28 Apr 2008
0 CommentsIs There More to Early Adopters than the Next Big Thing?
In saying:
“believe me, you have to get up early if you want to get out of bed”
it’s not entirely clear that Groucho Marx was referring the much-vaunted early adopter of a previous post. Therein, I illuminated how important early adopters are and the hazards of miscuing when serving them in newly minted markets. Because of this, I thought I’d share a few personal experiences of what motivates me to adopt early. Of course, I’m a technophile, yet I’m hardly indiscriminate in my acquisition of new technologies.
How do I decide where to focus my energies? Let’s start by looking at a few of the new technologies I didn’t adopt and why not, and discern some lessons from that.
“The Ultimate Audiophile’s Turntable”
British Audiophile Bible in the 1970’s and 1980’s
Compact Disc
As an audiophile in the 1970’s, I spent lots of time researching and purchasing hi-fi audio systems with a primarily primarily British lineage, including: high end turntable (Linn Sondek or Rega), cartridge (Supex), pre-pre-amp, pre-amp (Meridian, Naim or Tangent), amplifier, speakers (Harbeth), etc. I read the quirky “Hi Fi Answers”, patronized audiophile shrines like Ring Audio and CC Audio and even had equipment (from Tangent) for which total production volume was about 100.
The 1982 introduction of the Compact Disc (CD) was a major market disruption. Unfortunately, although the CD overcame the clicks and pops inherent in the analogue vinyl LP , the format had a disappointingly low sample rate limited by the state of technology at the time. As a good friend and audiophile engineer, who worked on the Synclavier synthesizer, said: “you can’t simulate a sine wave with a square wave”. Well, doubly so at too low a sample rate. Forced to create a standard that was at best a compromise, high end audio has suffered ever since. And, we won’t even mention that audiophile travesty known as MP3‘s.
I can remember being at the Spring CES in 1984 and hearing a CD demoed against a Linn Sondekand Meridian bi-amped system. After the blindfolds were removed, it was clear that i had been the LP which produced bright and vibrant sounds, while the CD sounded comparatively lifeless. As a result, I probably delayed my conversion from LPs to CDs for about 5 years, if only because the CD was good enough for the average audio listener. It’s interesting that the lowly vinyl LP continues in the turntable art and mashup set today, while I continue to remain unexcited by the sound quality of the CD, a standard launched more than 26 years ago. Of course, 99% of the market, apart from the long tail like me, think the CD was a vast improvement over the compact cassette and a low end turntable.
Blackberry Pearl – Convergence of Network and Information
First Mass Market PDA 1996
Personal Digital Asistant
Way back in 1996 when some of my early adopter buddies hoisted their trendy stylus to enter text in a new language called Graffiti, the Palm Pilot was all the rage. Nonetheless I stuck stubbornly to my paper and leather Economist personal diary. My paper-based calendar and address book was simply good enough for me on a pragmatic level and it was also portable, fitting nicely into my jacket pocket.
What I seemed to know intuitively, way back then, was that the technology disuprtion that would change my thinking was the addition of the (mobile) internet connectivity into the mix. So, for me, the late 1999 birth of the original Blackberry 950 was a quite different story than the first PDAs. Essentially a two-way pager, which primitively fused email connectivity with the calendar and address book of the PDA, the early Blackberry was much less sleek than the device I now carry (pictured on the right).
By solving a new problem, doing email and keeping almost all my information at my fingertips, it became an indispensable arrow in the quiver of a nascent mobile nomad.
The Next Wave
Apple iPhone – Next Generation Browsing Experience
Asus eee – MID Computer
Building on the lessons of the Blackberry, for me, the next wave of applications will clearly be in the web-enabled, mobile applications category. As an inadvertent mobile nomad, the value in being an early adopter may well be more apparent to me, and allow me to put up with more glitches than the next person. Of course, at least in North America, the entire mobile data infrastructure is still one big “beta test” when scrutinized for coverage, reliability and cost factors.
The big gap I see for the coming few years will be to both transition existing applications off my desktop and/or notebook computer and also to build new applications that benefit from the fusion of internet and mobile standards with things like GPS, Bluetooth, camera, secure payments, etc. Ironically, as we see convergence of more and more features in a single mobile device, we will also witness a new specialization as well. For example, a high-end GPS navigation device or a Mobile Internet Device (MID) may well have roles that the basic smartphone will never fulfill.
Recently, I’ve been testing a very simple MID computer called the Asus EeePC. With 7″ screen, full (but small keyboard), 8 GB solid state flash disc, 2 GB RAM and the ability to add 32GB of SDHC or USB disc, and running Ubuntu it does almost everything a legacy Windows notebook does. However, this is small, light, solid state so it can be used in more places and more flexibly. Not without some rough edges, the device shows promise and at least will help me evaluate a more mobile web-enabled application set of the future.
Lessons
Here are some lessons I’ve learned that have applicability both to those who like to live on the “bleeding edge” and to companies trying to serve the early adopter market:
- most early adopters are quite selective in the technologies they will invest time in as pioneering users. Most either explicitly or intuitively identify gaps in their personal or business application environment.
- in fact, perhaps each adapts a particular form of the “Ten X Rule” – ie. a new technology has to be at least 10 times better than what exists in the marketplace, simply to justify the switching costs. Some people may remember the Digital Audio Tape which, among other failings, didn’t need the 10X Rule compared to existing technologies.
- early adopters in one product category may well be early majority or mainstream users of other technologies.
- Next generation products, while better in many aspects, may well be a step backward in other ways.
Being a technology pioneer is both fun and time confusing. With appropriate focus, it does have its rewards. Please feel free to share your early adopter war stories and, to comment on the trends identified here.
