curiousgirl's playground

I've been idle for a while and actively pursuing a few projects of mine...one of which is Yoink'd.

Yoink'd Mediabox is a fully AJAX / DHTML web media player (like Windows Media Player, iTunes, Winamp, etc..) for finding, organizing, and sharing available online video content (from youtube, google video, etc.). Features include:

• Ability to convert any raw RSS feed into a playlist
• View real-time live yoinks from friends (integrated with Facebook)
• Ability to completely embed the media player onto any website in various formats (Yoink'd Mini and Yoink'd Widget)
• Auto-relinking of dead video links
• Ability to play on any web-enabled device (browser, iPhone, Nintendo Wii, PS3, iPod Touch, etc..)
• Customization via multiple skins

Our core value lies in user experience and our media sharing capabilities. We truly want to change the way we view media on the web.

Enjoy this short demo to the sweet, tunes of Aly and AJ in "The Potential Breakup Song."

technorati tags: yoink'd, yoinkd, mediabox, aly, aj, potential breakup song, yoinkd.com

October 9, 2007 | 4:19 AM | Comments (1)

Chapter 9 of The Valley of Heart's Delight by Michael Malone.

Hah, I love the author's sarcasm and sense of humor. In any case, skimming through this chapter reminded me of how much my current New York roommates are corporate slaves --- *suffering* through the long hours of investment banking. I barely see them at all since they work well over 100 hours per week. One of my roommates -- Sharon -- ran out of the door this afternoon (practically in tears) since she was called back to do work. I immediately left her a voicemail to offer my support and encourage her to do well. It really hurts me to see my roommates like this.... Why do they even have jobs like this? Employee unhappiness should be a crime!

Rule #1: The real world is slower, more inefficient. And guess what? You got to live with it. I think I learned this the hard way ;p. I'm naturally an impatient person (which may be good or bad) -- but I have this natural tendency to not only "get things done" but to also get them done fast. I guess you can say I'm very results-oriented ;p....

Rule #2: If you can't live with Rule #1, you have to invent your own rules. This is the path I'm currently taking...Yes, I'm most likely going to be living out of a cardboard box but hey, at least it's -my- cardboard box. Luckily, I still have my underwear :) In the next coming weeks, I'm leaving New York City and moving back to the bay area...

technorati tags: ambition, silicon valley, michael malone, secrets, job

September 15, 2007 | 8:45 PM | Comments (3)

I've been taking a closer look at the mobile space and found a number of very well-written blogs. One of favorites is Mobile Opportunity written by seasoned industry expert Michael Mace.

One of his older posts back in April 2007 caught my attention. He points out an interesting ultimate social networking tool, Spitr, a project by Inrvoice LLC being worked on by technologists and biomedical researchers:

technorati tags: twitter, social networking, spitr, bluetooth

August 30, 2007 | 9:25 AM | Comments (1)

Here's an excerpt from my recent conversation with a friend online (re: web 2.0 site):

In addition, my friend is "paranoid" and will not disclose his idea until it is "finished" (which is not a problem by me, of course. I'm just a curious girl and love to hear about new ideas.)

This post is not to make fun of my friend as he is super-talented and an amazing computer scientist. I just find it amusing as I've heard the same exact lines echoed previously in blog posts I've read in the past year or so. In fact, here are some related, very useful articles by industry leaders and experts:

• Top 10 Lies of Entrepreneurs
• Startup Lessons

One of the key lessons I've picked up from visiting TechStars, talking with entrepreneurs, helping build a social web media player, and working at a startup is the importance of speed-to-market and customer feedback. It's so critical to rapidly prototype in order to churn around fast iterations of a product. This process of fast, agile development is advocated by heavily by Eric and Todd of MyBlogLog; it's also a trend we notice with the high influx of Facebook and iPhone apps. Yet, this seems to be at odds with the emphasis in design in my last few posts, right?

Naturally, there are tradeoffs to everything in life. It's hard to pursue several ideas at once only to "see what sticks" so to speak. However, I feel like what's more important is finding the right balance between all these different choices. I guess, at the end of the day, there must be a final team consensus -- make a decision and move forward.

technorati tags: entrepreneurship, startup, technology

August 8, 2007 | 5:27 PM | Comments (0)

I came across a great Fast Company article titled "Strategy by Design" by Tim Brown, CEO of IDEO, written back in June 2005. Tim emphasizes the importance of design thinking as a catalyst for innovation productivity. "Where you innovate, how you innovate, and what you innovate are design problems."

1. Hit the streets. Go out there and be observant. Get original insights from your market.
2. Recruit T-shaped people. People with breadth and depth. Expertise in one area that can be applied to many disciplines.
3. Build to think. Focus on problem solving. "Design thinking is inherently a prototyping process....The goal isn't to create a close approximation of the finished product or process; the goal is to elicit feedback that helps us work through the problem we're trying to solve."
4. The prototype tells the story. Generate feedback and make corrections. Visually describe your strategy.
5. Design is never done. We live in a changing world. "The market is always changing; your strategy needs to change with it. Since design thinking is inherently rooted in the world, it is ideally suited to helping your strategy evolve."

