Your winnings, Sir.

So, the NSA has been snooping the data at most of the big Silicon Valley tech titans, who snoop the data of most of the planet. The former is looking for bad guys, the latter are looking for customers.

What’s the diff?

What cracks me up is the outrage. It reminds me of Captain Renault’s great line outside Rick’s Cafe the night he shut it down.

How did we get to this place?

Data used to be such a hard and fast thing. Name, address, and social security was plenty to get a verification going. It worked well for high stakes actions like getting a mortgage, a car loan, a college education… and it still does. The titans of big data and credit have built tremendous businesses based primarily on that data. But it’s getting tired, and the options for passing that data between them is getting more finite with every day.

However, a new generation is beginning to emerge. One without much credit, poor job prospects, shared homes, and many other traits that make them look like ghosts on paper. How to get a read on these guys? All they have are mobile phones and social networks which allow them temporary access to some of the things their parents owned (this is currently called sharing). Well, Zuck and the devil (not to be confused) both had it figured out: vanity is the world’s favorite sin. ….(i acknowledge the irony, as the guy writing a blog . The biggest affect of being mobile and social is the astounding amount of data that it throws off.

Facebook and the rest have masterfully used that data to imply the best ad to suggest a user, the best hotel in the area, the best gift for someone. Even the best match for you to date, lend a car, share a spare room, or walk your dog. That intelligence has gone way beyond the stale cookies of the online world; while not knowing your name, the parameters captured on mobile can include location, screen size, device type, apps open etc. Add to this what users willingly volunteer in their posts, comments, likes, reviews and you have a treasure trove of behavioral data to crunch. I know this from my experience at Mojiva, where we process 35,000 ads per second and analyse 1.5 terabytes of data a day.

Now how is the government supposed to resist all that?

And so now… the Outrage?

So while we as a younger planet willingly volunteer all kind of vanity data in an effort to look good, somehow some of us get outraged when it’s used for national security instead of recommendations for underwear.

I imagine the elders want to remain in the hard data world, and may react negatively to all this digital spy-craft. They own the assets – and the debt to support it – and their address, social security and FiCa will forever be their go-to data. For this group, railing on the government for something they don’t yet understand (like why would anyone want to know my behavior and preferences) is pretty logical, if not up to date. And on the other side of the spectrum, any mobile social junkie with 33 dukedoms on Yelp and a 800+ score on TrustCloud can’t possibly say “my public data has it’s limitations” … it’s all opt in and public anyways.

And there is the generational disconnect that conceals an emerging opportunity.

Those that were and still are accustomed to hard and real data as the one-and-only arbiter of trust-worthiness are going to quickly pass from majority to minority. You can’t look at this slide from Mary Meeker on how we spend our time and debate the effect of mobile. People are choosing to spend their time in places that throw off more data and indicators for the new world. And while the soft data from mobile and social are not yet enough to fully vet “worthiness”, those that recognize leverage of the combination of the two will prevail in the next chapter of “data as indicator”.

Let’s just call it like it is, Rick

Despite all the protests, we’re getting to the cusp of a new world, where hard data (FICA, mortgage, etc.) is going to meet with softer, more contextual data (mobile, social) to form new benchmarks of trust in our world. I suspect Zuck and the devil will prevail on this one, if not together then in league. And we’ll come to accept our digital behavior as an important component of who we are. Our mortgages as well as our underwear selections will be smarter because of it.

Get over it people. Rick already has.

Epic Cover from Popular Mechanics c’94

Ever wonder what goes on behind the scenes when you pull up some information on your mobile device or tablet like today’s Weather Channel outlook or last nights scores on ESPN? Ever been annoyed by the ad intruding on what you want to look at, or if it’s behaving but not being relevant at all. What goes on behind the scenes, in about 1/1000th of a second, is a remarkable battle for the right deliver a message from someone who wants to engage you.

Flattered? Well you (and about 6 billion other people) are one of the two pillars that anchor a giant eco-system that is defining our times. Congratulations.

But the pipes that run between the brand that wants to reach you and the mobile device you are looking are new, not fully developed, filled with billions of dollars, and clogged with FUD. For the un-initiated, that’s Fear-Uncertainty-and-Doubt. When it gets solved, it will mean more and better content supported by relevant and timely ads that actually add to the experience.

