entrepreneurship

“You have to be in mobile,” venture capitalists will instruct you.  “We have to be in mobile,” tech giants like Facebook, Microsoft and Yahoo will echo.  Obviously, it’s because we’re living in a mobile-first world.

Yet, becoming the next Instagram or Snapchat is insanely difficult and increasingly so.  A hit app is a rarer unicorn than a hit website.  Why?  Unlike websites, apps aren’t linked to each other; you can’t click on a link to discover a new app, you have to purposefully search and download it from the app store.  Then you have to learn how to use the app before finally getting some value out of it.  Some apps — especially on Android but even from bluebloods like Facebook — behave badly and mistreat your phone’s battery or privacy settings.

The result of the above is that, according to Nielsen, most people use only 30 apps on their phone.  What are the chances your mobile app can make a person’s top 30?  Let’s break down how difficult a threshold that truly is.  What are the 30 apps you’d typically use?

Read Full Article

Phew!  Today was an intense day of travel and meetings.  I’ve been preparing a tirade about Chromebooks but lack the energy to complete the story for today.  So instead I’ll post a few thoughts about business development.

For most consumer-oriented start-ups, business development can be a complete waste of time.

Example #1: A major phone manufacturer promised to preload feecha on their flagship phone — to the point of sending us stuff to sign — but then overnight became totally unresponsive.  We later learned a certain telecom company had a similar app and suggested we get dropped… yep.

Read Full Article

Twitter has a new analytics tool that lets you see how many people actually saw your tweets.  Danny Sullivan of Marketing Land reported that of his 390,000 followers, only 1.85% saw (not even necessarily read) a random tweet.  Ouch!

When we started feecha, one of the early decisions was what data to show users.  To be like YouTube, where you can see how many viewed a video; or to be like Instagram, where you have no idea how many actually saw a photo.

We decided to go the Instagram route because content creators need to feel like they’re being read to continue; once that illusion is gone, only the most strong-willed can keep going.  In the beginning, and especially with all that’s out there, most new start-ups will struggle getting engagement from users.  When the crowd is sparse, no news is better than bad news.  It’s better to keep your users guessing on how many they’re actually speaking to.

So why did Twitter make this kind of analytics tool available?  Advertising. I find advertisers’ interest particularly ironic; if they only knew just how many really saw their ads on TV or print…  390,000 Twitter followers sounds amazing, but it’s the 7,215 that actually matters.  I wouldn’t be surprised if the 1.85% seen ratio applies to TV ratings and print circulation numbers too.

Yesterday we used Snapchat, Instagram and Candy Crush as three examples of apps that were just as much about great marketing as they are great products.  The implication being that there are many good products that failed because the marketing didn’t connect.  Today we’ll present three examples of that.

Let’s start with a major product from a major brand that failed: Google Reader.  True story — a year ago an excited friend pitched me that “Jeff, this a billion dollar idea.  What if we could invent a way to keep track of websites, so you can get all the latest updates from the websites you follow all in one place?”  LOL.  That product exists of course; it’s called RSS and it’s already widely supported by our industry.  Yet, very few outside the tech world know what it is; even when its leading product was from a titan like Google (Reader was shut down in June 2013).

My start-up, feecha, organizes content from websites, blogs, events databases, etc. into neighbourhoods so you can easily see what’s happening in the area you care about.  Part of that is utilizing RSS feeds.  When we contacted bloggers to get their permission to use their content, we were shocked to discover that most hadn’t even heard of RSS.

Has there been any product like Google Reader and RSS that added so much value yet remains largely unknown?  Lack of awareness is a marketing issue, and one that the RSS community has yet to figure out.

Read Full Article

In yesterday’s post, we casually mentioned Tinder as an example of how a successful app is both great product and great marketing. Nothing just sells itself. There are lots of wonderful products that die a quiet death because nobody knew about them.

“Marketing” might be a misnomer, because technically product is part of marketing. What we mean is a go-to-market strategy: price, single-minded proposition, awareness building and distribution strategy.  Not only do you need product-market fit, you need an effective way for product and market to find each other.

Take Snapchat as an example.  Snapchat, despite being the same essential product from inception, puttered along at first without any traction. In fact, Murphy, one of the co-founders, got a full-time job elsewhere while the other, Spiegel, returned to finish his final year at Stanford.  The two had basically given up on Snapchat. Then they got their lucky break: Spiegel’s mom introduced the app to her popular niece who went to a school where Facebook was banned; soon, all the students there used Snapchat.  Murphy and Spiegel saw the numbers and realized they had a hit, and that the way of achieving it was through teens and schools. The rest is history.