• Is design often overlooked? Even in my undergraduate computer science courses at Penn, I've remembered that the "specification" phase was often rushed through or , worse yet, done -after- the coding was completed.
• How easy is it to sell design? Of course, from a business perspective, people like to see numbers and quantify the value of a feature, project, idea, etc. Adaptive Path has taken a look at this issue by applying ROI methodology to user experience design, ensuing that companies are only investing in high-value projects. The truth of the matter is that it's almost impossible to appropriately capture all the "value" derived from design and user experience. If this is the case, how do design consultant shops effectively pitch to new clients who don't recognize the benefits of design thinking?
• Design thinking is here to stay. Just watch the trends. Emerging design schools (Stanford's d.school and Copenhagen Institute of Interaction Design). iPod/iPhone phenomenon. Google and importance of simplicity. Less is more. "Web 2.0"-style design.

» Interview with Tim Brown, CEO of IDEO (by Brandon Schauer of Adaptive Path)

technorati tags: design, design thinking, design strategy, ideo, tim brown, business, innovation, adaptive path

August 5, 2007 | 1:12 PM | Comments (0)

My recent conversations with my friend Doug has got me thinking more about our information overloaded society and how people can best find what they want or "separate signal from noise" be it on the internet, in the real world, etc.

In particular, we were talking about finding "good quality" topical blogs. While blogging has enabled mass participation from everyone, it has also made the entire universe more cluttered, crowded, and hard to filter through. You always get the good with the bad.

Like what happens in mainstream media, it seems that a few, key influential blogs (either by an individual or group of bloggers) have a widespread effect on the content on all posts across different subsystems of the blog world:

• In tech: TechCrunch, GigaOM, Read/Write Web, Mashable, Engadget, or individuals like Don Dodge...
• In VC blogging world: Brad Feld, Fred Wilson, Guy Kawasaki, Lightspeed Venture Partners ..

• Is "long tail" content less unique because of these influential few?
• Is "long tail" content really driven by the "few" or vice versa? Or both?
• How do we truly separate signal from noise at a more micro level? Can this process be at all automated, or do we need a real person to ultimately assess "quality?" Sure, there are sophisticated techniques of determining quality of sites, but can this be translated down to a post level? Just like a great author who may write a "bad" book, a great blogger can have some "bad" posts.

There are sites out there already that helps us filter information: vertical search engines, social bookmarking (digg/reddit), etc. Even in the real world, we see the same filters: New York Times' Bestsellers, Zagat guide, etc. However, what if I don't want to read what everyone else is reading? What about finding the hidden gems inside the "long tail" (e.g. those blogs who have not yet established high authority or rank on Technorati, new authors, etc..)? Or better yet, do we need to do anything at all? In theory, a "good" blogger over time should be able to rise in the ranks (e.g. of Technorati, etc.) as more and more people "discover" his/her content. (Hah, quick financial analog: A undervalued stock who's price has finally returned to "fair" value.) The problem is that, if the blogger is not active about "getting known and out there," this process can take a really long time. And time is what we -don't- have these days. Hmm..there should be some way to speed up this process.....

technorati tags: influence, law of a few, blogosphere, long tail

July 8, 2007 | 7:38 AM | Comments (0)

Yesterday, I had the pleasure of meeting one of my favorite VC bloggers, Ho Nam, General Partner and co-founder of Altos Ventures on the famous Sand Hill Road in Menlo Park, CA. Ho's posts are always very insightful, thoughtful, and well-written --- full of inspirational or witty quotes, personal anecdotes, facts, and opinions supported by solid business fundamentals.

Ho's blog is the first I've seen that actively applies the principles of Warren Buffett and value investing to venture capital. This struck me as unusual. Why? Because they tend to be very different. It's like apples and oranges. Here are the major differences I see --

1. Diversification - Where do you put your eggs? The conventional VC business model (which Ho calls "Venture Lotto") involves investing large sums of capital in a lot of different startups in hopes of one mega-hit (e.g. a Google) to cover all the other losses. On the flip side, Buffett follows the words of Mark Twain: "Put all your eggs in one basket, and watch that basket!" He prefers large, infrequent bets where the odds are in his favor.
2. Time horizon - "Buy & Hold Forever" vs. "When Can I Cash Out?" VCs care a lot about exits and multiples. So does Wall Street. (This is only re-emphasized in the "Finance of Venture Capital" class I took at Wharton with Professor Andrew Metrick.) The numbers matter a lot more than the underlying business (the qualitative factors). Buffett, on the other hand, invests for the quality and long-term sustainability of the business based on economic factors, business model, strength of management, etc. Hence, his favorite holding period is "forever."
3. Industry - What's your favorite? Buffett avoids technology completely. He sees the industry as "speculative" and doesn't believe anyone can "predict the future." As a result, he preaches investing in businesses you know and understand well or staying within your "circle of competence." Meanwhile, all the VCs in Silicon Valley largely invest in technology or just growth.

