Simon Williams

Forgive the grammatical errors and typos in this post, but I just made it back from two days in Barcelona (I live in California, so it’s a non-trivial trip!).

Why Barcelona in November?  Well, I work for Teambox, a start-up that has its roots in the beautiful Spanish city, and it was time to get the team together for an all-hands meeting.  Teambox builds awesome software that facilitates collaboration and communication — but even for us, you sometimes have to get on a plane and meet people face-to-face.

I had been to Barcelona once before while on holiday with friends from university, but the memories are distant, and dominated by the fact that the coach I was on crushed the side of a car while navigating through the busy streets.

This trip had me arriving late last Tuesday night, and I unexpectedly got to try out the HotelTonight app, which has been garnering rave reviews.  After taking a cab to the address I had been given for our rented apartment, I realized I didn’t have a clue which specific apartment we were staying in.  My iPhone was refusing to connect to any cell network, so I resorted to  ringing every buzzer on the building, saying with some embarrassment to the few that answered “Err, is Dan or Robert there?” (knowing full well they would not be from the moment I heard the older Spanish ladies answer).

Next plan was to jump on wi-fi…but it’s not Silicon Valley so finding a freely available wi-fi signal wasn’t easy.  I resorted to huddling in the door of an ice-cream shop, checking in on Facebook in exchange for 45 mins of wi-fi access, so that I could email my colleagues to see where they were.  A few minutes went by with no response, so I decided to download HotelTonight — why not?  Still no email responses from my colleagues (who were out enjoying some of the great food you can find in the city) so I began to search for a hotel.

Not 50ft from me was a great place at $110 for the night.  My finger hovered for a moment, above the elegant icon over which you must trace your finger  to confirm a booking.  Seeing no email from said colleagues pop into my inbox, I made the plunge, booked the hotel, and strolled over (avoiding one or two homeless people growling at me, and eyeing my suitcase enviably — Barcelona has its share of crazies).

Thankfully the drama was over there — I got some sleep, and met up with the team in the morning.  We headed over to the new office that we have recently leased in the city and, though I haven’t seen the “bootstrapped” version of our current office, it was fun to see all the employees arrive in what will soon be their truly professional home.

Two days of vibrant presentations and discussions followed, and I was particularly grateful for the engagement during my presentation (everyone has a view on marketing!).

Most impressive was the level of English in the office.  It left me feeling rather embarrassed given my less-than-schoolboy level of Spanish (I studied French and German in school).  Truth be told, the team was very impressive in many regards, not just their mastery of the English language.  For more on this topic, check out Teambox Founder Pablo Villalba’s blog post “Running an English speaking company“.

We wrapped up our meetings with some Tapas cooking lessons, and then a few of our team decided that rather than going to bed, we would simply wander round the city and explore Barcelona until the early hours, and then go directly to the airport without  heads hitting  pillows.  While cold, it was definitely an enjoyable expedition, though I was glad our account exec, rather than me, was the one groped by the pseudo-hookers that populate La Rambla.

By 5am I was at the airport, and feeling pretty tired.  This was compounded when I saw the “B” on my boarding passes (plural) indicating that I had a middle seat for flights from Barcelona to London, AND from London to San Francisco!  I must admit, I took this news harder than perhaps a grown adult should.  However, I pulled myself together over a great cup of coffee and a pastry, and resolved to change my seat as soon as I arrived in London.  Thankfully the flight to San Francisco wasn’t full, so this was an easy task.  Mini tantrum over.

In conclusion, it was a privilege to visit Barcelona and see the roots of the company for which I now work.  Living in the Valley we tend to think everything starts in Los Altos or Palo Alto.  Not so!  Let’s continue to embrace entrepreneurship around the world — and be thankful for those that learn English, thus enabling me and others to be part of these stories.

AngelList, the platform that connects startups, investors, and job-seekers began life in 2010 as a mailing list before the founders, Naval Ravikant and Babak Nivi, morphed it into the website that many in the startup community now use on a weekly, if not daily, basis.  One of the popular use cases has become looking for a new job.

I have used a number of online tools to research companies and keep my eye on opportunities over the years — the awful CareerBuilder, the woeful Monster, and the better LinkedIn — but it was right around the time that AngelList “got serious” that I started using it as a job search resource back in 2010 (when first considering departing Corporate America).

In the last few months I entered into a more focused job search, and while I still used LinkedIn, 80% of my effort was focused on AngelList.  This was mainly due to the fact that I was looking for a job in an early stage or startup company, so AngelList was an obvious place to start.

