Complaining Will Get Canadian Startups Nowhere

By Mark Evans in Startups 13 Comments Tags: , ,

Canada’s startup landscape is far from perfect but it’s probably as good as it’s been in a long time. There is a lot of activity by entrepreneurs, who are bold, enthusiastic and opportunistic. And there’s more financing available, albeit far from ideal.

It was surprising, therefore, to read James Bagnell’s story in the Montreal Gazette about how tough it is for Canadian startups, who have little access to financing and little enthusiasm among domestic buyers for their products and services.

“Corporate buyers are often unwilling to take a chance on untested firms. Venture capitalists are too cautious. Investment banks and pension funds prefer to invest in much larger, more mature companies. Government procurement officials – worried in the extreme about making a blunder – opt for the perceived safety of established brands,” he writes.

With all due respect to Bagnell, one of Canada’s leading technology reporters, his story is overly dramatic because it doesn’t properly reflect the vibrant startup landscape.

While complaining about the lack of startup financing is a common refrain, I haven’t heard a startup complain about a dearth of local buyers because they’re focused on global customers. Nor have I heard startups say our financial regulations are a hindrance.

The bottom line is Canadian startups just have to do it rather than complain things aren’t perfect.

It is easy to suggest conditions could be better but it takes away from fact there are fertile opportunities for entrepreneurs to be successful with the right vision and ability to execute.

Yes, it would be great to have more startup capital but we’re not looking at a woe-is-me, the sky-is-falling landscape. Instead, there seems to be a healthy amount of optimism and confidence.

How Viable Does a Product/Service Need to Be?

By Mark Evans in Startups 2 Comments Tags: , , ,

In 2005, Flock (aka the “social browser”) launched to much excitement. It bombed because it was an ambitious project prematurely launched as an alpha.

Earlier this year, Research in Motion unveiled the PlayBook. It was a half-baked product rushed out the door. Now, you can buy a PlayBook for peanuts because there is so little demand.

These are just two examples of products that weren’t viable enough to capture the imagination of consumers. In a fickle world, you only get one shot to impress. If the world goes “meh”, you’re DOA.

There a lot of discussion these days about how baked a product or service needs to be, focused around a concept called “Minimum Viable Product”, or MVP. It’s based on the idea that it’s better to launch a product early to a small group of users, who will provide feedback and real-world information so improvements can be made before a broader launch.

It’s a fascinating product development and marketing balancing act because the world moves so fast it can be difficult to wait until a product is totally ready for prime time. At the same time, a product or service that launches but doesn’t delight can be savaged, and it can never recover because consumers quickly move on.

For entrepreneurs, the challenge is figuring out when to pull the trigger on a launch. This is exacerbated by how quickly new digital services can be created and unveiled. Drinkify, for example, was put together over a weekend.

With “rapid development” becoming a part of the competitive landscape, there is more pressure for start-ups to launch their products, even if they’re not ready.

Given there are many start-ups that sadly failed the “delight” test, I believe there is more danger in launching too early than waiting a bit longer. Consumers are too fickle, quick to criticize and impatient to tolerate products or services that don’t meet the mark. It’s yet another hurdle that entrepreneurs need to overcome.

For more thoughts, Seth Godin had a blog post recently about when “MVP” doesn’t work. Eric Reis, one of the leading proponents of MVP, had a guest post on TechCrunch about how the wildly successful Dropbox was started as a MVP product.

Ranking Startups is a Dumb Idea

By Mark Evans in Startups 2 Comments Tags: , , ,

I noticed a tweet last night that caught my attention – “Canada’s Top 100 Startups”. A click took me to Mobisheet, which a list of startups using Alexa as the ranking tool.

First, Alexa should never be used as a way to accurately rank anything online.

Second, the idea of ranking startups has never struck me as a good idea other than perhaps putting a flickering spotlight on startups who will take all the attention they can get.

The problem with lists is they’re like beauty contests; completely subjective, open to bias and always called into question.

Using metrics such as pageviews or Alexa rankings to rank startups is an exercise with no value because assessing the potential of a startup often has nothing to do with publicly-available numbers. B2B companies, for example, they could have modest amounts of traffic but strong sales that, of course, they may not reveal publicly.

I would suggest lists such as the one created by Mobisheet are bad because they highlight companies that may not deserve or warrant the attention, while burying or ignoring companies that are more exciting and interesting.

So how should startups be highlighted other than ranking them? 

One approach is simply writing about startups doing interesting things. In my Globe & Mail “Start” column, I’ve written about startups such as QuickMobile, 500Pixels, Keek, Strutta and Thrive Software. StartupNorth and TechVibes also do a good job of putting the spotlight on startups, and, from time to time, the major newspapers write about startups.

While there needs to be more coverage because there’s so many interesting startups, they’re better than lists because the approach has more merit and value.

Drinkify: The Dark Side of Digital Entrepreneurship?

By Mark Evans in Startups 8 Comments Tags: , ,

Drinkify is a pretty cool, fun and cheeky service: Enter the music you’re listening to, and it spits out the most appropriate drink.