It was through reading Ho's blog and speaking with him in person that I've come to realize that these two camps are actually very similar. At the end of the day, there are common principles of what makes good, sustainable businesses. That being said, I feel Altos Ventures positions itself very well in terms of applying these fundamentals to its venture investments, focusing more on those "qualitative" factors and making more careful investment decisions rather than throwing money out randomly and "seeing what sticks."

What I really wonder, is how likely these kind of unique opportunities actually exist in today's world (compared to the time Buffett invested)? With the rise of internet, information and knowledge is much more readily available and more "free." Is it much harder to "know more than the market" compared to the past? While Buffett relied on his newspapers and didn't believe a computer program could make sound investment decisions, I would say that with the added aid of technology, it's now possible for a Buffett-type investor to not only acquire more information (e.g. interesting / niche content, annual reports, etc.) at a faster rate but also interpret that information. For instance, today's value investor may use software to draw diagrams on financial data and see trends (e.g. illustrating the facts on the computer) and then use the increased information (from news sources, blogs, etc.) to assess the qualitative factors of the business. This way the data reading and opinion formation of the investor is still separated.

• Technology and growth can be your "circle of competence." While these sectors have far more unpredictable futures, Ho pointed out that it is possible to be a true industry expert, understand the business, and see future trends. He pointed out the extraordinary track record of now angel investor Andy Bechtolsheim, one of the early investors in Google. Andy's hit rate beats that of many VCs. While this may be possible, I wonder if visionaries like Andy (and Steve Jobs) are the just the more exceptional and rare cases.
• Be interested. Curiosity is the first step. More important that "being interesting."
• Do more thinking. Ho tells me doesn't read blogs or newspapers that much anymore. "How often do we stop to just think?" he asked.
• Try to eliminate / cut down on the things that waste time. Ho tries to avoid constantly checking email. He hates his Blackberry at times.

Concluding Thought: Does a "good" business necessarily have to have "long-term" sustainability as Buffett seems to look for? What if you are just doing well in the shorter term (5, 7, 10 years out)? Perhaps things change because of consumer preferences or just some other disruptive technology. In other words, is it necessarily "evil" that people are overly concerned with exits (short term gain)?

technorati tags: ho nam, altos, venture capital, value investing, warren buffett, buffettology

June 26, 2007 | 4:50 PM | Comments (0)

During my trip last week to Boulder, CO, I had the pleasure of meeting Lucy Sanders, CEO and Co-Founder of the National Center for Women & Information Technology (NCWIT), and Jill Ross, Director of Image of Computing at the University of Colorado. NCWIT recently launched their Heroes project, a series of 15-minute interviews with 20 selected women IT entrepreneurs chosen from more than 100 nominations.

I really admire Lucy Sanders. She has a highly impressive background: worked R&D and executive positions at AT&T Bell Labs, Lucent Bell Labs, and Avaya Labs for over 20 years, awarded Bell Labs Fellow (highest technical accomplishment) in 1996, and has served on the boards of an array of organizations from academic institutions to venture-backed companies to non-profit organizations. What I really like is the fact she has made significant contributions in both the private and public spheres, having a broad influence not just within a company but to the community at large.

Lucy's work echoes the work of Janet Hanson and 85 Broads, a global network of more than 13,000 members worldwide for women in business. I met Janet last summer when I worked at Lehman Brothers. Janet's vibrant personality and energy definitely shined as she spoke. You could tell she truly genuinely cared about her work. She even told us that she envisioned 85 Broads cafes all over New York City one day.

I really support the work of Lucy and Janet and hope to encourage women to pursue science, technology, and business. It's not about trying to "level the playing field" and "forcing" women to study these subjects. Rather, it's making sure that they are not discouraged to try it out. For instance, I know a number of my friends (both female and male) who did not pursue engineering because they thought it was "too hard" and "too much work." "I don't want to spend all this time and have it lower my GPA," a friend told me.

I do admit there are sacrifices to be made. Engineering = more requirements, more labs, more classes, more time. Ultimately, I think the most important thing is to find out what you like to do. Don't be afraid to take a class. Grades are overrated. Learn for the sake of learning.

technorati tags: women, it, technology, lucy sanders, ncwit, 85 broads, janet hanson, nonprofit

June 18, 2007 | 7:51 PM | Comments (0)

What is it? How do startups get ahead of customers? How and when do startups execute on strategy? What happens if your strategy fails?

