I am asked a lot about my investment criteria, but lately many of the questions have focussed on my criteria in the sharing economy. This is pretty amazing, because less than a year ago, I could not have told anyone what the sharing economy was.
Now sharing is something I do love, as I abhor waste and adore ways to get more out of any asset. Ask my wife.
In the past year, a movement has surfaced that is global (big) , reflective of our economic state (sucks), green (uses our planets assets more effectively), driven by a connected group (mobile powered millennial), and highly disruptive to a bunch of old models of doing business. It is alternatively called the Sharing Economy and Collaborative Consumption, depending on who you ask. I like the former because I have a hard time spelling the latter, but either will do.
But overall, there are big and sustainable trendwaves. The kind that I like to ride. (Disclaimer: my favorite investment in sharing so far is TrustCloud, probably). So, within the Sharing economy, this is how I break down the key ingredients to my angel investing options:
Networks or Platforms: Many winners, or winner takes all. This is emerging as a very big theme for me, and depends on what stage one enters the market development. I believe every new trend breaks into two types of opportunities; networks within a trend become a story of many winners. For reference, look at the online ad nets, with plenty of $100M+ businesses. Look as well at the mobile ad-tech business, and the several winners to date in the networks (Millennial Media’s monster IPO, and sales by Admob, Quattro, even Amobee). Now look at the platforms that sold picks and shovels in ad-tech: Atlas ($6B), DoubleClick ($14B or $3B, depending on who’s counting) and the incumbent adserver in mobile (another Vaux investment, I wrote about here).
The point is, the networks are great businesses that scale quickly and become an exercise in good sales and marketing systems. The barriers to entry are low, and scale counts. But margins erode at the top end of the scale, because they rarely have a technology platform underneath. I’ve seen it before, trust me.
On Leadership: Bold enough to be early, seasoned enough to run a fortress. In an age of SUPER angels, I am anything but. I don’t have the braincells or the checkbook to attempt 500 startups, the coding passion of prgrammer king FAKEGRIMLOCK, or the patience to do the TechStars or Foundry stuff. But I have the courage to be early and the capital to be patient. So when we latch onto an idea we like, I can land on a beach with a team of Startups SEALS, secure a niche and talk my way inside the castle walls before claiming the fortress to support a large organization. Teams of five are fun, teams of five hundred are awesome. I’ve led both. As such, passive roles and stakes just don’t excite me. Frankly, they distract me.
Karma: Makes me feel good, as in “I did that!” To be frank, I think the best monuments in the world are contained in the Emerson Poem “If” (that my father recited at my wedding, amazingly). To have made the world a better place, even in subtle ways, is sure gratifying. To point to a logo, an event, or even a business process and say “I helped to build that” is really special. Sharing makes me feel that way. Up top now, anyways
Lean: develop a product for $250, acquire users for $250. Scale with real capital. These days, I gravitate to digital media because it doesn’t cost much to develop a product that solves a need. (and almost all the proceeds are for just that- product). Then, a little more to ramp users, again within angel range. But sooner or later, most digital media companies will need big capital to scale, which is where access to VC (where I have again been blessed) is key.
Partners: Coachable entrepreneurs. I’ve said it before, and each day it gets more relevant: life is short, and I have long ago given up having to work with buttheads (knowingly). While most of the entrepreneurs I work with are younger, they all possess a common thread and that is the thirst to learn and the courage to recognize and work on their mistakes. It helps not that I am the most direct guy around, so the chances for setting people back is always there. But I speak the truth, and I always speak the same in front of people as I do behind them.
Of course, there are many more criteria for selecting a sharing business, but these are some that ring true. I will be discussing them with a panel next month at the Shared Squared event, and I’m sure there will be more added to it.
Oh, one more reason I like sharing: my mother always said it was kind.
Don Draper and the Mad Men gang from Sterling Cooper return Sunday on AMC’s four-time Emmy Award winner, after a seemingly interminable 17 months away.