In the meantime, let me (try to) explain what we (the businesses behind this) are working on to bring you to that point…

The pipe is all the different ways a brand can reach a consumer on a mobile device (explained below). The hold up revolves around people’s natural resistance to change, and their comfort with the familiar. I’m not immune to that, and I can remember a turning point about mid-way through the dot-com era when I lamented to a few of my old school buyout friends “remember when we used to be able to buy a company and phone it in for 5-10 years without anyone messing with us”?. Thomas Friedman got that right in his World is Flat, stating that our ability to learn and adapt will become the greatest skill set for the modern world. As markets and models change overnight, those that resist change and evolution will inevitably become a smaller and smaller island, if not altogether sunk. And who’s to blame for all this?

The information super highway for one. And for two, creative destruction went from Generational to 140 characters. Which brings us back to mobile ad-tech.

For an outsider, there is nothing more exciting than the tectonic shift of time spent from TV and PC to Mobile and Tablet. Though I write this on a PC (Mac) there are fewer and fewer tasks that get completed in front of this screen. And the brands that want to reach me are beginning to figure this out: the ads are getting smarter, more relevant, less intrusive and – dare I say – value ad on occasion. And this is done without cookies (on mobile) but with many more interesting parameters. But, like the internet’s early days, it’s still got a long way to go.

Segue here for first timers: my theory remains that as consumers get access to more information faster, they want more information, faster. And, like the internet, they will not like to pay for any of that. So the brands who want to access those consumers will subsidize that content with advertising support. And one way or another, that’s how we’ll roll for a while here.

So why do outsiders and first timers make such a big deal about the complexity and fragmentation of the mobile ads ecosystem? FUD. Listening to the CM Summit – thanks Google for the live stream- Luma’s Terry Kawaga  (start at 1:17:45) uses a showman’s flair for ridiculous sound effects and funny mash-ups while drawing out the following truth: there are only two pillars in digital media, consumer and brand. Everyone else is an enabler to that connection. If you get confused while looking a LumaScape, just repeat the preceding sentence. Here are the rest of the players, per Terry:

• Publishers create content of interest, where consumers flock like birds of a feather.
• Agencies create interesting ad units, and control lots of ad buys
• Networks buy and sell the remnants the publishers can’t sell themselves
• Exchanges automate the process
• Data targets users for more unique ad delivery

My world. Welcome.

And if you are gazing upon the Mobile LumaScape for the first time, you might say I guess I won’t be able to phone it in for 5-10 years without anyone messing with me. So this is where it gets interesting, as Terry again point out. Those enablers between the consumer and the brand tend to welcome the newbies with the following line

Oh, yes it’s very confusing. Give me your money and I’ll make it better.

Which is a lazy way to look at it. Yes, there’s a bunch of logos up there but he has the basics in the right place: Consumer and Brand. In between, there are a bunch of petri dishes founded by innovators, funded by vc’s, helping find better solutions between the two. But playing the game of fear (this is so confusing) and hero (but I can save you, give me your money) will not advance any of the said petri dishes. What will advance and differentiate them is seamless integrations between the petri dishes such that a brand can plug-in and gain the benefits of any and all of the innovations that allow it to best reach the consumer at the best time with the best ad.

And all this will normalize into something pretty logical I think. Just look at the same video at 1:28:00, about pop-ups. They were hated online, and they eventually receded or were trimmed back. They are no less hated in mobile, and likewise they will not win by dominating the screen. They will win by being relevant and timely and reaching the consumer when they need it most.

So that’s what’s going on each time you pull up a page on your mobile.

~~

While not mentioned directly, I’d be remiss if I did not disclose I founded a mobile ad-tech company that powers several logos above: Mocean Mobile.

Start Up Choate NYC

Ivan Taback and Proskauer hosted the final at bat of our Start Up // Choate Spring Road trip in their gorgeous space at 11 Times Square. It was a fitting finale to a great week which gathered over 100 Choaties from three cities to network, learn, and share experiences about starting and growing businesses.

The Panel was definitely skewed young and mobile, with Alex Moazed and NT Etuk joining me for the final night. We polled the crowd and we surprised to learn that there were 10 entrepreneurs, 6 angels, 8 service developers among the crowd that gathered. All said, I’d estimate 2/3 of the crowds in all three cities were involved one way or another with start-ups in their everyday lives.

Who knew.

