Category: Uncategorized

Brilliant!

Lots and lots of buzz today in all the major newspapers about how J.P. Morgan is trying to buy 10% or so of Twitter for $450 million.

As far as I can tell, all of the stories are wrong. In particular, say my sources, Twitter isn’t negotiating with anyone – J.P. Morgan or otherwise – about a new funding round. The last round with Kleiner Perkins seems to have more than satisfied their near term capital appetite. Also, J.P. Morgan isn’t currently trying to buy Twitter shares through the secondary market, either, say my sources. That’s because they already indirectly own 10% of Twitter.

Here’s what’s really going on, as far as I can tell from sources:

J.P. Morgan owns no Twitter shares directly. They have, however, committed the bulk of capital in a secretive new $1+ billion fund by angel investor Chris Sacca. Over the last several months, that fund has acquired around $400 million in Twitter stock from current shareholders, at prices ranging from $16 – $21/share. At $21/share, that implies a Twitter valuation of $4.5 billion.

That fund is now the second largest shareholder of Twitter, say our sources. Cofounder Evan Williams is the largest shareholder.

Who’s sold all that stock to Sacca? They bought $100 million from Williams, sources say, beating out General Atlantic in a bidding war for the shares. Early investors Union Square Ventures and Spark Capital make up most of the remaining $300 million, as well as some other employees.

Of note, the recent $80 million Twitter stock purchase by Andreessen Horowitz was actually done through a rival fund controlled by angel investor Ron Conway.

The fund still has some $700 million in fresh capital to spend, and it’s clearly aiming at investing in other companies, too. They’ve expressed interest in buying shares in Facebook, Zynga and other companies, we’ve heard. That makes them a very real competitive fund to DST, which has purchased primary and secondary shares in Facebook, Zynga, and Groupon to date.

get widgetminimize

CrunchBase Information

Twitter

Website:	twitter.com
Location:	San Francisco, California, United States
Founded:	March 21, 2006
Funding:	$360M

Twitter, founded by Jack Dorsey, Biz Stone, and Evan Williams in March 2006 (launched publicly in July 2006), is a social networking and micro-blogging… Learn More

Chris Sacca

Website:	lowercasellc.com
Birthplace:	Buffalo, NY
Companies:	Omnisio, MotionDSP, Speedera Networks, RescueTime, Someecards, Charles River Ventures, Clickpass, Twitter, Auctomatic, Lookout, Heroku, International Creative Management, Summit Entertainment, path intelligence, Lowercase Capital, Tipjoy, Photobucket (Old), bit.ly, FanBridge, Twilio, Poll Everywhere, Gowalla, Universal Record Database, Posterous, Hello Chair, 280 North, and more

An accomplished venture investor, private equity principal, company advisor, entrepreneur, and public speaker, Chris manages a portfolio of over three-dozen consumer web, mobile, and wireless technology start-ups as well as an array of mature… Learn More

J.P. Morgan

Information provided by CrunchBase

Danger Will Robinson. Danger!

We get weird around money, don’t we? We get a little uncomfortable talking about it when we make some. We are looked on as rude for discussing it at all. Very rich people never talk about their money openly. But oddly, to me, we have no problem complaining that we can’t pay the bills, or that it’s not stretching far enough. Doesn’t that strike anyone else as odd?

I get the sense that lots of us look at money as if it’s mystical, as if it’s somewhere up on a puffy cloud. I can understand this. Most employees don’t really understand where money comes from, how it filters down to their paychecks. Heck, when I took my first president role at New Marketing Labs, I went into a budget meeting where the first question was, “Well, what’s YOUR salary going to be?” I wasn’t prepared to answer. My two business partners looked at me and said, “Well, you’ll need to know what your salary will be if you’re planning out the budget for your company.” And like that, I realized that I was clueless. Thankfully, there’s a cure for that.