But a lot has changed in the 17 month hiatus. Not with the sixties, in which the show is set, but the ‘teens in which it is viewed. The Mad Men of the show were trying to grapple with the new medium of TV, which was a big departure from how people were spending time, and how advertisers spent money. They had a raw take on manliness, and a pretty much anti-PC bent to everything that transpired. I’ve written about it before (relating to another Vaux investment). They also wear pocket squares.
But in the here and now, the M’ad Men are on the scene (that’s Mobile ad men, and I’m among them) and there is another mass transformation in process.
Let me try to explain it this way: there is a scene in an early episode where John Hamm’s character driving upstate, listening to the radio (speeding, with a drink and no seat belt but that’s considered period charming). He hears a traffic report (backup on the bridge), and dismisses the information (ending up in a caught in the same). It was just the beginning of how ad-supported media would become capable of delivering information that is both timely and relevant, if not always used.
Today, a larger and larger audience will hear of Don Draper and Mad Men, watch his show, and comment on his show through mobile devices. It is the harbinger of the greatest transfer of time spent since the TV entered Don’s creative agency: out of no-where, people are now spending 10% of their total screen time on a mobile device. People are starting revolutions, looking up recipes, avoiding disasters, and of course watching MadMen videos on mobile devices. It’s going to get a lot bigger, at the expense of most other media out there. There are a few billion mobile devices in the world today, and it’s still growing.
I believe it will set off the greatest traffic jam of all time, in a digital media sense, anyways. Heres how it happened, in grossly oversimplified terms only I could dare to paint!
The publishers may have figured this out first. Companies like Time Inc, ABC, NBC Universal saw their audiences begin to shift. As their inventory of available pages evolved (aka circulation, or eyeballs in digital media speak), their mobile strategies got serious. They monetized through ad networks (see below), then other point solutions (see below also), some even tried to get online ad-networks to work in this new medium. Finally, they concluded that they needed a platform to run and maximize the yield on their entire mobile inventory. Lucky for them, there was one that served their needs.
The Early Mobile ad Networks were the first prospectors in this brave new worked of mobile, and they did well, stringing together exchanges of advertisers and publishers and taking a cut for matching them up. Though a hard business to differentiate in, the early winners were great exits. Enpocket to Nokia for a couple hundred. Third Screen to AOL for a little under fifty. Quattro to Apple for almost three hundred. Admob to Google for over seven. There are several more.
But a funny thing happened in almost all of those acquisitions: I truly believe the buyers really thought they were getting a technology platform that they could scale across their larger organizations, so they paid up. We’re talking billions of dollars in the hopes there was some tech under there somewhere that could give them a commanding lead in mobile. But when I look at what those buyers are doing with the assets, I have to conclude they all didn’t get that. Not even the recent S-1 filings are all that impressive when it comes to ad tech. Facebook even acknowledged it as a risk- 122 times in their filing.
The point solutions came next into the market, trying to get attention (from anyone!) with their latest idea that would revolutionize mobile. Mobile Thumbprint (the equivalent of an internet cookie), video, full screen takeovers, SDK’s, app networks, real-time bidding and every other feature and business process under the sun has launched, and maybe saw Series A funding. Some were just too early. Most of them tried to give away the farm to get clients, and the VC money won’t last long with that model. Many are starting to top out, and will soon realize they have to bolt onto an enterprise with scale and relationships. It’s not going to be a pretty story as they get caught in the rush.
The Social Networks and social gamers have grown large and influential, but they too are noticing a problem- their audience is spending more and more time on mobile. Facebook is a game changer of epic proportions (here’s my take on a portion of that story) and they have massive advertising revenue from their online sites, but most of the leaders in the field have not figured out how to monetize mobile. If the trends continue (doubtless they will), they will be lined up at the mobile bridge in no time.