As usual, the panel had some great nuggets to share. Here we some of my favorites from NYC: When we talked about forming an ideal team and looking for co-founders, NT Etuk said “Don’t look for a partner in the mirror” – meaning having opposing points of view when developing a product, a business, and an organization is key. When we discussed “what would be the plastics for tomorrow”, Alex Moazed was sure that mobile was the answer for how profoundly is has affected our lives just five years into the show. He also added the analogy of the toy business, which never got around to thinking like a tech company: result is that toys (plastics, plush, etc) are now $20B industry, and digital games are about $18B. Gotcha.

Here were some of my favorites from Boston and San Fran:

One of my favorite comments from Boston was Bain Capital’s Jeff Schwartz (P’16) was embrace your ignorance. It can be a valuable tool. Dream about how to solve problems. Live in the future, and build what is missing.

Jeffrey Mullen (Founder and CEO, Dynamics, Inc.) who is a legit freak of nature (lawyer, EE degree, patent holder, CEO, addicted gamer, nice guy) was around the question of singularity (will we live forever if we live to 2046, per Ray Kurzweil). “Sure, I checked it out- living forever is basically an engineering problem”. And you know, he’s the one person that I believe probably has.

Michael Holthouse former CEO of Paranet (sold to Sprint) added that the “plastics” of tomorrow may well be energy. How we make it, store it, and consume it will become vital to our future sustainability.

My favorite comment of the San Fran night from Seth Sternberg was on the makeup of founder teams: While he stressed the fact that Eng’s (his abbreviation) had to form the core of the product and it’s build, having a business guy that does the deals/money was also a healthy add. One point we all agreed on: avoid replicants. Having divergent points of view are key. Last point form the audience was this: consider how “geared” your co-founders are to start a business. It’s a long haul, with plenty of dips.

And, proud to say, Choate finally started to get its social groove on: the  LinkedIn group (now one of the school’s most active) has been full of good pointers, suggestions, and comments and a twitter feed (at this point twitter’s most inactive account , but getting better ) picked up steam in New York (this is a relative term- it’s a humble beginning. Check us out at #startupchoate

Soup to nuts, this whole thing came togehter in less than six weeks from the time Ron Fleury and Joe McAndrew posed the question: “what the hell do we do?”. And while Choate has been effusive in its praise and gracious with its thanks during this whole process (and tireless in its coordination), I attribute my contribution to nothing more than “doin’ what come naturally”. Hard as this may seem to some, it is really, truly all in a days work. Special praise also to our hosts at Connect Solutions in San Fran and Choate Hall (coincidence) in Boston. So now Choaties with start ups, who have a great network anyways, now have one on mobile, social and local to press the advantage.

Which is perhaps the greatest start up lesson of all: do what you love and your efforts can make a tremendous impact.

Panel at Choate Hall- great space!

Last week, when putting the final plans together for our Boston stop on the Start Up // Choate Roadshow, the bombs went off. And so we paused, briefly, to assess what it meant and what needed done.

The response that came back from our hosts and panelist pretty much sums up what make Boston unique, and what makes entrepreneurs special. While acknowledging the practicalities of navigating Boston after the bombing, the message came back loud and clear: events like this are what we do as start-ups and Americans. We’re undaunted builders of things. We cherish our freedom of thought, expression, and opportunity. It feels great, and we won’t quit. Let’s go.

And so, in a dense rainy night in Boston we had a great crowd of entrepreneurs on hand to listen to a great panel.

One of my favorite comments from Bain Capital’s Jeff Schwartz (P’16) was embrace your ignorance. It can be a valuable tool. Dream about how to solve problems. Live in the future, and build what is missing.

Jeffrey Mullen (Founder and CEO, Dynamics, Inc.) who is a legit freak of nature (lawyer, EE degree, patent holder, CEO, addicted gamer, nice guy) was around the question of singularity (will we live forever if we live to 2046, per Ray Kurzweil). “Sure, I checked it out- living forever is basically an engineering problem”. And you know, he’s the one person that I believe probably has.

Michael Holthouse former CEO of Paranet (sold to Sprint) added that the “plastics” of tomorrow may well be energy. How we make it, store it, and consume it will become vital to our future sustainability. 

So, I ‘ll remind those from Choate that are reading this (sorry, group closed otherwise)… We started a LinkedIn group (now one of the school’s most active) and a twitter feed (at this point twitter’s most inactive account , but getting better ) and planned a road show highlighting the best and brightest minds from the Choate universe of StartUps. We’ll do(ne) SanFran, Boston (last night), and New York (tonight).