Now I am at the end of my search, having started a new job at Redbooth this week, I thought it would be useful to share what I learned using AngelList as a job search tool.  I was also inspired to codify my experiences when I read “A Signal for Emerging Startup Communities” on the Boundary Conditions blog.

So here’s what I learned.

1.  More transparency around what you’ll earn, and how much stock you’ll receive

Most job listings (all?) include information about cash and stock compensation.  It’s refreshing to have some transparency in the technology job marketplace.  My wife, a doctor, often quizzes me on why jobs I am discussing have little or no indication about compensation and my “that’s the way it is” response is clearly unsatisfactory.  In the medical world it’s far more common to have salaries listed on the job description that is posted.

Unfortunately, we haven’t yet achieved true transparency.  This is because most companies on AngelList opt for a spread, both for cash and stock.  It was quite common for me to see a marketing role that offered cash comp of $70-$125k and stock of 0-2%.  Obviously this spread is very wide, and I suspect this can actually make things harder for companies as most candidates will expect to come in at the top end of any range, whether this is realistic or not.

2.  The cash compensation listed can be “aspirational” (aka not real)

While there is transparency, I ran into multiple companies who had posted a salary, but in our first discussion they made it clear that the salary depended on a future funding event that might be many months away.  At least they made this clear early on in the conversation, but I think the posting should make this explicit.  It’s nice if you can work for stock only, but I am not so fortunate.

3.  Some roles are stale

I also encountered a number of “stale” job listings.  This probably happens for three reasons.

First, the job is filled, but not removed.  I know of at least one instance where this happened as a friend of mine filled a role some weeks back.

Second, the startup is evolving so quickly that a role that once existed no longer does, yet no one has the time to take the listing off.

Thirdly, and a little more sinister, having jobs listed creates an aura of success for investors and job-seekers alike.  I have known CEOs deliberately post bogus job descriptions, again part of the fake-it-till-you-make-it school of thought.

The good news is that if you spend a few weeks on the site looking for a role, you will come to recognize the companies you want to steer clear of.  However, it would be nice if AngelList implemented a “days on AngelList” metric, similar to those used on real estate websites.

4.  Access to Founders

One of the coolest things about my experience was near-immediate access to Founders.  Sure, it’s not that hard to figure out how to connect with a founder (firstname@companyname.com usually does it) but it was nice to inquire about a job and have a CEO or Founder get back to you.  It really lets you cut through a lot of BS and very quickly assess the fit for a role.

~

Overall, my experience with AngelList was great.  I have heard mixed things about it as a funding platform, but for the job search use case, it gets a thumbs up.

Summer is well and truly underway — though frighteningly some people are  talking about  autumn as if it’s already here — and it’s an interesting time to revisit the vacation policy debate that came up again recently.

Hubspot, a marketing software company in Cambridge MA, were recently back in the news concerning their unlimited vacation policy.  This isn’t a new story for Hubspot — it was covered as far back as 2011 and probably before — and nor is it a new discussion for the tech industry in general.  Perhaps most famously, Reed Hastings got similar press coverage around a very similar policy that he put in place at Netflix, one that has been copied at startups around the country beyond just Hubspot (Chegg is another good example).

The argument in favor of unlimited vacation boils down to the fact that in most startups people work really hard, and the concept of a 9-5 day, Mon-Fri doesn’t really make a lot of sense.  When you’re launching a new product, which team isn’t burning the midnight oil as well as working weekends too?  That’s normal.  As such, tracking vacation in a formal manner makes no sense in this context, and people should be empowered to make decisions that they believe are right given their responsibilities, and what they are trying to achieve as a company.

The other side of the argument posits that the absence of a vacation policy in fact results in pressure to take no vacation at all.  None.  Zero.  Indeed, there are some pretty scary comments on TechCrunch below an article MG Sielger wrote in 2009, which definitely suggest that the policy, rather than being one of freedom at Netflix, can become one in which you get fired for taking time off (I treat this with a very healthy does of skepticism, and it’s good balance to read the answers on Quora around the same topic — all very positive).

My personal view is that this is one of those situations where you can have your cake and eat it.

I love the idea of being empowered, and empowering employees to make decisions for themselves about how much time they can take off.  Manage people and teams based on the product they deliver (be it software, technical documentation; whatever “product” means given the job role), and don’t micro-manage how they get there.  If an employee is abusing the system it will be obvious — they will be under-delivering — and there should be a process in place to deal with these performance issues.

However, the “policy” should be augmented to deal with the concern that no policy = no vacation.  So, set a clear expectation with employees that they must take x number of days off a year, and that y is the target they should strive for.  Hopefully this will create a culture whereby people are comfortable taking time off and informing their colleagues of this.  There’s no stigma as people are required to take at least some time off.