The Online ad networks may be themselves facing a rude surprise soon enough as more of their audience bolts to mobile. Online ad servers didn’t translate to mobile for a few very simple reasons, none of which I am about to give up here. But it doesn’t work, or it hasn’t until now and the bigs have been losing customers left and right because they could not get some basic mobile parameters to work. They need a bridge to mobile, and they will need it soon. Tailoring the existing online platforms hasn’t worked. They will need a bridge.
And so, the traffic jam begins to form at the bridge to mobile ad serving. Hundreds of online ad networks have to deliver on a mobile solution, but theirs have not worked to date. The remaining large publishers, and indeed the mediums and the smalls will have to finalize a sophisticated mobile strategy in order to compete as well. The point solutions who have entered the market will have to seek out scale. And they look across that yawning chasm to those that have made the move to mobile and are beginning to ramp (some thirty mobile ad networks, and about thirty of the largest publishers by my count) and they are thinking oh shit, if this trend continues I’m gonna get killed on this side of the divide.
It looks to me like there is only one bridge, and people are going to want to cross it sooner than later. Even a one-hand driving, seatbelt-scoffing, scotch-in-hand Don Draper would see that signpost up ahead.
There is a yawning gap emerging in the world and I think this gap will define the advancement of societies, the creation of jobs, and even the happiness of populations in the decades to come: it is access to mobile data and I call it Flintstones vs. Jetsons. (shout out to April Rudin for the headline).
Generation segue: Some of us remember Fred Flintstone. Worked in a quarry, drove a foot pedal car. Loved to bowl and eat steaks. Life was simple, and there was not a lot of reason to innovate. Pebbles and BamBam didn’t seem to be a big generational culture gap. A loveable guy in the Jackie Gleason vein.
And his cartoon counterpart, George Jetson. Worked are Spacely, drove an automated space scooter. Astro walked himself, Rosie the Robot did the chores. Skyped with the office, used the tele-puter on his wrist. Loveable knucklehead is in a fast-moving world, but he kept adapting and he kept pace.
So my point, my belief, is that we have arrived at a crucial inflection point in our history, where people, countries, leaders (and entire industries) are choosing to go Flintsone or Jetson. And the catalyst for this decision is, clearly, the smart phone and the data it generates. The Flintstone are content with how things are. They have found ways to live until now without technology, and they resolved they would coast from here on in, whether in their carreers or their lives. Financial planners are on the list. So is much of the financial services (non retail) industry. Traditional media has hated the transition. KONY is no fan. Nor is Assad, or Mubarak. People of a certain age (but not all!). There are lots more.
Meanwhile, the Jetsons accelerate. The gap has not even yet begun to present itself.
mOcean at Mobile World Congress
If you have any doubt of how quickly this industry has grown, check out the Mojiva/Mocean (I am an investor) booth at The Mobile World Congress. MWC was, five years ago, just a bunch of suits from Nordic and Asian countries wielding flip phones for voice and text. Today, MWC is heralded as the biggest and the best mobile technology event in the world. According to conference organizer the GSMA, this year’s event played host to a record number of attendees, topping out at 67,000 visitors from 205 countries; an 11% increase over the 2011 show. The four-day conference and exhibition attracted mobile operators, software companies, equipment providers, Internet companies and media and entertainment organizations, as well as government delegations from across the globe. More than 50 percent of this year’s attendees hold C-level positions, including more than 3,500 CEOs.
Most telling perhaps, CEO’s were wearing jeans, T’s and blazers…
So here’s the shocker datapoint from cisco: 40% of the worlds smartphone data is consumed by… 1% of the world population. That means a small group of people are gaining an unfair (perhaps) advantage because of their access to information
The subways are down: take the bus.
This new place is overcrowded: here’s another local option.
Gas prices are skyrocketing, but discounted in NJ this weekend.
This client has spent xxx seconds on the site and is ready to take the next buying step
Yo Twitter! The rally to unseat the government has been moved to the following sidestreet!
