How To Get Your Voice Mails Returned

Have you ever received a phone message which was so good you had to call back? The answer for most people is no and because most voice mails are terrible, it doesn’t take much to have your voice mail message stand out from the crowd. There are several great tactics which will help you maximize the chances that your voice mail messages will get returned. The first…

Is Phone The Preferred Method Of Communication?
If the person you’re calling prefers text or email communication, the telephone should be your last resort. If you do surveys or offers to customers or prospects, it’s a great touch to ask their preferred method of communication. Assuming phone is the preferred method of communication, you’ll need to make another assumption, which is…

Assume Your Message Will Not Be Returned
Many people think they’re too busy and too stressed and they’re just not going to even listen to voice mail messages, let alone return them. Not leaving a message, however, guarantees you’re never get a return call back. When you do, it’s always a nice surprise.

You Only Have One Goal When Leaving A Message
It’s easy to think of your goals for when you eventually speak with the person you’re trying to reach. That’s one step too far. When leaving a message, you have one goal and only one goal: to get your message returned. Keeping that in focus will improve your chances of getting your call returned.

Keep Your Message Less Than 30 Seconds
Your message should be like an elevator pitch: short and concise. Record and time yourself to get an idea what you can say in 20-30 seconds. Messages longer than 30 seconds are often deleted before being played in full.

The Message Rules
* Speak slowly
* Using your full name sounds more professional
* Spell your name if it is not common
* Sound friendly but not over the top
* Make the call about them

Give Them A Deadline
Saying “When you get a chance, give me a call” ensures your call won’t be returned. A good rule of thumb is four hours. If you call before 1:00 pm their time, you say, “When you get this message, please give me a call back by the end of the day.” If it’s after 1:00 pm, give a deadline of noon the following business day. Deadlines make people act. Those who don’t return your call are seldom worth chasing.

Repeat Your Number Twice – Differently
The first time you say your number, say the last four numbers as separate digits. 5047 is five zero four seven. The second time, say it as two two-digit numbers. 5047 is now fifty forty-seven. People hear and remember numbers differently and this improves the chance your call is returned.

Your Name Is Not A Reason For Them To Call You Back
Leave your name towards the end of the message.

End With The Sweetest Sound They Know
Dale Carnegie said a person’s name was the sweetest sound in the world to them. Finish your message with, “Thank you, _______.” The manners of the term “Thank you” and ending with their name define the end of the message and leaves them with a very positive feeling.

The type of message will vary depending on whether it’s a cold call, a response to an inquiry, or another call with someone you already know. Writing a general script for different scenarios will help you keep your focus. Testing, refining and testing again will give the best results for you, your company, and your industry.

What the Seed Funding Boom Means for Raising a Series A

This article is by First Round Partner Josh Kopelman.
Shortly after my first child was born, a friend gave me a copy of a book called “The Blessing of a Skinned Knee.” The book was full of contrarian wisdom. While most new parents' natural instincts are to improve their child’s life by removing obstacles, eliminating every potential source of pain, and helping them avoid adversity, the author of the book cautioned against overprotecting your child. Specifically, her thesis was that grit and resilience are extremely important life skills, and that it is important for people to learn how to overcome adversity (like a skinned knee) at a young age. That way they aren’t surprised when they inevitably experience obstacles at an older age.

There has never been a better time to be an entrepreneur. The number of seed-funded companies has quadrupled over the last four years. Over 200 Micro-VC firms have recently raised over $4 billion to invest at the earliest of stages. AngelList and FundersClub are growing in popularity. This all adds up to an awesome environment for entrepreneurs to get started. While it used to take weeks or months to raise a seed round, we’re now seeing some rounds get raised in a matter of days. Incubators and accelerators are pushing out larger numbers of companies — many getting term sheets within hours of walking off the demo day stage.

