Whether you run a startup (pre-revenue and running on fumes), a larger, later stage company (with actual revenues and earnings) or even a public technology company, the topic of cash should never be far from your consciousness. And, it goes without saying that keeping tabs on cash is generally even more germane in social enterprises.
For many early stage entrepreneurs, skilled in technology, marketing and strategy, the notion of vigilance around cash burn might seem mundane, something to be avoided or delegated. There is no question that companies endowed with more cash on their balance sheets can act more strategically. Conversely, It is the rare company indeed that isn’t significantly cash constrained at some part of its life cycle. As a result, you need to be on top of cash burn and not let cash crises catch you off guard.
Of course your need, or even better should virtualize, solid financial and accounting management skills. Notwithstanding this, as CEO, cash needs to figure as a constant item in your personal mental checklist. In the New Venture 2.0 Playbook, discussed in much more detail in an earlier blog post here,Grover Righter has aptly dubbed the level of importance of cash as “The CEO’s Mistress” (pictured at right).
No, not like this!
Yet, many entrepreneurial CEOs can’t answer simple, but fundamental, questions, such as:
what is your monthly burn?
what is the life of existing (and committed) cash in the business?
Which expenses could be cut, should I wish to extend this cash life by lessening burn?
What was that cheque really for?
While the Venture 2.0 Playbook outlines a complete methodology to build certain entrepeneurial technology startups, from beginning to exit for much less money, the key point of today’s post is that every entrepreneurial CEO must internalize the whole issue of cash burn. Remember, it’s not enough to sleep peacefully at night, comfortable in the notion that your CFO is handling all of that cash stuff.
And, ironically, this need doesn’t disappear even in a larger firm. When I ran a public company, portfolio manager expectation was that the CEO knew the business model, budget and forecast to a reasonable level of detail for up to 2 years into the future and also with longer term strategic thinking. Because public CEOs (and CFOs) are expected to give “street guidance” of future quarters, it feels like trying to drive a car where the steering column is very long — in this case say 18 months long. Keeping all of this in your head can be challenging. And, furthermore as you discussing product, market and strategic questions, all may well have financial implications. In other words, even minor adjustments in one area of the business can significantly alter the “18 month steering” problem of future financial guidance.
To summarize, for the entrepreneur without formal financial training, seriously consider upgrading your financial skills (by formal training, finding a good mentor or via your own research). And, even more important, take them to heart – particularly in the area of cash management.
In the tech heyday of the mid-1990’s, my favourite US investment banker, Mark Slater (formerly of Hambrecht & Quist) had a strategy to avoid CEOs that, as he so eloquently put it, “Drank their own bathwater”. Mark had identified the tendency amongst CEOs, even entire executive teams, to become so satiated with the power and glitz of riding the waves of technology/media hype, that the corporate adulation goes straight to their head.
Ego and ambition, never faults in themselves, taken to extremes tend to cloud better judgment. Anyone who has visited their capital city, like Washington, London or Ottawa, has witnessed the same effect that all that marble and walnut lining the corridors of power have on newly elected Members of Parliament or Congress.
I’m sure all of us entrepreneurs have been seduced by the siren call of their own PR. I know I have. But long ago I learned that, no matter how big the entrepreneur’s ego, it is critical to be self analytical and have enough inner humility and judgement to resist the corrupting force of power and spin. Every company has faults, challenges and issues to deal with. In truth, no matter how great the press or the wave being ridden, no company can entirely escape the buffeting of real world forces and the ups and downs of a cruel world. Navigating such turbulent waters is simply another challenge entrepreneurs need to face every day.
Ed Iacobucci, CEO Dayjet
One example, and a person I would consider a mentor and role model, is Ed Iacobucci, founder of Citrix Systems and more recently Dayjet. Ed, an industry visionary, pundit, technologist supreme with energy and a will to win, is a man for whom I have infinite respect. Specifically, Ed has weathered highs and lows like almost no one else I know. For example, when I first met him, he was CEO of an almost bankrupt startup selling multi-user OS/2 technology (go figure). Later, after re-targeting the Citrix product family around Windows NT, his company was a NASDAQ darling and on a roll.