• Know your customer; be a customer. Try to find a few key customers who might just tell you what they want and then go build that (Reminds me of “Law of a Few” from Malcolm Galdwell’s Tipping Point). What influences your customers? What do they care about? Above all, be passionate about your product. Use it. Test it. Tinker with it.
• Master storytelling. Why should anyone (e.g. your customer, Wall Street analyst, public relations, etc. -- your constituents) care about your product?
• Perception is key. People expect things to work. If something is in “beta” stage, it better work. Underpromise and overdeliver.
• Flexibility is crucial. Have a plan but don’t be afraid to tweak it.
  • 50% proactive - Knowing your strategy
  • 50% reactive - Understanding what market is saying and reacting to feedback
• Failure is OK. In fact, fail over and over again. Don’t be afraid. You learn more from your mistakes.

Panelists: Alex King (Crowd Favorite), Brad Feld (Mobius Venture Capital), Don Loeb (Feedburner), Dave Taylor (serial entrepreneur and consultant)

Should all startups blog? Must they do so nowadays to gain critical mass?

• Free marketing. Blogs can serve as a great way to spread the word about your product and company. Huge viral and network effects.
• Be coherent and consistent. Keep blogs focused on specific topics (e.g. separate personal and company blogs).
• Be thoughtful. Have your own insight and opinion. Do more than copy or reiterate what’s already out there.
• Have domain expertise. What is your unique contribution? Brad Feld asked one question to the eager founders of the room: “What can we be best in the world at?”

While Brad Feld argued for complete transparency in blogging, I feel companies ought to exercise caution. While blogging may be especially beneficial for consumer-oriented internet startups in "spreading the word," it also is a source of competitive intelligence. One interesting point that was brought up was whether or not companies should blog about a "roadblock" they've encountered. Another point was whether or not young people today should be worried about what they are blogging about online. In other words, can the words you say now (e.g. say as a teenager using MySpace or Facebook) be used against you later (e.g. for a future job position)? Since perception is so important, one negative first impression can ruin the future image of the brand (or person).

technorati tags: techstars, go-to-market strategy, blogging, startups, marketing, getting started

June 14, 2007 | 10:41 AM | Comments (0)

My trip has been amazing so far. First off, Boulder is absolutely gorgeous. Here are some of my favorite perks about the city:

• Perfect weather. I’m biased since my family is currently in the Bay Area of California, but think Seattle summer. Clear blue skies, clouds, moderate temperature. Not too cold, not too hot. You can wear anything you want.
• Very outdoorsy. Great for hiking, biking, camping, skiing, running, whatever else you can think of. There are always cyclists and pedestrians on the road. Seeing people in a suburban town is a wonderful feeling!
• Happy, friendly people. I think this is a result of the weather, but everyone is nice. Talk to any local barista of the many, many coffee shops around the area. Feel free to ask a stranger for directions somewhere. Or talk to the lady who works in the Boulder Bookstore. They are all personable and easy going. I love the laid back attitude of everyone here.
• Easy to navigate. Because I recently lost my wallet, I wasn’t able to rent a car, but this hasn’t been a problem at all for me. The Pearl Street Mall (downtown Boulder) is just four streets away from me. Everything is within walking distance, giving me the opportunity to really appreciate and enjoy the weather in the mornings when I go out.
• Other random facts. Did you that more than 50% of city has college education or better? One of the best places to retire.

In addition, I’ve thoroughly enjoyed all the conversations I’ve had with the founders of the TechStars teams. I love meeting new people and hearing their thoughts and ideas. I could immediately feel the excitement and energy of the founders just from short conversations with them, making me more eager to see the results of their hard work. All of them have been working on some very interesting, exciting, cool ideas. Unfortunately, most of them haven’t been getting too much sleep… For instance, my friends on the LingoLinko team have had crazy schedules (e.g. sleeping at 7am and waking up at 12noon). I’m amazed by everyone’s energy ….

I’m heading out of Boulder this afternoon. Thanks to David Cohen for letting me crash TechStars for a few days. Also, special shout out to Ben Casnocha for making my trip even more amazing and introducing me to more entrepreneurial people in the Boulder area!

technorati tags: techstars, boulder, colorado, david cohen, startups, entrepreneurship

June 12, 2007 | 9:06 PM | Comments (2)

In light of some of the recent billion dollar transactions, Don Dodge poses some great questions in his recent post "Deal or no deal? The psychology of making deals:"

• "Cisco could have acquired WebEx four years ago when the stock market valued Web-Ex at $600 Million. Why did Cisco wait four years and pay $3.2 billion?"
• "DoubleClick was a publicly traded company two years ago and valued at less than $1 billion. Anyone could have acquired DoubleClick, but a private equity firm took them private less than two years ago for $1.1 billion. They later sold off two divisions for $525 million. Yesterday Google paid $3.1 billion for what remained of DoubleClick. Why did Google wait two years and pay billions more?"