Ironically, I believe this current “Seed Surge” is unintentionally exacerbating a Series A Crunch. The current free flowing seed stage capital is giving lots of founders a false sense of confidence when going into their Series A. As Y Combinator President Sam Altman recently tweeted, “…seed money is so easy to raise in the current environment that founders assume they can just raise more money whenever they want…”

I recently worked with a team of talented, young founders who had raised their Series Seed financing without breaking a sweat. They had their choice of investors (I’m thankful they chose us) and their seed round was oversubscribed by 2x. They set out to raise their Series A round six months later — and they were in for a rude awakening. They ended up raising money, but not as much as they hoped for, it was much much harder than they expected and took months to cross the finish line. In the CEO's words, “Our seed round was super fast and hyper-competitive, and then we went into the A and started getting interrogated about our data. It was like graduating from elementary school straight into college.”

This experience mirrors that of many founders and startups I've seen both inside and outside the First Round community. I believe, across our industry, the unprecedented amounts of seed funding available to startups early on is setting them up for a tough reality check at Series A. You can call it a “crunch” or whatever you'd like, but it's significantly impacting companies' long-term success. Looking at this trend, I think the key is to stay lean and thoughtful after the initial money hits the bank.

Below is my thinking on why this is so critical, and what founders can do to avoid getting killed in the crunch.

What's Happening?

Seed funding is more plentiful and easier to raise today than I've ever seen during my career. What that means, ironically, is that this makes everything much harder. It sets an expectation — especially for young, first-time founders — that something they expected to be challenging is relatively easy, and this sets strong expectations for the next time they do it. The problem is that the number of A rounds hasn't changed. That amount of Series A capital HAS NOT increased. So, if you have 4x the number of companies with seed funding, that's 4x the players competing for the same money… making it 4x harder to raise an A round than it was five years ago.

I talk to a lot of founders about their Series A experience, and more often than not they say they were shocked by how hard it was to get a term sheet, how long the process took, and how much more complex the conversations got. As one CEO I spoke to noted, “The way that seed funding is all about your idea and team, Series A is all about the numbers. We weren't tracking cohorts or anything at all. I didn't know about LTV or CAC, or how to answer questions about the economics of scale. We walked into an interrogation that we weren't prepared for.”

One reason this happens is that founders mistake casual conversations with VCs for serious interest. Founders get a bunch of emails or calls from VCs, and then feel like they have to start their fundraising process immediately or miss out. This can (and does) lead to a lot of hasty pitching before companies are ready. And here's the deal on the VC side: both partners and associates are paid to get out there and build relationships with promising young companies, but there's no commitment. Investors want to make sure they get “the call” from founders when they begin fundraising — so they're motivated to send “happy vibes” in order to stay around the hoop. These happy vibes are heard by a founder’s “happy ears” — often leading the founder to draw false conclusions about the true level of potential VC interest.

Series A investors are always looking to catch a company before they run an official process, as it's almost always in their best interest to pre-empt a competitive funding situation. That means that they're aggressive in trying to get early meetings. As first-time founders see their inboxes fill with email from VCs, they often assume that the volume and intensity of VC interest will translate into an easy funding round — and often (mistakenly) decide to start a fundraising process too soon.

The real danger with pitching earlier than you planned is that you probably haven't hit the right milestones yet and haven't had the time to set up a fundraising strategy. After raising a seed round, every startup should get smart about the inflection points they need to pass in growth, revenue, etc. to demonstrate the traction (customer acceptance, virality, revenue, engagement, etc.) they need to land a Series A. It's more important than ever to hit those goals as Series A investors have more choices than ever to fill each general partners' 1 to 3 investments a year.

There's enormous risk in raising too early that many founders forget.
Once a company has taken more than a handful of meetings, it can be viewed as a “shopped deal.” Information travels quickly in the startup community. Great fundraising processes are run tightly, like a tactical mission. Containing information is a huge advantage for founders. If a VC knows that 20 of her peers have already had a look and passed, that's some serious negative signaling. How many people eat at a restaurant after 20 of their friends tell them it stinks?

Of course, there are some VCs who can avoid the herd mentality — but even with them, you'll likely start at a deficit. Of course that doesn't mean you won't be able to raise a financing in the future, it just means you're setting yourself for a much bigger challenge. Once a deal is shopped, you often need to demonstrate more traction by focusing on solid execution for 9 to 12 months before you can take another swing.

It's almost impossible for a startup to get a second fresh look.
Another, related trend we're seeing is that startups are seeking larger and larger A rounds. It's pretty clear that the market can't accommodate it, yet we keep seeing companies setting out to raise $15 to $20 million Series A rounds — just a few months after they've raised their seed round. To invest $15 million, an investor needs to have 3x the conviction that that they have for a $5 million investment. I think this desire to raise $15M+ at series A is being caused by a couple different things.