Imagine being in Ed’s shoes when, at the February H&Q conference at the Westin St. Francis in San Francisco, he learned that Microsoft had just informed them that they were planning to compete with their core product, Ed led the charge with the team. First he did the honest thing and issued a press release, which had the effect of instantly wiping out over 80% of Citrix’s market capitalization. Without even going home, Ed flew straight to Redmond and led the 24×7 multi-month battle to save Citrix from being “Quickenized” by Microsoft. A $150 million deal saved the day, but the key fact was that Ed remained honest to himself and his shareholder base throughout, which is no simple task for a major public company given shareholder disclosure rules. Several years later, when his stock price touched $50, making Citrix worth a cool $20 billion, his only comment was a modest and realistic “that stock price is a lot to live up to.” Perhaps this illustrates why I have such admiration for Ed as an individual.
For every Ed Iacobucci, there were many dot com era fibre and telecom firms that, despite all hard data to the contrary, ran their businesses into the ground on the false proposition that the interent was doubling every 90 days. And, make not mistake, sheer hubris was the major contributing factor.
In summary, humility and being self critical (“not drinking your own bath water) coupled with fearless passion (the killer instinct and laser beam focus) are two of the most important qualities in the Entrepreneurial Toolkit. Well balanced, and taken together, they are a winning combination. Most importantly, like almost all personal success factors, they can and must be learned as only a rare few are born with this wiring.
Big “boil the ocean” issues (with apologies for the corny metaphor) like Global Warming overwhelm many people with their scope, long time scale and difficulty to solve. Predictions that human activity, which has of late been increasingly generating Green House Gases (GHGs) which in turn accumulate in the atmosphere and, by changing the heat retention of the whole earth’s ecosystem, cause our average temperatures to warm up, are now almost universally accepted as fact rather than just scientific theory.
In response, socially responsible businesses and individuals have started to buy carbon offsets which seek to provide an alternative reduction elsewhere, equivalent to the actual carbon they the purchaser of the offset produces. While worthwhile, most offsets are, in fact, delivered via the CDM part of the Kyoto Protocol in the absence of more pervasive emissions trading schemes. CDM, short for Clean Development Mechanism, invests in programs in developing countries which reduce GHG emissions.
But, what about reducing our emissions here in Canada and the United States? I’d like to share a best kept secret, namely the Elora Centre for Environmental Excellence (ECEE), a charitable organization of which I am the Board Chair and co-founder. Without a lot of fanfare, this organization was an early innovator of home audits which were aimed at improving our residential housing stock and working to both educate and deliver greater energy efficiency for homes (as well as water and waste). Originally, we pioneered a “Green Home Visit” just for our small community of Elora, Ontario which our current Executive Director, Don Eaton had the vision develop into a nationwide home labelling system. Don’s vision was for all homes to receive simple label of energy efficiency, say on a scale of 0 (heating the outdoors) to 100 (heated only by the heat generated by the inhabitants) which would provide:
an objective standard that would drive a market for energy efficiency,
a system endorsed by realtors and contribute to the relative value of the home,
homeowners would be directly educated in energy efficiency issues on the spot during the process of home evaluation and label production,
an auditable and objective benchmark that would allow homeowners to better select contractors for upgrades (e.g. draftproofing, insulation, furnace, windows, etc.)
In the late 1990’s, Don was one of a group of experts who put this dream into reality, in the context of a Canadian federal government programme, called EnerGuide for Houses. The name “EnerGuide” was borrowed from a pre-existing and well-known Canadian government appliance labelling standard. Don Eaton became an icon of this program, by providing much of the initial training for hundreds and hundreds of Certified Energy Advisors over the years, through a national-wide environmental service organization, Green Communities Canada, of which ECEE is a founding member. Such is the level of Don’s expertise, that he’s been called to provide expert help in developing programmes in places like the UK and US.