It’s also important to implement this as an honor system, rather than through a formal tracking tool.  I spent 10 years in large corporate companies, and they never managed to track vacation time correctly or efficiently.  It always came down to an agreement with my boss about when to take time off, and I stuck to the rule of how much time I could take.  The systems implemented to track this were inefficient and largely a waste of time and money — exactly the reason Dharmesh Shah, Hubspot Co-founder/CTO, wants to stay away from this “solution”.

I am now going to practice what I preach and book a trip to Maui with my wife and daughter for the fall.  Head over to Expedia and plan to visit somewhere new — it’s unlikely you will regret it.

I spent an enjoyable July 4th with friends in San Mateo…doing what you do on this oh-so-American holiday — enjoying the sun, cooking and eating outside, and so on.  When I got home I scanned through my Twitter feed to see what was going on in the world, and before I knew it two hours had gone by and I was still following one story arc (which hasn’t yet concluded).

What caught my eye was a PandoDaily tweet that provided an “update” to a story that one of their journalists, Michael Carney, had written about Santa Monica-based startup BeachMint (noted by an article in the LA Times is that the startup is in Santa Monica, not Los Angeles!).

BeachMint is “A next generation social commerce company”.  Ok, what does that mean?  Well, they were founded in 2010 and have what can only be described as a complicated array of sub-brands:  JewelMint, StyleMint, BeautyMint, ShoeMint, HomeMint and, finally, IntiMint (if the company is truly in some strife as is being speculated, expect them to whittle this list of six down to fewer — maybe two or three).  Basically BeachMint boils down to celebs hawking products.

The thrust of Carney’s original piece was that he had learned, from six independent sources, that the BeachMint board were going to sack the two founders, and return some funds to investors — not exactly a positive sign.  BeachMint quickly reacted and denied any truth to this story, and the next day, on July 3rd, Sarah Lacy published an update.

It’s this update, and the comments below it (especially those involving Paul Carr), that really sucked me in.  Two things stood out in what Paul raised.

First, it certainly *appears* as if BeachMint employees, or people close to the company, created accounts to post on PandoDaily with pseudonyms to refute the claims and stick up for BeachMint.  We’ll never know if this is truly the case, but it does seem fishy.

Second, it felt like watching a train wreck in slow motion as I read the discussion between Paul and David Oh develop.  David got off on the wrong foot by not being upfront about his role at BeachMint (Paul’s response:  “David, you should disclose that you are Director of Acquisition at BeachMint. “), and from there he continued to stumble.  Paul does verge on pedantic/nit-picky, but he is honing in on some interesting points, and highlighting inconsistencies that may or may not prove consequential.

What am I taking away from all this, besides the pure entertainment value?  Well, speaking generally it clearly behooves companies to get truly organized around how they engage with the media, particularly when something like this flares up.  Have a plan prepared before you get in this situation — know how your company will react in the case of a PR nightmare.

Be careful too how advisors and other people “close” to the company are involved and, if possible, have a single spokesperson take the lead such that everything can be coordinated.  Don’t shy away from (privately) telling people to shut up.

We wait to see how this story will conclude…

 “Rich people (angels) are charging the poor people (startup entrepreneurs desperate for cash to fuel their dreams) to hear their pitch. No, I’m not kidding. This is actually happening — and it’s widespread.”

– Jason Calacanis, October 2009

Jason Calacanis published an infamous rant (his term) in 2009 stating that startups shouldn’t have to pay to pitch to angel investors, and calling out some of the angel groups that were operating this way.  This generated a lot of debate, including support from the likes of Fred Wilson (the acclaimed VC), and defense from others such as Chris Padfield (part of something called the Angels Den in the UK, one of the groups Jason called out).

Recently I have been involved in a couple of situations where the startups I have been working with have considered their pitch approach.  It was doing some quick research again one night that reminded me of Jason’s vitriolic and passionate argument, and led me to wonder – what’s changed?

To address this, I tried to find out if the organizations highlighted by Jason were still around, and if they were still charging to pitch.  This is what I discovered:

• Keiretsu Forum – while their website obfuscates the fact, there is indeed a $6,000 fee if your are “selected” to pitch.  I had to get this information by emailing their contact address.
• Maverick Angels – still $495, packaged as a workshop, which must be taken before you get the chance to pitch.
• PrivateEquityForums.com – this website has the look and feel of the 90s, which alone should be a huge warning flag.  I couldn’t find their price to pitch, so I emailed the organizer who wrote back to confirm that there is a fee, but that he wanted “no e-mails with questions please”.  Can you hear the alarm bell going off in my head?
• Tech Super Club – now defunct?
• Angels Den (UK) – They offer a lot of packages for £799, + a 5% success fee.
• USAngelinvestors.com – did not respond to email.
• Angel Venture Forum  – $1500 per finalist, with verbiage talking about how this doesn’t come close to covering costs.
• Central Texas Angels Network – They charge $250 to submit an application, and that’s before you even get the chance to pitch.  Wow.  They did not respond to my email follow-up.