Founders often see a handful of data points and believe that a new normal exists. For example, a given founder sees their friend raise a large Series A and sees a few tech press articles on large Series A's and they immediately believe they can do it too. Of course, it might be possible. But it's far from typical. 

I also hear a lot of later-stage investors giving early-stage founders bad advice. For example, a founder takes a first meeting on Sand Hill Road and mentions a large target round size. When the investor doesn't blink, the founder now thinks it's achievable, even if it's not.

A simple piece of advice: It's much easier to increase a round size than to decrease it.

The most successful founders I see wait to raise — they wait to demonstrate traction and hit proof-points that represent real step-change for their companies — and when they do, they ask for a lower range. You never want to call a VC back and say, “Hey, I know I told you last month that I was raising $15M but now I'm going to raise $6M after talking to a bunch of people.” Every investor will know what that means, and it will raise red flags about you and your company. It's much better to call and say, “So I was going after $6 to $8M, but it looks like we're going to be able to do $12M given the strong investor interest.”

I can't tell you the number of stories I've heard about rounds that failed because founders raised too early and asked for too much. It's an industry phenomenon, but founders' mindsets are only just now beginning to change.

I think founders vastly underestimate the risk of busted financing.

So, What Should Founders Do?

The good news is that companies don't have to fall into the Series A trap. There are a lot of opportunities to capitalize on these same trends and use them to your advantage.

For example, some of the smartest founders I work with are taking advantage of the seed funding boom to raise larger early rounds, buying themselves more time to get more done and hit more of those critical inflection points. If you're only new and shiny once, get as much out of it as you can.

When you raise seed money, you're raising on the strength of your vision. As I always say, there's nothing like numbers to fuck up a good story. And that's exactly what happens at the Series A. 

You're suddenly judged on the data that you should have been collecting all along to show traction, growth, potential. So why not raise $2.5M in seed money instead of $1.5M to give yourself the best shot at perfecting this data? You should target 18 to 24 months of runway post Series Seed. The best time to raise follow-on capital is when you don't need it, and 2 years of runway gives you the best chance to land in that situation.

The other benefit of raising seed money in today’s environment is that more companies have their choice of which seed investors to work with. There's a chance to be more thoughtful about the investors you want.

My advice: Do your research and see which firms and people have a track record of working hard to help their startups win. While there are some super-angels who add tremendous value, there are others who are neither super nor angelic. 

Rather than having a “party round” full of VC firm logos, I believe founders are better served by having investors who will roll up their sleeves and open doors, make introductions, help source and recruit great talent, give feedback on a Series A pitch, and call in favors to make things happen. And make sure that your investor is willing to do real work for a seed investment. It's tough for a firm that writes both $250K checks and $25M checks to offer the same level of service and support.

Once you have the money in the bank, you need to pause and map things out carefully. It always surprises me how startups fail to plan realistically around their spending. It's vital that you have a clear picture of the traction and proof points you'll need to show investors when you eventually do raise your A. And these proof points have to both demonstrate a significant jump in valuation and de-risk your concept. That is more difficult given how expensive good people are and the current price of Bay Area real estate.

It's much easier than you think to spend $1 million.
Keeping your burn rate low until you have product-market fit will give you the best chance at building a big company.

So many companies say, "Alright, we have 12 months worth of cash, let's launch in 11 months." This isn't a good plan.

If you take 11 months building your product, even if you assume you'll ship on time (which hardly ever happens), you'll run out of runway before you really know what it's like to be out in the market collecting data. There's nothing that increases your odds of a successful A round like a successful launch followed by customers that really love what you've built. 

A successful launch is defined by the months that come after it. Let's say you're an eCommerce company and you know the Christmas holidays will represent 40% of your revenue to date. You don’t want to be in a position where you have to raise in November. You're going to want to make sure you have enough cash on hand to raise in February after the milestone.

These inflection points change year to year — so be sure you know what's currently fundable. For example, in the hardware space, a year ago, $1M in pre-sales on Kickstarter with a great product idea was sometimes enough to raise a Series A. Now, investors are demanding pre-sales in the millions with a product that's either functional or actually in production given the risk of bringing hardware to market.