The examples go on and on. A few minutes saved. A better solution for the moment. A bit more background before the interview. A better way, on the way. Compound that millions of times over billions of people and guess what: you have a new gap between the haves and the have-nots. Food for thought before you make your choice between Flintstone or Jetson!
Years ago I got my start on Wall Street and was assigned to read business plans for a tiny investment banking boutique named Beuret & Co. I saw a lot of crap, but nothing near what the deficit “super committee,” must be analysing this week.
I didn’t have any financial background aside from a knack for knowing what added up and what didn’t, in a spooky kind of way. By my own count, people had wheeled in something like 10,000 plans, which I digested and, in many cases called the hapless entrepreneur and told them why it wouldn’t work, IMHO of course. One habit that I had been to take a little 3×5 piece of scrap paper and staple it to the cover of the plan with some basic facts, just to rememebr what plan I was talking about. What industry. Problem and solution. Stage of development. Unique properties. Raise and use of capital. And profit and loss basics. When I was asked about this deal or that, I had a handy reference, but later in life I realized that, once you get it you rarely needed more than those basics. (See my many references to investing like a child). When asked later in life how I came to read plans so quickly and asses a companies prospects in a flash, my only explanation was that when you see 10,000 of anything wrong by process of elimination you begin to know what is right.
Which is why, when I read this balance sheet and income statement on USA Inc. from Mary Meeker at the end of her Mobile Update, I nearly cried.
It came at the end of her regular update on digital media, now done under the auspices of Kleiner Perkins. She has routinely walked through the basics of income, expense, assets ans liabilities much the way I would have done it sitting in my little cubicle on Wall Street. As an American citizen, listening to this deadpan presentation is a must-do.
“By the standards of any public corporation, USA Inc.’s financials are discouraging,” she writes in an introduction to the report. “True, USA Inc. has many fundamental strengths. On an operating basis (excluding Medicare and Medicaid spending and one-time charges, the federal government’s profit and loss statement is solid, with a 4% median net margin over the last 15 years. But cash flow is deep in the red (by almost $1.3 trillion last year, or ~$11,000 per household) and USA Inc.’s net worth is negative and deteriorating. That net
worth figure includes the present value of unfunded entitlement liabilities but not hard-to-value assets such as natural resources, the power to tax or mint currency, or what Treasury calls ‘heritage’ or ‘stewardship assets’ like National Parks. Nevertheless, the trends are clear, and critical warning signs are evident in nearly every data point we examine.”
If the United States of America was a start-up, no one would give it any more money. More likely we would just take it out back and shoot it. Luckily, USA is not a start-up, but unfortunately it still takes a boatload of faith and capital to run the thing. While unlikely to actually go out of business, the cost of keeping the lights on gets higher and higher as the faith goes lower.
This does not bode well for us. But we can do something about it. If we really try.
Lao Tzu, with that simple phrase, would have been a mover and shaker in digital media. Here’s one reason why…
I had time for a cup of coffee with Charlie Greene, a trust advisor who has carved out a unique niche teaching Trust-Worthiness to all sorts of companies, corporate citizens, and high level advisors. In fact, I would venture to call him The Trust Advisor, not just a trust advisor. Check out his multiple books on the subject here.
I came into the meeting wondering if the processes he had developed would be applicable in the Sharing Economy where TrustCloud functions. What he told me opened a whole new perspective on the concept. In his words, the basic elements of trustworthiness are contained in the Trust Equation.
(T+C+R+I) / S
Now let me explain:
T stands for trustworthiness—how much the buyer/client trusts the seller (or vice versa)
C stands for credibility—it speaks to words and credentials.
R is reliability—how others perceive the consistency of our actions, and our actions’ connection with our words (integrity).
I is intimacy— how secure or safe the client feels sharing with us.
The lone term in the denominator is Self-Orientation, and it has a double meaning. Partly it’s about selfishness. But Self-orientation is also about our attention, our focus. Are we listening ? Or are we listening to truly hear. Are we obsessed by our own desires, by our insecurities? Or do we truly focus on others needs, paying attention even when it doesn’t necessarily benefit us? Only the latter builds deep, long-term relationships.