The Disclaimer

We don’t work to make money, but we do. Or rather, money isn’t enough. Work at any level has to be about feeling fulfilled. We have to think we’re helping others and doing good things for both our buyers and ourselves. Sure there are some people who don’t see it this way, but you and I see it this way. Money is important, but it’s not everything. With me?

The Rule of Thirds

In small business, there’s the rule of thirds. Spend 1/3 of your time prospecting for new business. Spend 1/3 of your time working on your existing deliverables and execution. Spend 1/3 of your time supporting your customer base and doing administrative work. What I see most times are people working on the 2nd and 3rd parts of this equation and forgetting the first, because they feel so overwhelmed with what they have. (By the way, this applies nicely to big business, as well, but it’s a lot more disassociated from most people’s perspectives.) But working on that first third is how you work money. Prospecting and finding new ways to build business is where the (NEW) (MORE) money is at. Yes, you have to satisfy your buyers. Yes, you have to work customer service and you have to handle the administrative chores of being who you are. But it’s that first third that matters.

Working Money

In a way, we can fall back on the “time is money” adage. Money is time. If you want money, you have to make time for it. The problem we all tend to fall into is that we’re so busy working that we run out of time to work money. Money needs work. It requires your attention. It’s a lot like a relationship that way. Working money needs some time and attention.

Start With a Goal

With all things, the goal is everything. If you want to make another $10,000 over 12 months, then make that the goal. That’s $834 a month. That’s around $193 more a week. That almost seems do-able, doesn’t it? But make the goal clear and make it a real number, and write it down. Goals aren’t meant to be squishy and maybe. They’re meant to make us hungry.

Forget Jobs; Think Work

Working money requires you to think about work. Your job is something finite. It’s tied to a set dollar amount (most times). Instead, you’re looking for work. You’re looking for ways to earn money while you’re doing other things. What’s your work? That’s up to you. But it doesn’t have to be tied to your job, your role, your identity.

I mentioned the other day that I sold a lot of suitcases via this blog post, and someone said, “I thought you were a blogger and a writer.” I replied that I’m also a marketer and a salesman and that I have to stay current with tools and methods to understand what’s going to work and what isn’t. Selling some suitcases or whatever isn’t my role. It was work. And it doesn’t pay the bills, but it gave me a few steak dinners worth of extra money so that while I paid the bills, I felt like I was living the life.

That’s just it. Work is work. It’s hard, and yet it’s rewarding. Working money is that, too. You work on finding ways to sell something that will benefit others. That suitcase is excellent for travel. I’m proud to point people towards it. It’s a life-saver to me. Of course I’m happy to promote it.

Working Money Is Only One Part

Prospecting and finding more work and understanding your time and your money requires more things. It requires the sense to know when chasing a low dollar isn’t worth it. For instance, if you’re selling things on eBay and your cut will be around $20 per piece, does that really equal a good use of your time? You have to constantly ask yourself things like that. For instance, are you still working harder to book hours? Well, there can only be one use of your time per that hour. Can you book per project instead? Can you find things that will sell while you’re sleeping? These are the questions that you need to answer to work money.

Helping Others Leads to Making Money

I find that being helpful to others often leads me to money. When I consult, that’s helpful. When I create products that others can make money from themselves, that’s helpful. The more I’m helpful to others, the more that leads to money. The thing is this: it’s not always instant.

You have to know when to take the money and when the money is coming further downstream. And you can never make the mistake of seeking the money too far upstream, or make the mistake of never asking for the money at some point along the stream. And these transitions between free and not must be really clear and obvious to people, or else a whole new set of problems comes to bear. This is probably the hardest part of it all. What to charge isn’t hard. This part is hard. But work isn’t easy. They call it work for a reason, as Larry Winget said.

And You?

What are you doing to work your money? How are you finding ways to make what you want? What are you feelings, good and bad about money? Do YOU feel guilty talking about money? Let’s dish.