• Think more, feel less. "Even the best executives sometimes succumb to emotion, competitive spirit, and ego in high pressure situations. That is when they over pay and make mistakes."
• Be patient! In contrast to the high-tech industry, "Warren Buffett made his money on boring businesses like insurance, manufacturing, retailing, consumer products. He never over pays for acquisitions and has a lot of patience for making his acquisitions pay off."
• Listen to your gut. After all the strategic and financial analysis, at the end of the day, someone must 1) name a price and 2) make final call on deal.

technorati tags: dealmaking, cisco, webex, google, doubleclick, acquisitions, warren buffett

April 18, 2007 | 10:31 AM | Comments (0)

My friend Theodore King and I had the pleasure of meeting Chris Lehmann, principal of Science Leadership Academy (SLA), this past Wednesday morning. SLA is a new Philadelphia public school, which opened this past Fall 2006, focused on project-based learning and built on School 2.0 principles. SLA's five core values (inquiry, research, collaboration, presentation and reflection) are deeply emphasized across all its curriculum. Many thanks to Christian Long, CEO of DesignShare, for introducing me to Chris in the first place!

Chris graciously offered us a few moments of this time out of his busy schedule to discuss the making of his vision. In addition, Jon Amsterdam gave us a tour of the facilities. Below are some of the observations I made from the visit.

• Empower students! SLA loves each of its students as individuals. This is deeply reflected in its admissions process. Each interested candidate is evaluated separately based on academics, extracurriculars, interest in project-based learning, etc. and goes through a face-to-face interview process where students are assessed based on their presentation skills, interaction with the SLA community, etc. Consequently, admission is not biased to only students who are top academic performers. Instead, the admission process considers a breadth of very diverse, qualified candidates. For instance, if a student was not performing as well academically, he/she must justify their performance during the interview process and why they are interested in a place like SLA. Fit is what matters. While this approach may lead to a larger academic difference gap among classes (which may be more difficult for teachers from a teaching perspective), ultimately I think this process provides "balance" and the "right" mix of students. At the end of the day, you want to admit people who truly want to be there, and SLA's admission process does just that.
• Renovate traditional learning. SLA focuses on project-based learning with lots of interdisciplinary overlap across courses, so students can easily apply concepts learned in one subject to another. For instance, history teacher Mr. Matt Baird described the most recent project his students were working on. It was focused on the abolitionist period where students had to draft a letter in response to the Dred Scott decision. The students then use modern technology to create advertisements during that time period. In another project, they must research and collect stories on historic Philadelphia and later publish the material on a public website. This process allows the students to mix knowledge of history with other disciplines (arts, computers, etc.).
• Incorporate cutting-edge technology. Each SLA student has an Apple labtop. Classes run on open-source course management programs like Moodle, allowing students and teachers to more easily collaborate online via features such as virtual classrooms, gradebook, discussion forums, and file uploads. In addition, teachers can use blogs and wikis to communicate with students on a daily basis. Chris told us that they are now switching over to use Drupal. In particular, they are partnering with Bill Fitzgerald of OpenAcademic to build a standard for online collaborative learning for the new tech-savvy generation.
• Create a sense of community. Students actively participate in all activities from helping with the SLA admissions process (acting as "interviewers" and providing their own feedback on candidates) to making changes to open-source software (updating SLA website, upgrading features of programs, blogging). One example Chris mentioned was a student who had excellent academics (4.0) but was not admitted. When the parents asked why, Chris said that the student expressed arrogance in front of other SLA students during the interview process, saying that he was only applying to SLA as a "safety school." To me, this is an excellent way of assessing a candidate's "soft" qualities. After all, people do not reveal their "true" self during the formal interview process. Only by interacting with people in an array of environments and situations can you get a better understanding of what the person is actually like. By using this method of active student participation, SLA students gain a sense of responsibility for SLA and ownership of their work. They feel part of the SLA family. Even just walking around the school, Theodore and I saw the hard work of students proudly displayed on the multi-colored pastel walls (e.g. poster displaying complex carbon molecules in Chicken Nuggets and Mac & Cheese). Jon told us that the walls will soon be decorated with art murals. (This hit home for me. I actually replicated a famous painting for my elementary school in New Jersey. I'm hoping to visit my old school later this May. My principal, Mr. Mrozinski, told me that as long as he was still at the school (which he is), he'd make sure the picture was still on the wall. I wonder if it's still there ...)

Overall, the visit was very enjoyable and eye-opening. It's great to first hear Chris talk about his initial vision and then physically see, touch, and walk through it. I can't wait to see what SLA will be like a year from now.