EnerGuide for Houses grew quietly until May 2006, when the Stephen Harper government killed the program in what was clearly a partisan, and ill conceived, move. It was reinstated, as EcoAction for Houses last year, but only after the collateral damage of hundreds of trained Certified Home Evaluators being forced out of the system by the over 12 month funding chasm. But, that’s a story for another day …
To make a long story short, home efficiency from EcoEnergy programmes conducted just by ECEE (in the service area of southwestern Ontario shown on the map below) so far delivers 8 000 tonnes of GHG reduction per year over the about 16 000 homes we’ve audited. Taking into account the Canada-wide results, and remembering that the reductions are, in effect, permanent so each and every year the savings continue and fewer GHGs are emitted into our atmosphere.
Remember too that this is still an early adopter programme. Because the homeowner pays a relatively nominal sum, although mitigated by government funded homeowner rewards for energy reductions and other cross-subsidies, it is far from universal. The most advanced communities have an audit penetration of approximately 5% while many are far lower.
Studies in Canada and the US, show that residential energy is the source of just under one-quarter of our GHG production, with the rest being transportation, industry and agriculture. So, taking market penetration much higher, to 30% or 40%, would make a real difference as we see below.
It is instructive to correlate the above case study in real GHG reduction with an article in May 10, 2008 Economist, entitled The Elusive Negawatt, “If energy conservation both saves money and is good for the planet, why don’t people do more of it?” Some of the key points made in that article are:
energy efficiency is really the “fifth fuel”, after coal, gas, oil and uranium, as a practical way to satisfy growing energy demand.
this fifth fuel of reduction and efficiency, also called “negawatts“, reduces rather than produces Greenhouse Gases, and enhances wealth at the same time.
McKinsey Global Institute suggests that energy efficiency could provide half of the savings needed to for the world to keep GHGs to below 550 ppm in the atmosphere, a level suggested that would reverse or stabilize climate change.
Some studies suggest a payback of 30% for many energy efficiency programmes, which is remarkable in itself.
If energy efficiency programmes are all goodness and light why aren’t they more pervasive? How do we get the production of negawatts beyond its early adopter stage?
It’s pretty clear that we need the right combination of committed governments, utilities and private sector partners working with environmental service organizations like ECEE that are providing the “real down in the trenches” work right at the homeowners doorstep. With such a tantalizing prize beckoning, let’s not wait too long to seize it.
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:
Q: in building companies for less (e.g. under $10 million, or even $5 million, from start to exit), is this building a complete company? Or, is an exit to a much larger acquirer the only way such nimbly funded companies can be grown to full scale? A: yes and no, we had some quite different opinions on this, so perhaps the jury is still out.
Q: likewise, are these companies inherently built around smaller applications, that aren’t as technologically deep as earlier startups, or is there a genuine breakthrough in company cost structures? A: yes there are real breakthroughs in outsourcing, virtualization, hardware and network costs, virtualizing management, etc. Furthermore, while some Venture 2.0 companies are big plays, many are ultimately just a piece of the whole product and will ultimately find their true “home” only when acquired.
Q: in an age of “free”, what are the long term monetization strategies that will build companies of real value? A: see discussion around TLC and Chris Anderson, below.
In addition, we spoke about:
the right time and stage to start going outside for money, and hence the tradeoffs between purely organic growth and the accelerated growth rates external finance allows.
how to get and maintain, and perhaps legally incent, alignment between investors and management.
the difficulties a “closed” mobile environment, particularly in Canada and the US, presents to startups and whether purely web-based applications (a laiPhone) represent the optimal rollout strategy. The emergence of 3G will only enhance this strategy (3G is expected to be 20% of handsets by 2010, but that number would be skewed to non-North American markets).
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.