When thinking about timing, remember, a good fundraising process will take between 4 and 8 weeks. Adding in preparation and time to close, you're talking a few months. Remember this math when you're thinking about timeline and proof points. Cutting things too close can be dangerous.

Keep in mind that capturing this data isn't enough, either. Your Series A pitch should be much more polished and rehearsed than you probably think. While it's an uncomfortable thing to do, and easy to dodge, your fundraising pitch is a make-or-break proposition. I've seen founders who spend more time working on weekly payroll than their pitch. You literally have to make it the most important, if not only, priority once you start the process.

Founders need to be able to demonstrate mastery of their numbers in conversation.
We recommended spending no less than 4 weeks preparing for a Series A. We've even gone as far as to build an internal team at First Round called “Pitch Assist” that works with our founders to nail the strongest fundraising story.

All of this can make it sound like you should start rationing funds immediately. But there's no need to be that extreme. You don't want to hobble yourself when you really should be building and growing fast. Raising a larger seed and regularly checking your progress against the milestones you need to hit will put you in a good position.

Get the feedback you need from your advisors and other entrepreneurs about the proof points they think you'll need to show. Prioritize advice from people who have worked in a similar sector or know your business model best. If you're a SaaS business, get advisors or seed investors that know this space cold. They should understand the exact metrics in the market that are generating strong interest from follow-on investors.

Depending on your business, you may create more enterprise value with aggressive customer growth instead of a monetization strategy. Progress in all dimensions is not the same when it comes to persuading investors. I highly recommend doing diligence on the firms you really want in your A round. Talk to other entrepreneurs who have pitched them or seed investors who know them to find out what they usually ask or expect. Firms are extremely diverse when it comes to what they want to see from entrepreneurs. The more you know, the more you can tailor your strategy to each meeting.

Adversity is not necessarily a bad thing. 

As Walt Disney once said: “All the adversity I’ve had in life, all my troubles and obstacles, have strengthened me… You may not realize it when it happens, but a kick in the teeth may be the best thing in the world for you.” Starting a company is not easy. It's hard to build an awesome product, to hire talented people, and to raise capital. Don’t let the Series Seed Surge fool you into thinking that future financings won’t be a struggle.

The Key Takeaways:

  • The Series A crunch is happening industry-wide, busting funding rounds and limiting startups' potential. 
  • That said, it's never been a better time to be an entrepreneur raising seed funding. It's 4x more available.
  • To avoid the crunch, only start a Series A fundraising process after you've hit major milestones. Starting too early is very risky.
  • Be rational about the size of the round you want to raise. It's always easier to increase a round than to shrink it, so let the market bid you up.
  • Consider raising a larger seed round to give yourself more runway to rack up more proof points before your A.
  • Take your time during your seed round to choose the right investors who will help you raise the next round.
  • Know what the key inflection points are that you need to hit to show successful step change.
  • Give yourself enough time in the market to get the volume of data you need, and figure out what is most compelling to share with prospective investors.
  • Don't panic. Do everything you can to prepare for the next step.

Former Microsoft CEO and Current LA Clippers owner Steve Ballmer visits with Growthinker Luke Brown

Very fortunate to have the opportunity to hear Steve Ballmer  speak and to do Q&A with him today. Among the takeaways , 

the most poignant and relevant were: 

* There's plenty of capital available for good business ideas. 
* Telling Satya Nadella, upon Nadella being named CEO of 
Microsoft: "Be bold - but be right!" 
* Ballmer's self-described leadership style is fluid based on 
time and situation. 
* "Get rid of your dead wood employees. High performers 
hate them." 
* Ballmer describes his personality as "hard core", meaning 
he thinks he's relentless, persistent, and tenacious. He told 
a story of happily winning a $20 golf bet from the Dean of 
Marshall School of Business, Jim Ellis. 
* Ballmer said it took Microsoft 15 years to master selling to 
enterprise customers. 
* He described many Microsoft employees coming to him with 
great ideas, yet those same employees were unable to execute 
on their own ideas. In that situation, even a company as large 
as Microsoft still suffers from some of the same pains as many 
startups. 
* He considers recruiting and company culture vital. He and Bill 
Gates placed high importance on that, even when they had just 
30 employees.