I love exploring the dynamics of Trust (and trust-worthiness), and have written regularly about what I have learned on the subject (here’s the Trust tag in my blog) including such favorites as MadMen, Catfish, and Fool me Once. I have also been speaking on the topic: one fun afternoon was spent with Cam Tonkinwise of Shared Square and his class of students at the New School studying (you guessed it) the sharing economy. I was hit with a ton of new questions about Trust and its components. Every time I think I have explored every corner, I get another view that gives me deeper understanding and deeper desire to dig deeper. As the dinosaur product development monster FAKE GRIMLOCK famously said: RIGHT IDEA MAKE BURN INSIDE TO FIX. CAN TAKE DAY OFF FROM IDEA? IT WRONG ONE. Trust has that grip on me.
So I began to think Trust as it applies to our online “social vapor” (a term Xin Chung coined to describe all the low stakes, hi volume events we participate in online that form a picture of our offline personality).
How much better would you feel about sharing a ride, if that someone had done the same with others. (C above) Even better if that share was with someone we knew. How confident might we been lending out our powertools if the borrower had proven reliability in a similar sharing economy circumstance. (R) How important would it be to know someone you were about to give the housekeys was actually connected to others in your network. (I) And, of all these data points, what does the denominator of paying attention to the needs of others affect our trust. (S). The formula works, even when applied in rudimentary terms to the sharing economy.
The sharing economy has some really cool companies that are just starting to get some traction:
Each of them have a unique idea to change the way our planet consumes resources more efficiently. and they have domain expertise in forming and communicating with that specialized market. Now, imagine an eco-system where people are doing more and quicker exchanges with each other because trust had been built within the community. Awesome power. All from a simple equation. But to make a sharing economy-type point to the sharing economy, would it not make perfect sense to use and re-use one common asset to track trust-worthiness across the eco-system?
Tweet'Quake has different effects on different people
New York has been sandwiched this week between a) a quake that had people on the streets all afternoon Wednesday checking in on their phones, and b) the impending havoc promised by Hurricane Irene sometime this weekend.
All the while, I’ve been working on a previously planned disaster recovery plan with Mojiva HR to protect and inform our nearly 100 workers spread from London to LA. What struck me was the difference between last year’s plan and this year’s.
In a word: twitter. A year ago, we were still stuck on All-email, a DR sharepoint site, and some redundancies with text, etc. This year, we can do a lot of it with a tweet. The benefits to all that, far as I can tell:
Twitter naturally appeals to social groups that communicate heavily via mobile and SMS; the teens and twenties. It is fundamentally an SMS bulletin board that you can post to and read directly on anything from a Mac to a mobile phone. You can even post to it and read it from FaceBook.
For the same reason, it appeals to anyone who wants to establish an affinity group and listen in. As you can follow anyone (except those who deliberately opt for select privacy) it’s reasonably easy to set up any kind of group and follow it.
Twitter can quickly become an impromptu info-sharing point, as happened in the California fires and the Chinese earthquake. Worked pretty well in Cairo Damascus, Tripoli and London. Hell, twitter works.
You can use it as a real-time news feed because a number of News providers, including the BBC and CNN issue News bulletins as tweets.
Finally you can aggregate everything relevant to a group or topic and quickly see and entire stream of whats going on in one page- online or mobile. It also works well with SMS/text.
The few drawbacks, far as I can see:
Everything is out there. You own your mistakes later, but hey don’t we anyways.
There’s plenty of irrelevant tweets out there that add no value. You just have to learn how to filter them.
People (beyond early adopter geek types) are just starting to learn how to use the tool (see #2 above)
A few months ago, I wondered how any company could survive when most of its content was self-absorbed streams of consciousness. Two disasters in one week and I have realized twitter is a heck of a tool. for exchanging useful, fluid information. Bonus: it can also be pretty funny.