For example, it suggests if you’re listening to U2, drinking 10 ounces of vodka garnished with nutmeg sounds right.

Created at Music Hack Day Boston 2011, Drinkify is a terrific example of how a nugget of an idea and some developer/design know-how can become a service in no time at all.

Who knows, Drinkify, which is powered by the Echo Nest API and Last.fm, might turn into a business if music and/or drink makers see it as a new way to reach consumers. Hey, it might even get VCs interested. Perhaps Union Square’s Fred Wilson, who loves music, could throw Drinkify some seed money.

At the same time, Drinkify also symbolizes how the online service marketplace has become noisy, hard to navigate and ultra-competitive. With services being created literally overnight, it raises the question about whether it’s a completely positive thing.

If new services can quickly be developed and launched, it creates a competitive landscape with arguably far too much choice. The “rapid development” reality of the digital world makes it unlike any other industry in which creating and launching a new service globally in a matter of days is impossible.

With new services such as Drinkify popping up left and right, it makes things more difficult or, at least, challenging for entrepreneurs trying to establish a new service because there’s plenty of competition and it’s easy for consumers to be confused by the number of choices.

This is not to suggest Drinkify or “rapid development” are bad things but there is a downside that should be considered.

What do you think? Does this thesis make sense, or am I totally offside?

Six Ways to Make Your Web Site Rock

By Mark Evans in Startups 1 Comment Tags: , ,

After Seth Godin did a post recently about how to analyze a Web site, it got me thinking about some of the mistakes companies make with how their Web sites are structured and designed.

Far too often, Web sites fail to perform because not enough thought has gone into what it’s supposed to do, the audiences it needs to serve, and the ease in which visitors can do and get what they want.

Here are some fundamentals for any company – be it a startup or large organization.

1. What’s the role of the Web site? It’s a simple question: when people visit the Web site, what do you want them to do? Far too often, it’s a question that doesn’t get addressed because most of the focus is on the look and feel. A Web site can be beautiful but if visitors don’t do what you want, it doesn’t matter.

It means figuring out the Web site’s role. Do you want people to buy products or services? Do you want to provide visitors with information (case studies, whitepapers, blog, videos) to move them along in the buying process? Do you want them to contact you? Do you want them to follow you on social media? Whatever the goal, a Web site has to be designed to make it easy for people to do?

1A. Determine the target audiences. Is it potential or existing customers? What about partners, investors or employees?

2. Navigation has to be simple and intuitive. Let’s face it, most Web users are lazy. They expect everything they need to be served up quickly and easily because they’re not willing to do much work. If a Web site isn’t easy to navigate or makes it a challenge to do things (e.g. find information, make a transaction), many visitors will give up – and they’ll give up quickly.

3. Avoid information overload. It’s surprising to see Web sites that seem to include everything but the kitchen sink. Rather than being useful, they’re unwieldy. It’s like opening a closet door to discover a whole bunch of stuff crammed onto the shelves rather than having everything neatly organized and easy to find.

4. The homepage must perform instantly. It needs to tell visitors what your company does and how what you do benefits its customers. In other words, it needs to answer an important question: “What’s in it for me?”. The structure of the home page needs to be intuitive with clear messaging and easy navigation. The goal is getting visitors hooked so they decide to get more information.

5. Don’t ignore your “About Us” page: Often, “About Us” pages are after-thoughts slapped together without much effort. But, in many respects, I see them as the most important page on a Web site after the home page. “About Us” pages tell visitors what you do, the history of your company, and who’s involved. Done well, they validate your company and provide it with credibility.

6. Have a design that reflects your company and industry. The design has to support  a Web site’s role and target audiences, as well as being user-friendly, accessible and easy to navigate. Not every Web site has to be flashy with lots of bells and whistles, it just has to do the job – whatever that may be.

What are the other things that should go into a Web site?

Note: Don’t use my Web site as an example. It’s in the midst of a redesign, which I hope to unveil in the coming weeks.

Why Startups Need Great Content

By Mark Evans in Content Marketing, Startups No Comments Tags: , ,

For startups, attracting the spotlight can be a major challenge.

Without large marketing budgets and an army of people to spread the word, it can be a struggle to get anyone to pay attention to a startup, even if it is doing interesting things. The reality is there is so much competition and digital noise that attracting the spotlight is not an easy proposition.

Given this difficult landscape, there is a tool that startups can use to get some traction: great content.

Content is a fertile medium because it requires things that startups have in abundance: domain expertise, enthusiasm and energy. With these three ingredients, startups have the ability to create content that offers value, insight and information about not only what they’re but the industry in which they play and the key trends impacting it.

Great content can provide startups with credibility, position them as thought leaders and attract more attention from people looking for insight from people who not only talking the talk but walking the walk.

So what does it take to create great content? For the most part, it’s time, people (it helps to have someone who can write), consistency and some ideas. In the scheme of things, the cost can be relatively modest but, over time, the ROI can be significant.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
1 2 3 4 5