The SaaSification Of Consumer

The phrase “consumerization of the enterprise” feels a bit tired, but certainly has merit as it applies to consumer design and strategies to infiltrate larger organizations. Lately, I’ve noticed something taking afoot with entrepreneurs, especially those who are building local, mobile service offerings — they’re offering their customers a new service (like ClassPass) but slapping on a subscription model at the end. No more piecemeal transactions. This has been on my mind for a few days, and finally had the time think through why this is happening:

  1. Investors are tired of piecemeal transactions: I could rattle off 10s and 10s of consumer startups which were either p2p or some distributed model where the company had to grind out transactions (usually for physical goods), and things went ok for a while and then just tapped out and flattened. Unless there’s one transaction a week (at minimum), ideally looking for 2-3 per day (hence, food) it seems investors would rather back models like Spotify where the consumer feels he/she cannot live without the service and charge on a monthly basis.
  2. Subscriptions enable bundling: Every businessperson loves a good excuse to bundle. If done correctly, the consumer pays extra for they actually use, even though they have the right to use more. Startups can then also tweak the pricing and tiers to offer specific bundles and create even more options around how to segment customers, thereby (theoretically) extracting the most revenue from them.
  3. Consumers demonstrating a willingness to subscribe: And, maybe investors are pushing this a bit, but well, consumers are responding. Look at ClassPass, growing like a weed and not even yet two years old. Rather then offering freemium models, these startups are just going right for the monthly or annual subscription. Maybe it’s that these early services are focused on cities and customers with disposable incomes. That is certainly a factor for why it’s being adopted. (For instance, I pay a monthly fee to Gmail, Dropbox, Boomerang, Sanebox, HelloSign, Spotify, Netflix, etc….I now wonder if any individual transaction that I make is on the table for a “subscription bundle.”
  4. Consumers also willing to pay more for convenience of subscription: My theory is that having the subscription, even if it may cost a bit more, reducing the cognitive load for customers to not be burdened with each transaction piling up. It removes that disincentive and in turn creates loyalty to the service.
  5. Subscriptions fit nicely with services versus most physical goods: I have been forced to try some physical products on a subscription. I get why they do it, I’m sympathetic to that. But, I rarely end up needing it. As a service, though, it’s easier to subscribe and know that I could use a service once in a month, or maybe 5x that month. It’s nice to not have to think about that.

    http://blog.semilshah.com/2015/03/05/the-saasification-of-consumer/

Venture Capital Firms are Being Disrupted by Software And Data

Over the last decade, the estimated number of new tech startups formed in the U.S. each year ranged from 16,000 to 20,000, and the total amount of venture funding per year for software startups increased from ~$5 billion to $19 billion.

Most recently, over the past five years, terabytes of structured data about these startups have been proliferating on the web (see CrunchBase profile growth and App Annie traffic volume below).

App Annie Data Volume

Crunchbase Data Volume

In addition to reflecting a more active venture industry, these numbers are indicative of a rapidly expanding demographic of founders and emerging geographic hubs of innovation. Despite these changes in the startup formation landscape, internal processes used by venture capitalists to source and create value for founders have not kept pace with modern-day software innovations and the proliferation of data on seed-stage startups.

Demographic Shifts of Early-Stage Startup Founders

There is significant student demand for entrepreneurship in both undergraduate and graduate programs, which is partly a result of an imbalance between an increasing number of college students – many of whom aspire to be mid- to executive-level professionals – and the inherently small number of leadership roles at large companies.

Effectively, the career path for most people in large companies flattens out at the junior and mid-levels. Consequently, there are many recent graduates and experienced professionals who are willing to forfeit their dreams of being a big corporate executive in return for startup equity and the experience of forming or joining early-stage companies.

The difference between this generation and previous tech generations, however, is that this trend is spreading from traditional startup hubs – communities that are surrounded by top research institutions and publicly traded tech companies (i.e. Silicon Valley and Boston) – to new business capitals and urban centers, specifically cities that have access to investors, engineering talent, domain experts, and antiquated industries that are in search of technology innovation.