Related posts:

1. Make Some Money
2. The Way We’re Working Isn’t Working – Video Book Review
3. The Inevitable Nonprofit and Money Conversation
4. Timothy Ferriss Saves Your Money
5. Money Buckets

–>

A few years ago provocateur Tom Foremski wrote a blog post titled “Die! Press Release! Die! Die! Die!” He talked about how the press release had become a largely meaningless tool, a toothless artifact of a disconnected past. He was right. That post, along with my own experiences in the communications trenches, inspired me to create the Social Media News Release.

Today I’m hoping this post inspires you. Today I’m swapping the words “press release” for the acronym “RFP” in the hope that we may collectively change what I view as a deeply flawed process of engagement.

My hope is that together we can create a better, more streamlined way of sharing agency credentials with those who would like to hire us. And I’d like to hear your ideas about what works and what doesn’t.

But first, something has to die.

To my fellow PR, digital and social media agency practitioners, and to the marketers looking to us to extend and elevate the conversations about their brands, please join me in throwing shovels full of dirt on the outlandishly time-intensive evaluation mechanism known as the RFP.

Suggested epitaph of the RFP?  “I asked too many questions. I asked too many of the wrong questions. I asked too many of the wrong questions too many times, to too many people.”

I’ve been at this game a long time and I’ve grappled with more than my fair share of RFPs. And SHIFT fortunately has a great track record of clearing the RFP hurdle en route to the pitch (95 percent, I’d say). I’m not writing this post because RFPs prevent us from winning business, or because I don’t appreciate the invitation to participate. I certainly do! I’m writing it because RFPs are a colossal timesuck for all parties – for those compiling, issuing and reviewing the RFP, and for the agencies of all stripes invited to complete them. The joy of receiving a new RFP dissolves into abject anguish the moment its contents, so familiar and yet just different enough to require days of work, are revealed.

A typical RFP means expensive senior talent must devote several hours (sometimes days!) to complete an assignment that five or 10 other firms also are completing. Best case scenario: 20 percent chance of winning. Worst case scenario: your work isn’t even read.

Sometimes the firm must undergo training just to complete the RFP response via a system such as Ariba or Citrix. Other times the questions are so specific and far-reaching that it’s as if an alien nation descended upon earth to gain a comprehensive understanding of what PR is, what social media is, and how earthlings measure with granularity the impact of the firms’ proposed interactions with the planet’s influencers.

The thing is, we get invited to participate in the RFP process based on our well-documented track record in both traditional and social media. We are being considered precisely because of our previous work and reputation. Couldn’t a 20 minute phone call erase any lingering concerns? Couldn’t we all save a lot of time, trouble and trees if we just … had a conversation?

But I’m not naïve. The reality is, marketers need to both show their value and cover their behinds with a documented review process. They are accountable for their decisions, especially when budgets are six or seven figures. If an agency lays an egg, there needs to be a paper trail showing the decision to hire that particular group was based on a thoughtful process.

So the question is, how do agencies make marketers look smart while dramatically reducing the tedious and often redundant work of today’s RFP?

I personally don’t think technology is the answer. Maybe in 10 years it will be, but for now most execs want to touch and feel the hard copy document. They want to pour over stacks of proposals and mark up the pages with notes and scores and questions.

No, I think we’re still dealing with a better, more useful set of questions that can quickly establish credentials and reveal differences between the competing firms’ skills, expertise and philosophies. A set of questions that can be broadly applied to almost any agency by almost any sized company (publicly traded companies are more challenging, obviously, given the degree of governance involved).

Some smart folks have already taken a stab at the social media piece, perhaps making the process easier, but I don’t think they’ve necessarily made short work of the process.

Can we together create a 10 question RFP template that should reasonably satisfy any marketer looking to hire an agency? What are those questions? How much space should be allotted to answer each question? What percentage of the questions should be “creative assignments?” Are such assignments even fair?

