Fund Requires
    NYC Seed
    • A team (2+ people) with a compelling idea that makes sense today.
    • Your team should be technically savvy, with members possessing a proven record of completing complex technology projects.
    • We will ask to review a prototype of your product.
    • Company must be based in NYC.
    IAF
    • Technologies or intellectual property (IP) the company intends to commercialize must have
      unique and protectable aspects that establish a sustainable competitive advantage
    • Full and unencumbered legal right to the commercial use of the company?s technology or IP
    • The products and services the company intends to bring to market must meet a defined
      market need and have a significant and sustainable advantage over competitors
    • The addressable market should be at least $20 million and clearly defined
    • The management team must have the skills and domain expertise to be successful,
      or be willing to replace or augment the team as necessary
    • A clear path to commercialization and a plausible plan to support it
    • The company must be incorporated, or be incorporated by the time of IAF investment
    • Total revenues should be less than $500k from the time of incorporation
    • Intend for at least 50% of salaried employees to be based in Ontario

    There?s not a huge difference in the funding, or the requirements. But the NYC Seed option just feels cleaner. The IAF eligibility requirements are verbose and at times a little obvious. The big difference might be in the size of the fund, NYC Seed is just $2M where IAF is a $29M fund. And the differences in focus, NYC Seed is focused strongly on ?software and web-oriented technologies?, the IAF fund is part of the Centre of Excellence for Communications and Information Technology covering diverse areas as wireless and wireline communications, the Internet, human-computer interaction, health and medicine, software design, network planning, education, security, among others.

    NYC Seed aims to provide ?entrepreneurs support via a network of "notable entrepreneurs, technologists and venture capitalists?. Very similar to the Business Mentorship and Entrepreneurship Program provided by MaRS.

    There?s a different feel in the web copy used to describe each program. The IAF program just feels more cumbersome. However, it offers many of the same advantages for Ontario companies.We need to do some work to help local entrepreneurs understand the availability, benefits and people at OCE to connect with John MacRitchie, Bryan Kanarens and Charles Plant.

    I think all entrepreneurs looking to raise funding should be able to answer the questions on the NYC Seed application form. My offer, any Ontario-based entrepreneur that wants a connection to OCE, just send me an email with the information from the NYC Seed application (see below) and I will forward it to John MacRitchie.

    1. What?s the idea?
    2. Why now?
    3. Who are your competitors?
    4. How will you make money?
    5. How will you use the funding?
    6. Please describe your product development roadmap. How long will it take to complete your first version?
    7. Please provide bios for each founder.
    8. Please provide 3 references for each founder.