Ten years, I co-founded Kayak for a Cause with Scott Carlin and we grew it to an charity organization of hundreds of participants and thousands of donors.
But the critical lesson I learned this year is knowing when and how a Founder should evolve his/her role. Even though this was a not-for-profit, the lessons apply equally for start-ups (which are often less-than-not-for-profit, anyways).
Founders roles fall generally into three buckets: starters, runners and defenders of the legacy. As I learned in KFAC and at Mojiva, starters have the hunch, put a stick in the ground and by sheer force of willpower rally others around them. It’s bold. It’s inspiring. It doesn’t last all that long.
Because as the data rolls in, a starter has to evolve into a runner and runners live on data. Market data. Customer data. Stakeholder feedback. Runners use the momentum from the starter and the data from the users to keep the party going. Hunches don’t play well. Consensus rules, or at least has a greater influence. Interestingly, my training in YEO (an entrepreneur’s organization, now called EO) helped a lot in running a charity: here were the skills I used most often:
Setting roles and goals: Founder and Runners both work from a set of goals, and the successful one assign roles and responsibility toward each objective. Sharing allows the rest of the team to feel part of the mission.
Being open to input on making it better, but firm in direction on what that means: This was a big one for KFAC. We had a logistical challenges like a modern-day Normandy invasion with wind, weather, tide, transport, launch, provisions, safety and yes entertainment all tied into one timeline. Everyone had a better idea. Precious few could be accomplished year to year, but we made a point of giving everyone a voice in making it better. Then we decided our vital factors and were firm in focussing on those few things with major impact.
Giving authority and resources to accomplish goals: People love to be able to make an impact and see their results. Once vital factors are in place, the team has to have the authority and the resources to accomplish their goals. Leaders look for ways to get those to the team, and it doesn’t always mean money. Sometimes it is just shortcuts or better efficiencies.
Making yourself obsolete by cross training your stars: this is where we truly excelled. KFAC became bigger than any one person, and every person that made it to the Committee was told to recruit their replacement from day one and prepare to make yourself obsolete. The result was a group of leaders that could jump into multiple roles. We have had our share of people move on (it’s a charity, there are no stay-bonuses!) but we have always had a backup.
This phase is where so many Founders fall down, as the skills to be a starter are vastly different from being a runner. Very few possess both talents. Very many try to hang on too long (and as major shareholders/stakeholders are able to do so, to their own detriment).
But for those that make the jump and attract another runner to their organization, a third transition awaits: leader and defender of the legacy.
While you may still be the largest shareholder, you have empowered someone else to add value to the enterprise. While your background and knowledge can be very valuable to the new team, your meddling can be equally obstructive. Knowing when is when, and passing the torch before it’s too late is another one of those Founder hunches that Founders often don’t listen to. Here’s what I learned about that phase:
Provide a full transition plan: no matter what you think everyone knows, you have experienced more. Passing along facts without sharing your prejudices will allow the new team a great roadmap to consult when they need it. Do it in writing.
Making clear the objectives (if you remain a stakeholder/owner): just because you are passing ht e torch doesn’t mean you are selling out. Make clear your legacy and what the DNA of the business means to you. It should be respected.
Leaving the team to do what they do best: step away from the controls. You chose them because you trust them. Demonstrate that.
Supporting where you can: staying in tune and in touch will allow you to point out shortcuts, dead ends and old tricks from the master. Nothing wrong with that if done in a with respect for the new team.
I have been through this transition in both the charity and the entrepreneur world, and what surprised me most were not the differences but the similarities in leadership skills. EO taught me the things that allowed me to grow KFAC, and much of the leadership team has entrepreneurial backgrounds (surprise!) . But KFAC definitely taught me the things that have allowed me to grow start-ups.
Having a great team behind you certainly helps. BTW, you can join KFAC XII here.