So far,  while I think this will become a HUGE benefit for our alumni, it is actually our gift back to  Choate. It has long deserved a great start-up network. And for Choaties themselves, who have a great network anyways, this one is finally going on mobile, social and local to press the advantage.

Which seems entirely normal to me. Doesn’t it you?

We are kicking off a unique series in San Francisco tonight: Start Up// Choate.

I’ve long remarked how deep the empathy and how good the connections were grown from that school. For some reason the cycle of 10 o’clock curfews, dress codes in the dining halls, room inspections, and deans countering our late-night antics built an espirit among my co-combatants rarely duplicated in my 30 years since. We simply trust each other on another level. And most of us want the best for the school, despite the epic pranks we prosecuted during our time there.

So when I was asked what the School could do to keep up with its tremendous group of entrepreneur alumni, I suggested “do what normal people do”… umm normal to me. In the weeks that followed I’ve realized perhaps, when it comes to mobile, social and networking that I’m just not that normal. My wife reminds me of this regularly. We started a LinkedIn group (now one of the school’s most active) and a twitter feed (we’ll see how that works out) and planned a road show hilighting the best and brightest minds from the Choate universe of StartUps. We’ll do SanFran, Boston, and New York on successive nights beginning with TCV’s Woody Marshall ’86 and Meebo’s (now Google+’s) Seth Sternberg ’97.

Hopefully, we’ll learn about that process of entrepreneurship I have referred to as Discover, Develop, and Deliver.  Interestingly enough, while I think this will become a HUGE benefit for our almni, it is actually our gift back to  Choate. It has long deserved a great start up network. And for for Choaties themselves, who have a great network anyways, this one is finally going on mobile, social and local to press the advantage.

Which seems entirely normal to me. Doesn’t it you?

More from the event later.

Austin has a groove

I hadn’t been to Austin for SX for awhile, and the differences are palpable. Each of these observations deserve a post on their own (blog tonnage warning), but here’s the brief from the plane

1: These kids won’t lap their Parents, but they’re over it

UT Spring break notwithstanding, SXSW trends pretty young but not tragically hip. I’d call it self-sufficiently hip. Perhaps its a stack of student debts, lack of faith in future entitlements, or a crap job market but most everyone here lives and breathes self-reliance. Kinda reminds me of KFAC in some ways.

No, they likely won’t end up better off than their parents but they have founds ways- ingenious ways – to have a share in interesting events, luxuries and experiences. It is the walking personification of the asset light generation, a veritable ride-sharing, house sharing, tab splitting mobile-social-fueled existence. You can see it in the number of backpacks lugged around. The premium real estate around power outlets. The use of timely information to scout out clean bathrooms and taco trucks still serving food. Maybe this generation can’t get what everything they want, but they sure use information to get what they need.

2: Booze may work for inspiration: but Coffee is for Execution

Ok, close to SxCentral (Dirty 6th or perhaps Rainey) the parties roll on late into the night. Bold dreams do emanate from these spots, no doubt. But who will do them? No-one with a hang-over I assure you. Life is not a Reality show perversion of how things get done. The business still happens the next morning, by guys sipping coffee and probably not wearing skinny jeans . I noticed on Don Dodge on twitter, who has backed his share of great SXSW start-ups, hits the parties for a few pics but probably doesn’t extend the night further… unless the band is good. He’s one worth following.

3: Mobile Social Local drives peer actions

Even Steve Case does sharing

And how. In this urbania of the future, I can’t remember anyone who didn’t whip out a smartphone every 90 seconds. Pedi-cab drivers checking directions. SXSW’s checking in on panels, flash mobs, and open bathrooms. Cops, using video. Really no surprise there. But when asked, how many of them pay for apps or subscribe to content the answer was rarely anything but “what?” (see #1 Above).

This of course, drives a few of the major theses of my activity: mobile, social and local will be supported by increasingly relevant and targeted ads. It would help if they were displayed in appealing, but unobtrusive ways but that’s on its way as well. While I was there, I saw a stat that online screen time had yielded to mobile screen time. Revenue isn’t that far behind. Mojiva is ideally positioned for both.