View this Flickr set to see more images. I took some with my phone, but the quality isn't nearly as good!

technorati tags: science leadership academy, sla, philadelphia, chris lehmann, school 2.0, education

March 29, 2007 | 5:19 PM | Comments (1)

In my Wharton marketing class on advertising (one of my favorite classes this semester), our major group project for the semester is to create a new advertising strategy for Aquafina: identifying our target audience, what media vehicles to use, allocating budget expenditures, creating a few creative proposals on potential ad executions, etc. We have to produce both a final report and presentation. The top groups in the class get to present in front of Aquafina executives.

Date your consumers first. Then marry them. Get them to drink you all the time. The Aquafina lady said (I'm paraphrasing), "Advertising water is like a dating game. You first want to date your consumers. In the current water industry, because of little brand differentiation, it's like showing up to a party where everyone is wearing jeans and a black top. The question is, what happens if you show up with a white top? Will people think you are cool, or will you just come out to be a loser?

The point the Aquafina lady mentioned made me think more about what it means to be different. Being different can definitely pay off. Some companies even preach it: Apple's Think Different. On the other hand, if you are too different, you might just be going after a non-existing market with not enough consumer demand. On the whole though, I've seen a lot of examples lately where going against the "crowd" is a great strategy in finding precious gems of value. In other words, companies derive their competitive advantage by doing what their competitors aren't doing. My hypothesis is that this competitive advantage may not always be long lasting. When other companies react and respond to what you are doing, the value of that "difference" becomes diminished (e.g. Tag body spray has entered to compete head on with Axe. In fact, their campaigns are so similar that consumers have thought Tag was actually an Axe product, according to David Rubin, Director for Brand Development for Axe North America):

How to avoid losing competitive advantage? Be responsive to market conditions and never cease to innovative. In others words, be observant. Reflect, think, and react...quickly. Whatever happens. Just don't get too comfortable with the way things are.

technorati tags: aquafina, water, commodity, differentiation, competitive advantage, think different

March 12, 2007 | 3:03 PM | Comments (0)

I was reading Josh Kopelman's latest post "The Penny Gap" which highlights the difference between a "free model" vs "$0.01 model" (model that charges any type of premium) and how the first has allowed for greater viral adoption of a product/service (e.g. Kazaa / Napster in music during the 90s and his own Jingle Networks, providing free 411 calls).

Interesting consequences Josh mentions for businesses moving between these two models:

• From "Free Model" to "Penny Model": Getting users to pay anything at all is extremely difficult. Biggest "hurdle" to cross. Possibility of losing users.
• From "Penny Model" to "Free Model": Ability to disrupt/shrink an industry (e.g. take those who are charging out of the game). This idea is especially interesting - changing an industry business model (better, making it free) as a disruptive mechanism. I wonder if this is the question the true industry-shaking entrepreneurs ask: What would the world look like if .... were free?

• Which model is best for your business? This of course depends on the end customer of your product/service. Consumers are cheap and want things for free. Corporations, though, may be willing to pay premiums for a better product/service.
• What comes first? Users or the Business Model? I don't think there's a clear cut answer to this. However, from looking at cases such as Google/Facebook/MySpace and other consumer-facing Internet products/services, customer adoption is key. Customer adoption drives traffic hits which drive advertising dollars.

technorati tags: customer adoption, business model, free, premium

March 12, 2007 | 10:44 AM | Comments (1)

People are inherently social beings, and it's no surprise that the web is moving in that direction.

• More niche social networks, more application across industries and sectors: On top of social networking sites (MySpace/Facebook), social music sites (last.fm), social video sites (YouTube), here are a few examples from the professional world this NYT article:
  • Corporations: Cisco recently purchased technological assets of Tribe.net. In the future, company employees will more easily do internal searches, network with one another, schedule events, etc. They can use these networks to spread buzz on company products or events.
  • Politics: Check out My.Barack.Obama. Politicians can now use the web as a tool to gain widespread support.
  • Education: School 2.0 is reinventing education for the future. While this process is slowest (since training and adoption rate is slow - see below), once the initial infrastructure is built, this effort can easily scale. Students and teachers can more easily communicate and collaborate online (grading sheets, course materials, club websites, etc.).
• Social networking for everyone: Ning, a social networking site founded by Netscape co-creator Marc Andreessen, has recently been getting a lot of buzz for allowing users to create their own social networks (example: site for American Idol fans):
  
  
  From eBay sellers in Upstate New York to bead store owners in Maine, aspiring hip hop artists in New Jersey, pop culture junkies in New York City, college professors in Germany, young deviant artists in North Carolina, and even a few big media companies in LA, with Ning anyone can create the perfect social network for them.