Many of the above will defend their decision to charge on the basis that there are costs involved in running and hosting the pitch event; that charging a fee acts as an initial quality screen;  and that “hours” are spent pouring over pitch decks and providing feedback.  All of this may be true, in which case I would argue that this is how the “service” should be structured and sold, rather than orienting around the pitch event itself.  You are paying for advice, not to pitch.

Many entrepreneurs will also consider options such as The LAUNCH Festival or TechCrunch Disrupt, though getting in is very competitive.  However, even for these events that don’t charge to pitch, you need to consider how much time and energy you will need to invest in the process, and weigh this against the likely outcomes.  Anecdotal evidence I have collected is mixed, but be wary of believing that getting on stage and launching/pitching guarantees anything (though at least your dev team will have a concrete delivery date to hit!).

As an aside, I recently went through the very detailed preparation and follow-up work that was required to launch on stage at DEMO Mobile in San Francisco.  Email me for coffee if you want to hear about the experience.

Overall, when thinking about if you should pay to pitch, my view is — no.  It makes little sense as an entrepreneur…if you have a great idea then through your own sweat and perseverance you should be able to get access to Angels and other investors (and don’t underestimate AngelList as a tool).  Getting a meeting isn’t the biggest challenge; walking out of the room with a signed check is much harder!

First, let me say that I love the movies and I love startups. So, qiiwhen I first learned of Dealflicks in 2012 I was very excited to see what Sean, Kevin, and Zachary were planning. TechCrunch covered them in February 2013, in their review of the recent 500 Startups class, and stated:

“Filling last-minute vacancies by offering discounts is a strategy that has worked well for other apps such as Priceline and Hotel Tonight, so this could really be one to watch.”

On top of this endorsement, I have been following Dealflicks on Facebook for some time, and they have a quirky, fun approach to how they engage with their audience, as evidenced by some of the screenshots at the end. In a sea of advertising dross on my Facebook newsfeed, Dealflicks always stands out. You can’t help but want to like these guys and the company they’re building. It’s a brand I and many like me can identify with.

So when I consider Dealflicks there seems to be a lot of promise. Discount or deal sites have flourished (and then fallen from great heights in the horizontal space, with Groupon being the poster child) and going to the movies, especially for the average American family, can be a pricey proposition — especially with the introduction of 3D, 48 FPS, IMAX etc.

This led me to start thinking about a blog post, and my hypothesis was that Dealflicks faced the problem of trying to sell inventory at a discount to a group of people that were not price sensitive. Movie theaters are not poorly attended at 11am on a Wednesday morning because the ticket price (usually already discounted) is too high; rather it’s because they have other things to do…like go to work.

However, I have checked the Dealflicks website a number of times over the last few days and have been pleasantly surprised at the number of evening offerings, and it’s a smart move to bundle concessions too. Popcorn and sugary beverages come at often eye-wateringly high prices, so it’s an astute move for the Dealflicks team to take a chunk out of these margins in an attempt to woo the marginal consumer.

The challenge for theater managers is to not release inventory for shows that would sell out – but that’s not hard to predict, given the enormous drop-off most movies experience after opening weekend. If you wanted to see The Hangover 3 on opening night (I hope you didn’t after the aberration that was The Hangover 2) then you’re out of luck…Dealflicks likely couldn’t help you there. But if you’re willing to wait a few days, or if you have, dare I say it, more discerning tastes, then the guys at Dealflicks are onto something.

By way of example, while not available in my local area (Palo Alto), the movies recently highlighted for me in Cupertino (the closest location to me) all look like high quality and good value (these were the four visible above the fold):

• The Company you Keep
• The Reluctant Fundamentalist
• Life of Pi
• The Place Beyond the Pines

Judged by quality, this seems a good selection, and maybe leans towards a more “mature” segment. But I suspect this is a product of many of the early adopters being smaller, semi-independent operators that show a mix of features. Much easier for the Dealflicks team to sell to these guys than your local AMC I suspect.

I am rooting for these guys to succeed, and encourage you to check them out. Guys, one plea – please add some theaters closer to where I live soon!