I also noticed that a huge focus of the Sharing Economy conversation (aka Asset Light, Collaborative Consumption, Peer to Peer Economy- talk about a naming clusterjam!) is all about Trust. How will Sharing grow if every transaction comes with the doubt and questioning that goes like this : I know I will make (save) money on this, but might I die doing it? News from the washington Post this weeks kinda underscores the point. Who is behind that screen? Can I just rely on the one network to provide that data (and are they conflicted b/c they want the transaction)? Isn’t there a repository of all the identity, behavior and transaction data that sits with a third-party and can quickly display a dossier on a potential counterparty? I had a back and forth with FAKEGRIMLOCK (yes, all caps please) about ways the Sharing Networks might be compelled to share their API toward this end (his suggestion was a ray-gun).  Leah Busque from Task Rabbit mentioned TrustCloud as an option in her panel on sharing- no ray-gun needed. She’s a nice lady and a great entrepreneur.

4. Space: the Everest of STEM

The biggest draw, by far, was the rockstar Elon Musk. And his expertise and passion for Science, Tech, Engineering and Math overfloweth. PayPal, ok. But this guy has Tesla and SpaceX rocking along while parenting five kids. The sheer out-of-this-world challenges this guy takes on, and the STEM talent he draws to do it should be an analog for our entire workforce. Learn STEM, and develop a passion for it. Pursue bold visions.

5. Being Top ten in the information race hardly matters

Just ask #11 in line at the taco truck at 3am. Not so long ago, information was valuable for a lot longer, long as your counterparty didn’t have it yet. Now, most information travels so fast and is so complete that is becoming commoditized. So what counts anymore? Speed, and creativity.

Sam Lessin had a brilliant talk on this BTW. And ironically but perhaps not un-related, his dear departed father Bob wrote a small treatise (Lessin’s Lessons) on what is essentially the asset light generation I discuss above. Great read if you can still find it- self published of course. Ahead of his time. Sam is a great continuation of his legacy.

If everyone has about the same information, at the same time the people who will extract the most value from it will be those that get it first, those that understand it first, and devise a creative angle to use it. It’s an interesting leveler of the playing field.

So that’s the quickie from SXSW. More to come on each of these. But my takeaway for the week is “Live in the future: build what’s missing”.

My Frequent disclaimer: I own equity in TrustCloud and Mojiva. 

Great name!

Yes, Marissa Mayer is out there honing her strategy for a next move, and lots of buzz is around Mobile Ad-Tech. I’m quite keen to those developments, because of my activity in the space… you might say.

But before her time, Yahoo made an offer that prompted one of the best “What Would you Do” conversations of our generation. I caught the gist of it at during Peter Thiel’s talk at SXSW, but Inc. does a better job of describing it here:

…Facebook was just two years old. It was a college site with roughly eight or nine million people on it. And, though it was making $30 million in revenue, it was not profitable. “And we received an acquisition offer from Yahoo for $1 billion,” Thiel said.   

“Both Briar and myself on balance thought we probably should take the money,” recalled Thiel. “But Zuckerberg started the meeting like, ‘This is kind of a formality, just a quick board meeting, it shouldn’t take more than 10 minutes. We’re obviously not going to sell here’.” 

At the time, Zuckerberg was 22 years old.

Thiel said he remembered saying, “We should probably talk about this. A billion dollars is a lot of money.” They hashed out the conversation. Thiel said he and Breyer pointed out: “You own 25 percent. There’s so much you could do with the money.”Thiel recalled Zuckerberg said, in a nutshell: “I don’t know what I could do with the money. I’d just start another social networking site. I kind of like the one I already have.”

Now for the What Would You Do part- a/k/a- WWYD.

If I were Mark Zuckerberg, I would have done the same. His talent is towering, his vision is far reaching. I would also say his youth might lead some to say he didn’t know what he didn’t know, but Zuckerberg probably did know. He had one great idea, and the likelihood of having another of such epic scale and impact was remote. He knew that lucky and good are not the same thing, and the former rarely strikes twice. He was, and is, part of an asset light generation that I have written about before.

But, I am not Mark Zuckerberg. Not even close.

I am not a sole founder (um, was Zuck?) and I would not imagine to be able to run something myself without the great work of those talented people around me. I might have other ideas I’d like to back, and more entrepreneurs I’d like to work with. I also deeply respect the stakes held by each of my shareholders, and would give due consideration to what they may want as well. Everyone has a number. And working for Yahoo, especially the new Yahoo, might be quite interesting. I may have hit the bid, not being Zuck.

But most of all, I love the fact that it was a ten minute Board meeting, or he thought it should be!

By the way, What would you do?