6 May 2008
0 CommentsTech Leadership Redux
I finally found some time to record thoughts on a great conference – last Thursday’s Tech Leadership Conference (TLC) by Communitech.
CEO ROUNDTABLE:
Verdexus once again gathered a few tech CEOs from Waterloo and Toronto, the night before at Charbries, to have an informal and open-ended discussion of key issues in financing, growing, valuing and finding exits for technology startups.
As in past years, we assembled an accomplished group who have built primarily software-based businesses during the last decade and are now executing newer models, whether SaaS or the more esoteric Venture 2.0 Playbook necessary for “so-called” Web 2.0 and Mobile businesses. In an earlier blog, I covered a past TLC speaker and Verdexus advisor Grover RIghter’s Venture 2.0 Playbook.
Numerous war stories about increased complexities of dealing with founders, VCs, groups of angel investors, not to mention simply making enterprise sales highlighted common success factors of perseverence to overcome obstacles, failure and experimentation before ultimate success and just plain good luck around timing. The drying up of VC money and other funding challenges remain a constant theme.
Experience in building great businesses over the last ten years has a lot to teach us today. However, the 2008 market also demands significantly different startup building techniques. To explore that, we spent time dissecting the Web 2.0 phenomenon. Some key questions we analyzed were:
In addition, we spoke about:
TECH LEADERSHIP KEYNOTES:
For anyone attending the May 1st Tech Leadership Conference, you can see that our roundtable discussions were right on point for what the US-based, most west coast and Web 2.0 focused speakers were telling the audience. In fact, it was striking how common the issues between the two back-to-back events turned out to be.
First of all, Chris Anderson, editor of Wired, author the The Long Tail and most notably a past contributor to my favourite magazine, The Economist, spoke about the increasingly dominant role of FREE in product pricing strategies. Speaking from the perspective of an economist, Anderson illuminated why, increasingly, products and services, particularly those in the online digital realm, are moving to free or low cost pricing. He boldly predicted that “free is going to be the price of some version of any product”. First of all, the cost of production and distribution of these virtual products is primarily based on such inputs as computer processing power, network bandwidth, digital data storage, All of these are approaching zero or very low cost. Anderson underscored this by showing that the cost of serving video for 1 hour over the internet was about 1/4 cent per hour (and would be 1/8 cent per hour next year).
This is important because basic economics teaches us that “in a competitive industry price will equal marginal cost.” At the very least, this means that competitive online markets will almost always involve competing with a free offering. Anderson presented a fabulous dissection of why this is true and the implications for business, and especially tech startups in fields like web, social media, mobile and digital media.
He spent less time on the monetization strategies startups should use to compete in these free-dominated markets. Although he presented the “freemium“ business model wherein 99% use a basic and free offering, while revenues come from the 1% who are most engaged and hence see the greatest value. However, as I’m engaged in real world exploration of these web 2.0 monetization strategies even as I write this, there is so much more to this critical topic. The previously mentioned Grover Righter Venture 2.0 playbook delves deep, exploring a hierarchy of monetization models, including mashups, text ads, video ads, carriage, points, subscription, vending, etc.
Having already seen venture investor and advisor Chris Sacca doing a similar presentation at the Deloitte Predictions conference in January 2008, I will spend less time on his lunch time keynote. Sacca is an especially smart and engaging speaker and probably the best I’ve seen in sharing the Silicon Valley culture, expousing lessons learned during his recent work as head of special initiatives for Google.
The statistic that still resonates with me from his January talk was that Google is the largest purchaser of Filet Mignons in California. Having struggled over the years to import the Silicon Valley culture of focus and fun to Waterloo, I continue to wonder whether a direct import is possible given our differences of culture, climate and politics here in Canada. But, we this is definitely worth exploring and I’d really be interested in a Google employee’s analysis of the office and amenities in Waterloo compared to Mountain View.
On a deeper note, Sacca’s described his almost evangelical mission to lobby the FCC and help shape the subsequent 700 MHz spectrum to ensure it would be an open wireless platform. I’ve spoken a number of times about how broken our mobile environment is and that we need an improved regulatory framework and increased competition to get out of our current “dark ages”. In engaging the FCC, Chris has helped move the regulatory piece forward and with its Android open handset initiative, there is a good chance that Google will increase competitive intensity as well.
Lastly, Sacca weighed in on the topic of building new companies more efficiently and at the same time, took a swipe at VCs, in saying “traditional VC funds haven’t fathomed how cheap it is now to build a software company”. He continued that he “wouldn’t know how to be a VC, when you can start a company without maxing out a credit card”. Overstatement perhaps, but it does drive home the point we’ve been exploring for some time.
The interplay of the two Chris’s (Anderson and Sacca) with later keynote Jeff Taylor (Eons, ex-Monster) and Rick Segal (venture parter at JLA Ventures) mashed up into a panel with maestro Mark Evans (PlanetEye, ex-National Post) moderating. Iain Klugman of Communitech is to be congratulated for putting this together. Never before have I seen so much mental horsepower and raw in the trenches experience on one stage. The panel, for which I believe Communitech plans to have a video stream available shortly, was a true highlight.
Again, major kudos to Communitech for pulling this remarkable event together. It is a real step forward for the Waterloo startup scene. To illustrate, less than three years ago, at October 2005 Entrepreneur Week, when Tony Perkins (AlwaysOn, founder RedHerring) spoke about many of the same Web 2.0 issues, the lack of readiness of the audience to receive this message was most apparent. The recent TLC dramatically shows that we’ve come a long way in those last few years in transitioning to the next generation of tech in Waterloo Region.