Disqus - Latest Comments for cfomarshall

Re: Investors need to actually use their portfolio products

Paul Marshall — Tue, 18 Feb 2014 23:34:08 -0000

While in principle I agree with dogfooding Boris I also always caution people that it can become easy to naval gaze internally (with the best of intentions) and get wrapped up with your own personal viewpoints and it is as and more important to get external and talk to the real dogs to understand what they like, don't like...use, don't use and why.

Re: Growth versus capital efficiency

Paul Marshall — Thu, 12 Dec 2013 20:33:22 -0000

Great post with great reminders. Agree re: point 1 being a large source of premature burn often but agree with other comments that it is not an "A-ha" moment where you wake up and have PM fit as much as a slow (or fast) burn that you have to carefully match spend to. Point 3 is an interesting thought but IMO nearly impossible to judge. There are so many examples of where being first REALLy matters and so many others where not being first but being best has been extremely successful...pre-judging which market you are building in seems near impossible to me. If you DID have some insight I completely agree with the point. Thanks for this Boris.

Re: Shopify Raises $100 Million — Ecommerce Blog by Shopify

Paul Marshall — Thu, 12 Dec 2013 12:11:14 -0000

Fantastic awesome...thrilled to see what comes next! Think big, take over the world.

Re: Fact: Most Startups Need to Constantly Pivot

Paul Marshall — Wed, 27 Nov 2013 20:36:57 -0000

Point 8 (below) from the big 'Unicorn' research post in TechCrunch last week (http://techcrunch.com/2013/... suggests that pivots are outliers in the truly successful startups. Interesting counterpoint.
That being said I agree with you Mark that there should not be a negative connotation with pivoting it simply reflects the improvement of focus after solid product/market fit learnings.

8) The "big pivot" is also an outlier, especially for enterprise companies

Few companies are the result of a successful pivot. Nearly 90 percent of companies are working on their original product vision.

The four "pivots" after a different initial product were all in consumer companies (Groupon, Instagram, Pinterest and Fab).

Re: How Startups Can Get Pricing Right

Paul Marshall — Wed, 27 Nov 2013 14:19:47 -0000

David Spinks nails this one...with VERY few exceptions.

Re: Canada Needs Better Startups, Not More

Paul Marshall — Tue, 19 Nov 2013 12:06:50 -0000

Good discussion post Mark. I agree with the sentiment I think my question is around practically how does this work? WHO decides what is a 'good' startup with a disruptive idea/product that has evidenced some product/market fit and is worthy of additional time and resources. If this was easy to identify then VC's would only fund clear winners and others would die on the vine. Determining what is a winner at an early stage is extremely subjective and I caution that we risk shunning entrepreneurs with ideas that, given the support you mention in their post, could build out something meaningful as they grow and pivot their product into what it MAY become.

An example for me would be 'Snapchat'...in early stages someone saying 'I have an idea for an app that you post pictures on for your social network but they disappear' *may* not have seemed like a multibillion dollar idea at the time. In a quality over quantity ecosystem we may lose some game changing ideas because at that stage we KNOW they are near impossible to identify.

Don't get me wrong, some can and should be clearly given input that they are not on the right track. Resources required to nurture the ecosystem are in limited supply and (the macro) WE need to be more efficient with their deployment...I just suggest some caution in how expeditiously and how early we start casting some to the discard pile...

Agree/Disagree?
Paul

Re: Startup identity & the sadness of a successful exit

Paul Marshall — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:23:31 -0000

Fair to say, companies are usually bought, not sold...or certainly more ideal.

Re: Startup identity & the sadness of a successful exit

Paul Marshall — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 11:18:46 -0000

Wow, so true. I was not a founder but was brought in alongside a founder to grow our business and spent 4+ years as CEO of our 'startup' putting all blood sweat and tears into it. We had a great exit last year and frankly I feel a little lost...I yearn for the old days but they were NOT all good days, so why do I miss it? Hard to move on and hard to stay....uggg

Re: The Power of No

Paul Marshall — Sat, 18 Feb 2012 12:49:27 -0000

Great post...just wrote a post about Apple and their focus on saying no. It takes discipline and courage...
http://www.paulmarshall.ca/...

Re: Between failure and Facebook

Paul Marshall — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 21:28:28 -0000

Defining success and failure is a very personal thing but FB is the exception not the rule...there are MANY levels of success between failure and FB...GREAT reminder Chris, thanks.

Re: http://bryce.vc/post/17006777345

Paul Marshall — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 13:22:14 -0000

Focus should be on solving a REAL problem or providing a REAL product in a manner that is a combination of beautiful, simple, elegant, emotional or all of them....money is a byproduct that allows you to continue to delight, master, improve, innovate, expand, etc. That should be the focus IMO. Focus on what you are delivering...

Re: http://bryce.vc/post/17576586986

Paul Marshall — Tue, 14 Feb 2012 09:34:11 -0000

I am actually doing a series on Inside Apple right now at my blog which looks at SJ and the culture he built. Clearly SJ was NOT an agreeable guy by ANY definition!! I think being 'nice' can be dangerous and there is a line you have to walk. Vision and leadership must be done firmly, which is not to say there is no collaboration, but rather that firm decisions MUST be made with incomplete information and not everyone will agree. There is no need to 'be nice' in this situation...just be right, be firm and be focused while being prepared to tweak directions along the way.

Re: Three Magic Numbers

Paul Marshall — Tue, 07 Feb 2012 10:13:41 -0000

Great post Brad. It is easy for all of us to get lost in data! That which is measured is improved....everyone needs to get this right!

Re: Amazon.com sells more Kindle books than paperbacks and hardcovers

Paul Marshall — Thu, 19 May 2011 10:17:30 -0000

Curious to know how many 'Kindle' books are downloaded to Kindle versus to iPad???