The world is indeed a strangely fascinating place. Technological forces have recently flattened the world, making the global village predicted by Marshall McLuhan way back in the early 1960’s a reality. Nicholas Negroponte’s highly publicized One Laptop Per Child project aside, the mobile phone is uniquely the one technology that has both gained traction and been as transformational in the developing world as in the west.
With that in mind, RoryStewart’s The Places in Between brilliantly captures the cultural melange that is modern Afghanistan. Having recently completed this book left me with a much richer understanding Afghanistan’s position as the “missing link” among European, Chinese and South Asian cultures, religions and history. Stewart, as a historian, and fearless trekker, captures the absurdities inherent in the American/NATO invasion, especially as they compound attempted occupations by Russia, colonial Britain and before them a long line going back even before Alexander the Great. I’d strongly encourage people to read this book.
In this context of historical and cultural dissonance, it was sadly amusing to read the following line about a small tribal village that retains its own language and culture and is (supposedly) isolated from the modern world:
“As we went to sleep someone turned on a radio tuned to the BBC Dari service. A Bill Gates speech on American policy toward technology monopologies was being translated into Dari. The men listened intently. I wondered what these illiterate men without electricity thought of bundling Internet Explorer with Windows.”
Likewise, the 1999 Vietnamese/American film Three Seasons (Trois Saisons) beautifully shows the traditional Asian culture clashing with western technology and ideals. Of course, the viewer is ever mindful of the backstory first the French, then American, attempts to conquer Vietnam colour the whole story. History is never far from the surface.
We who work to bring the latest and greatest technology innovations to the market, while working in an increasingly flat and seemingly homogeneous world, should never forget how intensely the forces of history shape today’s reality. But, we must never forget that increased globalization rarely means homogenization. Since culture and history continue to be full of surprises, whether dispensing international aid or designing “world” products, people must never forget the human element.
On Thursday, I attended the pre-launch party for what is an exciting new social enterprise. The guest of honour, Jonathan Howard, a 24 year old (and, I am proud to say, my nephew), is embarking on an extraordinary quest. On Tuesday, 25 March he will, in his RunTheDream charity fundraiser, do what most of us wouldn’t ever even consider attempting – to run across Canada, a distance of over 9 000 km from St. John’s to Victoria.
Why has Jonathan undertaken this amazing, and many of us would say impossible, run? Well, besides proving to himself that he can, Jonathan who is already an accomplished athlete and marathon runner, has had this personal goal since his university days. And, even more importantly, he hopes to raise significant funds for Autism Society of Canada, a rapidly emerging cause, yet one that still lags some of the bigger charities in its awareness and fundraising. In addition to a significant fundraising objective, a CSF for Jonathan’s will be to significantly increase awareness of the Autism Spectrum Disorders across Canada.
How can you help Jonathan raise his (minimum) goal of $2.5 million? The website at http://www.runthedream.ca will be launched on Tuesday March 25th, and in addition to regularly updated progress reports, online donations can be made on this site, or printable forms for mailing purposes are also provided. Alternatively, any Canadians can email from their online banking portal to “mydonation@runthedream.ca”. Please give generously, however you choose to donate.
One of my personal favourite quotes to characterize the exceptional nature of entrepreneurism is:
“Entrepreneurism – making the impossible merely difficult”
This surely applies to Jonathan’s demonstrated passion to embark on a task that 99.999% of us would view as impossible. And, part of achieving the impossible is the creation of a great “social enterprise” in RunTheDream, having startup metrics like:
Year one revenue (contributions) target of $2.5 million (which very few technology startups aspire to, let alone achieve
8 month run timeline, but probably almost two years of activities planned from conception to completion
corporate partners, like Telus, MuchMusic, Gatorade, Landmark Sport Group & Spa Sensations
a “board” & management group of about 15 core individuals doing everything from public relations, event planning, logistics, business development and partnering, etc.
and, like most technology startups, Jonathan and the team have developed this using years and months of passionately dedicated “sweat equity”
So, by these measures, this a not “your father’s” approach to charity or nonprofit and, I remain excited how the passionate entrepreneurism of remarkable individuals like Jonathan Howard, continue to transform our society in very positive ways. We all wish Jonathan good luck in embarking on his trans-Canada odyssey.