Emerging tech centers such as New York are embracing the rise of startup activity, with New York specifically beginning to track all of its startup formation activity online at destination sites like Digital.NYC.

The rapid growth of VC deals in NY Metro, Midwest, and LA compared to stable growth in New England.

The rapid growth of VC deals in NY Metro, Midwest, and LA compared to stable growth in New England.

Data and Volume of Startups Formed Are Overwhelming Traditional VC Operations

At the same time that startup activity is expanding across geography and demographics, the volume of data online that tracks seed-stage startups is growing exponentially. The massive quantity of constantly updated data online about startups’ founders, product traction and competitors has only existed for a few years. While much of this data is still fragmented, a large amount of it is easily assessable through APIs, and can be used in real time to detect signals of high growth startup activity.

This has given rise to tools such as DataFox, MatterMark and CB Insights, which are all aiding startup investors in quickly assessing public information on private companies. But these tools are not being used as core, end-to-end solutions that drive ongoing venture investment decisions and value creation for venture firms’ portfolio companies.

Although there has been substantial change in the tech community over the past decade, early-stage venture capital operations and processes are for the most part the same as they were twenty years ago. Conventional venture capital deal sourcing stems from personal relationships that provide access to exclusive and proprietary deals.

This information flow plus thoughtful investment theses, due diligence and sharp character judgments are the primary basis of top investors’ investment decisions – methods that have historically generated alpha for limited partners. Portfolio value creation has been derived from general partners’ personal networks (including existing portfolio companies), community managers, business development functions, and some VCs’ operating experiences/know-how.

These are tried-and-true methods that have always been employed by top VCs, and will continue to be used for years to come. But these approaches overlook new-age founders because there is a growing number of founders who do not inhabit traditional venture capital networks, and the rate at which companies are formed today overwhelms traditional manual methods of deal sourcing and vetting.

Algorithmically Searching the “Gulf of Startup Experimentation for Winners

Because of the reduced complexity to code, shrinking costs to build software, and lowered barriers to access initial funding, new founders are taking advantage of the ease of starting a company. These changes are partly responsible for the significant growth of startup formation in the tech sector, as well as the changing demographics of founders and new methodologies such as Lean Startup which encourage rapid experimentation.

This growth has created an entirely new asset class that is adjacent to the traditional seed to series A funnel (see diagram below). We refer to the extension of the seed market as a massive “Gulf of Startup Experimentation.”

645Ventures_Funnel_large

Within the gulf, there is a small group of very talented technologists, product managers, designers, and domain experts who are capable of transforming their experiments into high growth startups that are difficult to replicate. Several of these startup experiments in the gulf are being financed by angels, accelerators and seed investors; and the founders of these startups are making themselves and their companies known online through platforms like Product Hunt, AngelList and CrunchBase.

In order to efficiently discover the companies within this gulf that are capable of raising competitive Series A rounds, top venture capitalists must become more sophisticated at filtering and partnering with the best founders in the gulf – a process that is imperfect if it only relies on human intelligence and personal networks as sources of the information. Traditional methods of deal sourcing and vetting simply cannot scale to sufficiently evaluate the rapid experimentation that is occurring, they need to be supplemented by a technology-based approach.

The future deal flow for top-tier seed to early-stage investors will be complemented by artificially intelligent algorithms that help sharpen investors’ view into the gulf of startup experimentation, specifically through intelligent sourcing and tracking. Investors will also use software to identify opportunities to influence outcomes (i.e. value creation) for startup management teams. These algorithms will analyze general partners’ relationships, understand a firm’s investment strategies, and proactively discover founders that the VC firm is uniquely able to support.

We are in the very early days of the adoption of software and algorithms as a core part of venture capital firms operational DNA. Several VCs have started to experiment with complementary software and statistical models to aid investment decisions; however, very few firms have retrofitted their entire day-to-day operations (i.e. from sourcing to portfolio company management) to be supported by a fully integrated software system and intelligent algorithms that contributes to the VC’s ability to generate alpha for limited partners.

The change in the industry requires innovative and emerging VC firms to discover the role that software plays in venture capital and to share knowledge with the ecosystem.

Happy Belated Birthday, Darlene!


We wish the happiest of belated birthdays to Darlene Fukuji!