Note: the big break wasn’t a product change, it was simply marketing.

Read Full Article

Bloomberg Businessweek has a fascinating article on Tinder’s origins story, which alleges much of what we know to be mythologized.  It’s a fantastic story and worth reading.

Tinder is not a start-up, for starters.  Giant corporation IAC is the majority owner.  IAC also owns Match.com and originally planned for Tinder to be a marketing tool to get more users to the paid service.

The two most often portrayed as Tinder’s co-founders, CEO Sean Rad and his buddy Justin Mateen, aren’t really so.  Mateen joined only after Tinder was launched on the app store, and there were three others who played crucial founding roles but don’t get much if any recognition.

One of them is Whitney Wolfe, a former marketing executive, who is suing Tinder and parent IAC for sexual harassment and discrimination.  More interesting though is that Tinder’s marketing breakthrough was her initiative.

Read Full Article

I had written a few days ago about how Microsoft took customer feedback too much to heart with the Xbox One, which resulted in an E3 showing that was too focused and none too exciting.  It’s only fair that I now point to where Microsoft has used customer feedback in exactly the right away.

Gabe is a comic book artist at Penny Arcade.  He went on Microsoft’s radar after he wrote a glowing review of the first Surface Pro; possibly the most positively influential of all the coverage given to Microsoft’s first gen device.  As a comic book artist, the Surface Pro’s thin-and-light tablet form factor and pen were transformative.  Not surprisingly, he liked the second version even more.

So the Surface team was likely looking forward to getting his reaction to the Surface Pro 3, which is a giant leap better than its predecessors.  Except, Gabe had a few major problems with it and posted a less-than-glowing review.

So Microsoft did the right thing and tried to learn what went wrong.  Check out Gabe’s remarkable update here.  Read it and mosey back.

Read Full Article

Oh Microsoft.  The tech giant can’t seem to catch a break.  Last year, Microsoft was criticized for spending too much time on non-gaming things: voice control, TV, original programming, the NFL, etc.  So Microsoft listened to customers (or the press?) and at this year’s E3, the beleaguered company didn’t talk about anything but games, games and games.  And yet, people complained that Microsoft’s presentation was too focused and uninspired.  Forbes‘ take, for example:

[The presentation] wasn’t bad, so much — some of the games looked great, even if many weren’t exclusives — but it was decidedly safe. There wasn’t much that felt exciting coming from Microsoft, and you could sense that in the presentation as well. It was timid. That’s not the worst thing in the world, but you could feel it in the room. For a company that needs to re-invigorate its console, it doesn’t feel great.

It’s a catch-22 situation for Microsoft: damned for talking about non-gaming things, damned for only talking about games.

This is no paradox, however.  Microsoft’s mistake is in taking feedback too literally.  The objective of your business is not to listen to customers, the objective is to impress them enough so that they actually spend time or money on you.  Microsoft focused too much on listening and not enough on the actual wowing.

Read Full Article

I’ve been to every Echelon since it began, and the conference has changed a lot over that time. Everything is bigger, slicker, more polished. A reported 1700 attended the conference! There are more interesting people from a wider variety of backgrounds. Ideas are well researched and articulated. Start-ups pitch well and are better funded; you can say almost professional.

The tech scene’s maturation is unbelievable; like watching a child grow up into a young adult.

While so much of this is good, I have noticed two trends that while are not yet concerns, can easily be if we as a community are not careful.

Read Full Article

When Facebook first started, the homepage was essentially your profile.  You navigated by viewing a friend’s profile; and then a friend’s friend’s profile and so on.  Facebook was about jumping from one profile to another.

Then Mark Zuckerberg debuted the news feed.  Instead of having to check each person’s profile to see what’s new with that person, your friends’ updates were all pooled into one page.  People then consumed the news feed regularly, and only visited an actual profile when they wanted to go in depth on a person.  This was a fundamental shift in how people used Facebook and it’s hard to imagine going back the old way.

Profiles are static while the news feed is dynamic.

Profiles are “what is” while the news feed is about “what’s changed.”

Profiles are X, the news feed is ΔX.

I hope this distinction makes sense, because I’m about to apply it to mobile phones.

Read Full Article