Re: - This is going to be BIG! - The Sleeper Agents of Innovation

Paul Marshall — Sat, 27 Feb 2010 09:32:27 -0000

Charlie...why do driven folks like this stay at Company's like that? Follow his dream...take it outside...do it at night...find someone to help him outside the Company and go build the industry specific HuffPo on his own. Don't let your company's lack of vision and support kill what you know is a good idea. MAKE it happen!

Re: Selling to enterprises

Paul Marshall — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 11:53:17 -0000

Great point to remember Mark....You are engaging in a BUYING cycle NOT a SALES cycle....don't confuse the two!

Re: Selling to enterprises

Paul Marshall — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 11:51:32 -0000

No way the Valley of Death should go that high and if it does shame on us.

Discipline in the sales process means that you qualify opportunities and you do it thoroughly. The reason any of us qualify is so that we can align the resources($$$ and people...both of which are limited) in opportunities where the prospect of closing business is REAL. One of the things we do to 'manage' the Valley of Death' is we have a fairly well but not rigidly defined sales process that has resources to be applied at different stages and very specific EXIT criteria. For example:

You don't get to an on-site sales rep+demo guy meeting until you have established WHO your sponsor is, what the buying process is, is there budget, what is the buying timeline, what specifically is the business problem and how specifically do we solve it, who is in the audience you want to go onsite for, have you got to a C level, have you talked to IT or are they going to be there, etc etc.

The point is that you CAN sell POC's, you can sell some services, you can sell a module, you can engage in the valley so that it is not all give and cost (and you show your expertise and build trust) and the VP Sales, CEO whatever need to manage the business such that $250K is not being invested in a sales cycle

Re: Selling to enterprises

Paul Marshall — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 10:24:16 -0000

Good post Chris...I run an enterprise sales company & most of this is pretty bang on. Selling in the $5K-$100K can often be an entry point for a larger enterprise solution play. The sales process is very complex and has many sponsors, stakeholders, gatekeepers and chequ signers....NONE of which can be ignored or the entire sale is in peril. From a marketing perspective you are correct...almost ALL enterprise solutions solve at least one business problem or they wouldn't exist. Aligning your solution (or probably better said TIMING your solution) with the top 3 pain points of a business then being able to validate that through strong references is key.

YOU MUST find a way to get references and have WOM selling. NEVER leave an enterprise customer until they are thrilled with you as they are the clearest path to your next sale.

Your success ALWAYS comes after your customers success, anything less is not sustainable.

Re: Will people pay for the New York Times online?

Paul Marshall — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 00:33:23 -0000

Good post Chris...like you I have found the WSJ less relevant lately and the content generally available or certainly less scarce. The important thing to remember which you said perfectly is "The revenue-maximizing price of any good – including digital goods – is determined by value and scarcity, not what it costs to produce it." The NYT valuable content for me is some of the business writings and the Section A Op-Ed pieces but really I see the NYT as nothing more than a channel for the real value which is the guys like Friedman. Who needs who more...the NYT or the great writers?? Those guys who can craft great stories and poiniently opine on relevant issues and trends are really the key for without them the NYT become another daily rag. The writers and what they do with their new-found leverage will be the interesting thing to watch IMO.

Re: Entrepreneur-product fit

Paul Marshall — Mon, 25 Jan 2010 23:34:04 -0000

The harder thing to match is that the needs change over time. Early on have a CEO focussed on design and UX may be exactly what is needed but if/as the product gains traction you would ideally need a more Marketing/BD type CEO. As the company (hopefully) evolves the needs, skills, etc change which is why the 'team' is important which includes what the VC brings to the table. As Phineas points out a VC without deals and exp in web based solutions is probably not a good match for a company in that space.

Re: Startup Team That Adds the Steam

Paul Marshall — Wed, 20 Jan 2010 09:13:28 -0000

The other similiar position I would argue is between strategy and execution. I would take a B strategy and an A Execution over the opposite anytime. The right team who can execute will beat a lesser team with a better strategy.

Re: The $160 Lesson: Apps Beat Devices

Paul Marshall — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 11:04:39 -0000

Apps beat devices......ASSUMING you already have the right device for the app

Re: How Outposts Improve Your Ecosystem

Paul Marshall — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 10:27:07 -0000

I agree that it is a good entry tool for bloggers but for me I am struggling to write down what would constitute Posterous content. To Chris's point:
1. I want to keep my blog as the central point "home base"
2. Twitter is a daily who I am, what I am thinking, seeing, etc (as well as a channel that I push blog content through)
3. Facebook for me is a personal (non-business) tool
4. LinkedIn is a tool I use as a channel to non-Twitter business associates but not really as a place I hold dialogue
5. Flickr is mostly personal for me.

I was thinking that Posterous would be an in-between site where daily thoughts that were bigger than 140 characters and less than a full blog post could go. I may still go that way but I need some quiet time to really sit down and think this through considering the pull extent of Chris's broader message here. Once I figure it out I think I will do a blog post informing my readers exactly what my diagram and what they can expect from me in what locations.

Re: How Outposts Improve Your Ecosystem

Paul Marshall — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 18:41:36 -0000

One question Chris...using this model what would you use a Posterous account for? I don't believe you have an account and maybe that answers the question but could you use it for really small snipits or thoughts or links that you come across during your day? If you do then how do you synthesize down further to Twitter from there? Much like @Matt Sims below my Posterous account mainly acts as a distribution tool with my Blog, Twitter, Flickr, LinkedIn, etc.

Is Posterous kind of pointless as an Outpost?

Re: How Outposts Improve Your Ecosystem

Paul Marshall — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 14:55:01 -0000

Fantastic illustration and a great post/reminder on effectively building out using SM....thanks Chris