People that witnessed my hoarse performance at this week’s Young Start Up Panel learned I had spent the previous night at U2 show. And believe it or not, U2 can teach entrepreneurs an awful lot about success, because they live a few of its basic principles:
They have meaning and relevance
They understand timeliness
They have local impact with a global reach
They live with respect, gratitude and humility
Five years ago, a lifelong friend Mark (MvK) and I caught U2 at Croke Park in Dublin. We were so impressed, we spent the rest of the night in Temple Bar debating their ranking in “The Most Influential Bands of All Time,” along with perhaps the Stones and The Beatles. I cover that and more in this blog from way back when.
This week, Bono, Edge, Mark and I all reunited in the Meadowlands with a few others (!) and we conceded the Most Influential Band of our Lifetime to U2. The group’s tours ranked them second in total concert grosses for the decade after The Rolling Stones, although U2 had a significantly higher attendance figure than the Stones. They were the only band in the top 25 touring acts of the 2000s to sell out every show they played. In April 2011, the U2 360° Tour became the highest-grossing tour in history, surpassing earnings of $558 million and breaking The Stones’ previous record.
Any entrepreneur with this level of success does not need my advice. But numbers alone are not the reason for our award to U2. In order to transcend a niche, sustain your existence, leave a legacy, and essentially change the world for the better, a band –or even an entrepreneur – needs to consider these big four points:
Point #1) Meaning and relevance
How well are you listening and knowing your audience? Of all the millions of fans that U2 has performed in front of, they have always forfeited 20% of their audience to “backstage blindness.” Though their audience grew up on video mashups (MTV), it now also digests facts in tweet size doses.
Enter the Vid-Squid: a Willie Williams-designed four-legged contraption—which cost around $25 million, weighs 400 tons and is responsible for a harrowing carbon footprint—while offering a 360-degree vantage of U2 with its cylinder-shaped expandable screen and circular catwalk. It was a technical workhorse that solved the 360 problem and served the digital and audio needs of everyone in the house.
Here’s a video with more of what I mean: U2 on YouTube
How willing are you to Pivot and Reinvent? U2′s most beloved line in my book is “we are reapplying for the job of best rock band of all time.” In three decades, the band has continually morphed, synthesizing punk, glam rock, stadium anthem and mashups, without betraying their core audience. They’ve taken huge chances (Zoo Tour being a big one) that failed, and as I pointed out in a previous post, had the courage to keep reinventing.
A great example of this balls-out kind of courage came when MvK and I were discussing whether Bono indeed had a great voice or just a “people’s voice,” best-suited for sing-alongs or gospel choirs. Moments later, the band began a superb mashing up of an operatic aria into the greatly-meaningful song, “Miss Sarajevo.” With Luciano Pavarotti long since departed, we both wondered who would sing his part. No need; Bono literally channeled Pavarotti and hit every note with chilling brilliance – and in Italian. Not your average rockstar trick there. And extremely courageous.
Burma's msg, via Vid Squid
Point #2) Timeliness
How well do you use your leverage, when you have it? This means not wasting your moment in the spotlight, but using it to extend the franchise and transcend what just good product alone can’t deliver.
Arguably, U2’s moment has lasted quite longer than their two and a half hour concert mastery. For thirty years, the members of U2—as a band and individually—have collaborated with other musicians, artists, celebrities, and politicians to address issues concerning poverty, disease, and social injustice. (This list from Wiki)
In 1992, the band participated in the “Stop Sellafield” concert with Greenpeace during their Zoo TV tour. Events in Sarajevo during the Bosnian war inspired the song “Miss Sarajevo“, which premiered at a September 1995 Pavarotti and Friends show.
U2 and Bono’s social activism have not been without its critics. Several authors and activists who publish in politically-left journals such as CounterPunch have decried Bono’s support of political figures as well as his “essential paternalism.” I think recipients of their largesse would say “paternal me all you want.” Other news sources have generally questioned the efficacy of Bono’s campaign to relieve debt and provide assistance to Africa. Tax and development campaigners have also criticized the band’s move from Ireland to the Netherlands to reduce its tax bill. To which I — and they — say, ‘Yeah, and?”