• Organization of social networks and finding the "right" users: With all these niche social networks out there, how can we avoid duplicates? How can users quickly discover the networks they want? This really plays into the larger problem of organizing data on the web already. I suppose this is where Ning has an advantage in being a platform provider for social networking sites.
• Gap between techies vs. everyone else: There's an extreme lag (adoption rate) between the digital tech world of bloggers, tech geeks, etc. and everyone else. All I need to do is to take a look at my mom or even my college friends. The bottom line is that changing consumer habits is difficult (especially in a short amount of time). Of course, this depends on the target segment. If you are targeting tech-savvy users, adoption rates are much quicker. Look at the success of MyBlogLog. Instead, augmenting an existing user experience sounds much more likely for success in the short-term.
• Identity management: People hate typing in login/password information for multiple accounts. Is having one central location for management a "safe" way of handling this situation? The NYT article points to OpenId as a way for users to manage their profiles across social sites.
• Social network visualization I'm a visual person, so having a way to visualize my network - be it professional, for music, video, etc. - would be really cool. Sites like Many Eyes are playing within this space already. Though this might not be a "must have" feature, I feel presenting data in an easy-to-understand manner will be key in later stages of product development. I'm a big fan of using graphics/pictures to explain concepts and absolutely obsessive about presentation. (Talk to anyone who has worked with me on a Powerpoint presentation ;p)

technorati tags: social networking, social web, ning, mybloglog, data visualization, many eyes

March 3, 2007 | 7:29 PM | Comments (1)

Thanks to my dad for forwarding the link to Business 2.0's "The Next Net 25" (with short blurbs I added on each). Some observations of this data follow:

1. StumbleUpon - social websurfing
2. Slide - make easy slideshows on the web
3. Bebo - social network
4. Meebo - web-based integrated IM (better than AIM)
5. Wikia - hosting service for ad-supported community sites
6. Joost - interactive web TV (made by founders of Kazaa and Skype)
7. Dabble - tool for organizing videos into playlists of favorites
8. Metacafe - paying video creators for their work (not just a YouTube)
9. Revision 3 - production studio for geek-oriented online shows (started by Digg founder Kevin Rose)
10. Blip.tv- platform for syndicating serialized online shows
11. Fon - building a worldwide Wi-Fi network one router at a time
12. Loopt - around-the-clock friend tracking via mobile phone (Facebook stalking to a new level)
13. Mobio- mobile-phone mashups and widgets
14. Tiny- Flickr on the fly (pictures on your cellphone)
15. Soonr- access your home or office PC from your mobile phone
16. Turn- precise, automated ad targeting for advertisers
17. Adify- online marketplace for highly targeted ads
18. AdMob- place to buy ads for delivery to cell phones
19. SpotRunner- one-stop online shop for low-cost 30-second TV ads
20. ViTrue- lets corporate customers solicit, edit, and upload user-generated videos that promote their products
21. Success Factors- web-based performance & talent management (performance reviews, succession planning, and compensation)
22. JanRain- single sign-on service for multiple passwords that lets people hop freely from site to site
23. Logoworks- automates the design of logos, business cards, and stationery
24. Rearden Commerce- Web-based "virtual personal assistant" application that smoothly integrates hotel and flight reservations, meetings, and other events into your daily agenda
25. SimulScribe- effective way to convert voice-mail into scannable text (email, etc.)

While the data is heavily Silicon Valley-centric, it is worthwhile to point out that Silicon Valley tends to be more concentrated in consumer-oriented businesses; New York City is known more for media/advertising; and Boston is more business-to-business. This trend may just be a function of a sector analyzed.

Rich media video, broadband, mobile, interactive-internet-everything ...they will all be big.

Hah, this chart really should be titled "who's taking away your ownership" (money, control, power...) ;p

technorati tags: business 2.0, 2007 startups, web 2.0, tech startups

February 22, 2007 | 6:40 PM | Comments (0)

In my marketing class, I recently heard Bob McCurdy speak from Clear Channel Radio Sales about the radio space, an industry that has been greatly affected by the Internet (much like newspapers). Are people listening to the radio -- now that they can get satellite radio, free online song clips, or free music video online?

Since 2005, Clear Channel launched its "Less is More" strategy catering to both advertisers and listeners. First, it cut the number of commercials by 20% in order to improve the listening experience for its viewers. (Bold move of taking less profit to make listeners happy.) Second, it encouraged advertisers to buy shorter 15 to 30-second ads rather than the traditional 60-second ad of the radio industry. As part of this campaign, Clear Channel recently introduced even shorter ads called "blinklets" or "adlets," offering 1-second and 5-second ad spots. Blinklets have been used to promote Simpsons, NBC's Hero, and McDonalds. For example, the Simpson ad said: "D'oh!" quickly followed by "Tonight on Fox."