Please share your thoughts, gang. And I want to hear from my marketing friends, too! In my next post I’ll share some of my own ideas as well as the best of yours. We’ll keep iterating until we’ve got something close to perfection. I will then, as always, share the final template with everyone to use and share freely.

Who’s first?

• <a href="http://twitter.com/home?status=Die%2C+RFP%2C+Die%2C+Die%2C+Die%21+-+
•  
•  
•  
• <a href="mailto:?subject=%22Die%2C%20RFP%2C%20Die%2C%20Die%2C%20Die%21%22&body=Link:
•  

fun but true

Americans are known for their ingenuity and entrepreneurial spirit. Therefore it is crucial that those who are willing to start new businesses understand the options they have.

Choosing a legal formation will have a profound, lasting impact on your company. Learn the benefits and drawbacks of each class and make an informed choice before incorporating.

 

(Click the infographic below for an expanded view)

Via @ColumnFive for Contact Me

Like infographics? So do we.

cool #infoviz

By now it is becoming old hat to hear analysts spew smartphone figures with Android as the central theme, but here is one more for good measure. Research firm Ovum has taken a look at the current smartphone market and predicts that global shipments will double to 653 million by 2016. Where will much of the growth come from? A speculated 38 percent holding of the market by Android, which is proposed as the number one platform come that time.

The report goes on to place Apple in second with a much smaller  17.5 percent slice of the pie, though Ovum is banking on Nokia and Microsoft’s partnership both helping and hurting, leaving the combined entity at 17.2 percent. That still puts them in third and above RIM’s BlackBerry, but its a steep drop from Nokia’s current top dog position.

It’s all speculation for now. Heck, isn’t the world supposed to end in 2012 anyway? Here is the full press release:

Android to drive doubling of smartphone market by 2016

• Global shipments to hit 653 million by 2016
• Android will take 38% market share compared to Apple’s 17.5%
• Nokia-Microsoft deal re-draws the smartphone landscape

The global smartphone market will double in size by 2016 to hit shipments of 653 million, predicts Ovum in a new forecast*. Android will drive the growth and will emerge as the dominant platform, dramatically outperforming Apple with a massive 20.5 per cent lead on market share, finds the independent telecoms analyst.

Ovum predicts that smartphones will grow at a compound annual growth rate of 14.5 per cent between 2010 and 2016 and will account for approximately 40 per cent of the mobile phone market. Asia-Pacific will be the largest region, shipping just over 200 million units by 2016. Western Europe and North America will remain strong markets with 175 million and 165 million shipments respectively.

Ovum principal analyst Adam Leach said: “The smartphone market will see significant growth over the next five years, once again outperforming the wider mobile phone market. We will see dramatic shifts in dominance for smartphone software platforms, with Android storming into the lead with 38 per cent market share, compared to Apple iOS’ 17.5 per cent, by 2016.

“The success of the Android platform is being driven by the sheer number of hardware vendors supporting it at both the high and low ends of the market.”

According to Ovum’s forecast, just behind Apple iOS will be Windows Phone, with 17.2 per cent market share by 2016, followed by BlackBerry OS, with 16.5 per cent.

Leach continued: “We expect at least one other platform to achieve mainstream success within the forecast period. This could be an existing player in the market such as Bada, WebOS, or MeeGo, or it could be a new entrant to the market place.”

According to Leach, the partnership between Nokia and Microsoft has redrawn the smartphone market and will result in a significant reduction in shipments of Symbian-based handsets as Nokia transitions to Windows Phone as its primary smartphone platform. However, Nokia still expects to ship 150 million Symbian-based handsets so there will be shipments beyond 2012 and in some regions into 2016.

Leach continued: “For Microsoft the deal provides a committed handset partner that has the potential to make Windows Phone a mainstream smartphone platform. The risk to Microsoft is that other handset makers may choose not to compete with Nokia and may turn their backs on Windows Phone.”