Point #3) Local impact/ Global reach
KNOW your audience
It has to work first at home. Ask Starbucks. They spent YEARS in Seattle before taking their perfection on the road. So ask yourself… How well is your product received, adored, and used by the locals?
Bono started the evening by saying “We just want to thank Mr. Springsteen for letting us the hall tonight.” It was witty, humble, and got a roar from the crowd because it proved he was totally in tune with a bit of the locals. He thanked people from Conn-ect-i-cut, Penn-syl-vania, Jersey and New York for coming out on such a hot night, by Irish standards. And when he spied a sign in the crowd that said “For Clarence,” he stopped the show to let it be passed up onstage. He owned the locals.
And then he took it global like only U2 can.
Beautiful Day
He conjured up Commander Mark Kelly on the big screen via space satellite (OK, pre-recorded I later learned) to flip through poster boards of “Beautiful Day’s” lyrics.
His presence gave new meaning to the “Space Oddity” lyric, “Tell my wife, I love her very much, she knows,” which he quoted at the end of the song.
“Walk On” closed out the set with an emotional presentation by Amnesty International, as U2 fans piled onto the catwalk carrying large candles to remember the conflict taking place in Burma and the plight of the recently freed Burmese politician Aung San Suu Kyi, who also addressed the crowd from the expandable screen (above).
It’s a hard act for any little entrepreneur to follow, but this breadth and depth of action can certainly inspire some good work. U2’s efforts have effected change in Famine, Aids, War, National Debt, Political imprisonment, Pro Democracy, and preservation of music around the world. In my own samall way, I try to do what I love, and believe I have a better chance to make an impact as well.
Point #4) Respect, gratitude and humility
Thank others.
If it all works, don’t think it’s just because you’re good. I’ve had the honor to work with and hang around an awful lot of entrepreneurs that have met with some spectacular success.
The best of them recognize that, while they were good (like many others), they were also not strangers to luck and timing. Too many react by saying “that was fun, I want to do it again and again” … and then meet a hard fail. “Once in a lifetime” often means just that.
But U2 was none of that. I was struck by these sincere comments throughout the night:
“Thank you for giving us this wonderful life.” (For an entrepreneur that would be: thanks for letting me be an entrepreneur: it’s is hard, but great)
“Thank you for paying for this monstrosity.” (Entrepreneurs might thank investors for funding their new product launch)
“Thank you to our warm up band.” (Thanks to those that came before us in the innovation chain)
“Thank you Mr. Springsteen for letting us this hall.” (Thanks to the local expert that let us dabble in his warehouse)
So for everyone who thought I was just hanging out with MvK at a concert, taking pictures of mobs of people watching four men and a crazy stage production I say this: I was thinking!
For an entrepreneur, attempting to separate Work from the Rest is not only impossible, it’s a waste of kinetics and karma. As U2 have proven, we are One, with every ounce of our experience contributing to our creative output, bad or good.
Miles to go. Walk on.
~
PS: How to translate U2 in Entrepreneur
Meaning/Relevance: LISTEN to your damn market. Solve problems that really cause pain. Provide solutions that really are game changers.
Timeliness: Too late or too early is a loser. Being in the trend as it comes ashore is the only thing that works.
Local impact/ Global reach: Make it perfect for a small core group (or locals), but have the scalability to roll it out global.
Respect, gratitude and humility: When it works, it doesn’t just mean you’re hot sh*t and could repeat it. Act accordingly.
Miles Spencer is a prolific angel investor, media entrepreneur and explorer. He is best known for his role as co-host and co-creator of MoneyHunt, a reality based show where entrepreneurs pitch their ideas to a panel of experts.
About Miles Spencer
Miles Spencer is a prolific angel investor, media entrepreneur and explorer. He is best known for his role as co-host and co-creator of MoneyHunt, a reality based show where entrepreneurs pitch their ideas to a panel of experts.
Comments