Here are the issues:

• Content-dependent ads: Obviously, due to the length of these ads, they require content with a recognizable audio catchline (slogan, tune, etc.) in order for the listener to immediately recognize the advertiser.
• Too short to be recognized?: Isn't there already enough clutter in radio? To alleviate this, Clear Channel has limited the number of blinklets run per hour.
• Too easy to miss?: Bob did not have specific data tracking radio listening habits and behavior, which would be very valuable. However, perhaps today's radio listener immediately leaves a station once he/she hears the ad begin? If so, it doesn't matter how short the ad is, the listener would have already left.

Not quite like newspapers. The interesting point that I picked out from the discussion is that people who listen to radio aren't there just for the music. Radio also gives you sports, weather, and traffic reports by the hour. The target audience demographic is definitely older than the same listeners who are perhaps using services like last.fm, Pandora, iTunes, etc. One thing is for sure -- this industry needs better ways to track and analyze how people are listening to radio. Arbitron's Portable People Meter (recently introduced in Philadelphia) is a leap forward, replacing traditional diary-based radio ratings.

Questions to Readers:

1. Do you listen to radio?
2. What are your radio listening habits?

technorati tags: blinklets, radio, clear channel

February 19, 2007 | 6:36 PM | Comments (3)

Continuation of Tim Draper's presentation from 2007 Wharton Private Equity and Venture Capital Conference yesterday.

Here were his own predictions for future breakthroughs. I linked some topics to related previous posts I've made:

Despite the current hype around "web 2.0" and related internet technologies, it's important to realize that technological innovation spans all industries and geographical borders. It is a truly global phenomenon. Speaking of which, Tim Draper mentioned that the next generation of the most elite and talented engineers will come from India and China (compare differences in engineering salaries: $35,000/year for Chinese engineer vs. $80,000-$170,000/year for US engineer). With capital being invested abroad, the number of immigrant engineers coming into the US have declined over the years. Rapidly developing countries like India and China are quickly recruiting and retaining talent locally. One of the key reasons why Draper Fisher Jurvetson began their global DFJ affiliate network.

technorati tags: tim draper, future, breakthrough, dfj

January 20, 2007 | 10:07 AM | Comments (0)

Where does great innovation come from? With the recent buzz around Apple's iPhone and d.school's, I couldn't help but think about this issue some more.

1. For basic technologies, (e.g., new materials, chemical compounds, basic processes) technology push is a viable innovation model.
2. For complex, multi-function technologies, technology push is rarely viable.

From reading various articles and posts, here's a summary of key points I've picked out:

• Empathizing with the customer. This statement cannot be overstated. It's also echoed in this Fast Company post. Questions to consider: Who is the target customer? What need are you addressing? How is this current need addressed (if at all)? How will the customer interact with the product you are designing to address that need? How do you think the customer will respond?
• Predicting the future. This is always the hardest part. To me, this means watching trends closely; observing the customer-product interaction; and taking notes. Studying, dissecting, analyzing 24-7. In a Creating Passionate Users' blog post, Kathy Sierra points out that great innovation is about dreaming and creating new customer needs, not satisfying old ones. She gives examples saying:
  The world never needed GUIs.
  Or digital cameras.
  Or cafe mochas.
  Or skateboards.
  There are two issues I see with Kathy's point. 1) If the need is completely "new," it could mean a market doesn't exist. 2) While radical innovation is most revolutionary or ground breaking, it is definitely the most difficult to do. I feel that these extraordinary cases represent more "happy accidents" than anything else. Take Google as the classic example. It's not like Larry and Sergey woke up one day and said "Let's invent a search engine better than Yahoo and create a multi-billion dollar company." It's a combination of being at the right time and the right place with the right product.
• Starting small. Perhaps the key really is to not spend all your time analyzing and thinking about "what would happen" but just getting into the market and testing the results. What better way to innovate than to ask your customers what they think, need, feel, want, desire? Of course, sometimes they need a push since they might not always know themselves. In a speech I heard at Penn a few years back, Josh Kopelman stated that incremental innovations are much easier to implement and drew on Half.com and Turntide as examples.
• Being a bit lucky.

technorati tags: innovation, product innovation, radical innovation, product design

January 12, 2007 | 4:13 PM | Comments (1)

Rather, how well should you know your customer? A few questions that I've been thinking about lately:

• Product vs. Go-To-Market: How do you balance improving the product technologically vs. being the first mover in a market? Sure, you can have a great product, but it means nothing if you have no customers. A classic example of this is the Betamax vs. VHS standard battle. Along the same lines, is it always best to be the first mover? Say you've got the customers. If you're not as technologically competent, how feasible is it to improve the technology later on?
• Product Launch: How do you determine optimal product launch? When do you know to "let it go?" When do you stop adding features and start beta testing? Would it be bad if initial customer reaction was very negative (how badly does it affect your reputation)?
• Customer Feedback: Sometimes, customers may not know exactly what they want. How do you interpret customer feedback, reiterate, and incorporate that into your product?

technorati tags: customer, product launch, first mover

January 9, 2007 | 12:44 PM | Comments (3)