On Saturday, I had the very good fortune to hike through an amazing wilderness reserve and research centre, named rare with London-based artist and filmmaker David Buckland who has created Cape Farewell as well as several naturalists who interpreted this wonderful reserve. The experience was a special one for me, beyond the great outdoors and the people I was with.
Firstly, I love the outdoors, and this is the first time I’ve really been out in nature (the rough ground being a bit of a challenge) since I recovered from a broken leg. So, Saturdy was like a new beginning.
Secondly, at the end, we had a chance to hear David Buckland talk about Cape Farewell and some of their programs. Here is how they describe themselves:
“Cape Farewell brings artists, scientists and educators together to collectively address and raise awareness about climate change. “
David, as a visual artist and film maker definitely has a unique approach. They take boats, with artists, educators and students into the arctic, many through passages that were, prior to the current warming trend, ice bound. The whole point is to engage all of the senses and make a big impact on the participants.
Those people, in turn, will come back as evangelists (or mavens) to spread the word through their social graph. And, for the next voyage in September 2008, for the first time 11 students from across Canada (one from rare) will be able to go and share this incredible experience.
In an age where more and more people feel somewhat disconnected from the natural world, this approach certainly has merit.
And, my comment about climate change inducing torpor was more dedicated to the older generation – the one already making the economic and political decisions that have got us into this situation. I suspect that, far from being detached and cynic, the young people will come back energized as agents of change in what may well be one of the most important “save the world” endeavours for the human race ever.
8 Jul 2008
0 CommentsEntrepreneurial Toolkit #4: Taste the Cash Burn
Whether you run a startup (pre-revenue and running on fumes), a larger, later stage company (with actual revenues and earnings) or even a public technology company, the topic of cash should never be far from your consciousness. And, it goes without saying that keeping tabs on cash is generally even more germane in social enterprises.
For many early stage entrepreneurs, skilled in technology, marketing and strategy, the notion of vigilance around cash burn might seem mundane, something to be avoided or delegated. There is no question that companies endowed with more cash on their balance sheets can act more strategically. Conversely, It is the rare company indeed that isn’t significantly cash constrained at some part of its life cycle. As a result, you need to be on top of cash burn and not let cash crises catch you off guard.
Of course your need, or even better should virtualize, solid financial and accounting management skills. Notwithstanding this, as CEO, cash needs to figure as a constant item in your personal mental checklist. In the New Venture 2.0 Playbook, discussed in much more detail in an earlier blog post here, Grover Righter has aptly dubbed the level of importance of cash as “The CEO’s Mistress” (pictured at right).
No, not like this!
Yet, many entrepreneurial CEOs can’t answer simple, but fundamental, questions, such as:
While the Venture 2.0 Playbook outlines a complete methodology to build certain entrepeneurial technology startups, from beginning to exit for much less money, the key point of today’s post is that every entrepreneurial CEO must internalize the whole issue of cash burn. Remember, it’s not enough to sleep peacefully at night, comfortable in the notion that your CFO is handling all of that cash stuff.
And, ironically, this need doesn’t disappear even in a larger firm. When I ran a public company, portfolio manager expectation was that the CEO knew the business model, budget and forecast to a reasonable level of detail for up to 2 years into the future and also with longer term strategic thinking. Because public CEOs (and CFOs) are expected to give “street guidance” of future quarters, it feels like trying to drive a car where the steering column is very long — in this case say 18 months long. Keeping all of this in your head can be challenging. And, furthermore as you discussing product, market and strategic questions, all may well have financial implications. In other words, even minor adjustments in one area of the business can significantly alter the “18 month steering” problem of future financial guidance.
To summarize, for the entrepreneur without formal financial training, seriously consider upgrading your financial skills (by formal training, finding a good mentor or via your own research). And, even more important, take them to heart – particularly in the area of cash management.