Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Board Of Intellectual Capital’ Category

Article by Om Malik @ GigaOm.

This is going to be a busy weekend for me. While the weather in San Francisco threatens to be “summer-like,” I am going to be sitting at home and preparing for our Structure 2012 conference. Nevertheless here are seven stories that might be worth reading this weekend.

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

By – McHugh & Co. and  member of Gerbsman Partners Board of Intellectual Capital

A while back I was retained to help develop a new strategic plan for the management team and the Board of Directors of an angel-backed technology company.

Soon after I started the project, the CEO told me that a significant angel investor/board member (Moneyman) called either she or the CFO every day at 4:45 for an update on the company. Every day, not kidding…

Was Moneyman, “Just checkin’ in…?”

Was he simply showing enthusiasm, expressing interest, acting curious, proffering sage advice, coaching the senior team and being ‘hands on’?

He wasn’t calling to coach or offer operating advice. Moneyman was meddling.

The constant, meddling actions of the controlling, outside investors in the day-to-day affairs of the organization have a direct, negative impact on the organization’s performance.

Meddling can cause a company to be Stuck in a Ditch.

The Board of Director’s Bell Curve

I think a ‘bell curve’ (normal distribution) can be used to understand the participation level of a Director. Here is my interpretation:

Over time, I’ll be writing blog posts about the broad topic of private company boards and governance.  I’ve been a member of nine boards (private equity backed, vc/angel backed or family owned). I’ve also been directly involved with many other company boards through my consulting work.

These blog posts are not going to cover what I would call the ‘board/governance basics’ (i.e. ideal member, term, compensation, etc.). That sort of content is plentiful.

I will examine the different Board personalities and styles of governance I’ve experienced over the last 20 years with a hope that these shared experiences and stories can make your Board more cohesive, and improve the interactions between management and individual board members.

How did Moneyman become a Meddler?

I’ve already said Moneyman is a #5.  I think this table sums it up.

Moneyman:

  • was impatient, increasingly frustrated and dissatisfied with the company’s overall performance…his performance expectations were not being met
  • had put a lot of personal money into the company – he had the courage to commit his money to a new venture
  • did not have a good understanding of market size and customer acceptance of the products; he thought the market was HUGE – it wasn’t
  • questioned the skills of the management team
  • had no meaningful experience in this company’s business or industry; his personal financial success came from a completely different business experience
  • had a very intense personality

All of these factors together produced a combustive mix and created a difficult relationship with the management team and some other Board members.  If he was not one of the ‘lead angel investors’, he should not have been on the Board.

What happened?

Management and the Board came together around a revised strategy, a new operating plan and a realistic set of expectations about customer acceptance and addressable market size.  Revenues increased, the company became cash flow positive and the financial pressures subsided. Moneyman became less fearful that the value of his investment was heading toward zero. He had renewed hope and the meddling diminished and became less intense.

Have you experienced the Meddler? Do you have suggestions on how to work with this type of Director?

Read Full Post »

Article from GigaOm.

“I meet a lot of owners of midmarket IT services companies who almost immediately ask me, “What is my company worth?” Even those who don’t ask want to know often ask.

It’s a fair question, with a complicated answer. I can do a back of the envelope calculation and determine the enterprise value of a company today based on 12 months trailing revenue or perhaps a multiple of EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization). But the real value of a company is based less on its past performance than on its potential worth to a future owner. What the buyer can bring to the party and how well its management believes it can execute the acquisition and business strategy going forward is where a company’s true value resides and where the domain expertise or strategy comes into play.

Case in point: In 1996, IBM bought Tivoli Systems for $743 million, paying about 10 times trailing revenue. Many analysts concluded at the time of the sale that IBM grossly overpaid for the asset. Within a year, IBM was able to leverage Tivoli into almost a billion dollars in revenue. Just like beauty, value is in the eye of the beholder. Tivoli had more value to IBM than Tivoli had to itself at the time. So did IBM pay 10 times revenue or less than one times revenue for Tivoli?

Unfortunately, I don’t have a crystal ball. So I don’t know what potential buyers can do to leverage a company’s value. And a calculation on the back of an envelope almost always fails to satisfy.

Here is something else the owners I talk with really don’t want to hear: Chances are they have taken actions that over time have eroded — or even destroyed — the value of their company without even realizing it. In my last post for GigaOM, I wrote about “5 things that destroy a company’s value.” In this post and in future posts, I’m going to examine these value killers one at a time in greater detail.

Today, my topic is opportunistic acquisitions. And to be clear, my message is for owners of midmarket companies who are interested in making acquisitions designed to increase their own value. In doing so, they hope to become attractive acquisition candidates to buyers in the future.

Acquisitions fail 70 to 90 percent of the time

If you search for the phrase “acquisition failure rates,” you’ll be treated to study after study that peg failure rates at somewhere between 70 percent and 90 percent. Dig a little deeper, and you’ll find articles enumerating the many reasons most acquisitions don’t work.

Nearly all of these reasons can be boiled down to two:

  1. The acquisition was a bad match between what the seller had and what the buyer could do to create value. The bad match often occurs because the buyer was fooled, misled, or overlooked key points of the deal, or the buyer simply suffered from hubris.
  2.  The buyer did a poor job of integrating the acquisition and executing on the business strategy designed for its new asset.

In both situations, acquisitions fail because the buyer doesn’t really know what or why it’s buying — let alone what to do with the acquisition.

Think about when HP bought Compaq or when Time Warner bought AOL.

Of course there are companies that are successful with acquisitions. Cisco has acquired 150 companies since its first acquisition in 1993. In fact, acquisitions are a core competency of Cisco — few companies are better at it.

Cisco’s purchases are fueled by the desire to speed up the rate at which the company can offer new technologies in a market that is hyper-competitive and evolving rapidly.

Not all of Cisco’s acquisitions are hits. Remember the Flip video camera that Cisco shut down in 2011? But many were successful, especially in the early days. At the peak of its acquisition activity in 2001, Cisco’s purchases were widely credited with laying the foundation for about half of its business at the time.

The secret to Cisco’s fruitful acquisitions is its ability to successfully onboard companies. Cisco employs a full-time staff solely focused on integrating new companies into the fold — instead of haphazardly assembling part-time transition teams whose members are all busy with their regular jobs.

In terms of strategy and execution, Oracle is even better at acquisitions. The company has spent billions on about 90 companies since its acquisition of PeopleSoft closed in 2005. Oracle’s chief skills are identifying companies that fit well into its longterm business strategy at the front end of the process, and its ability to integrate and act on these strategies at the back end. In 2011, readers of The Deal Magazine recognized Oracle’s track record with an award for most admired corporate dealmaker in information technology for deals completed from 2008 to 2010.

Until late in 2011, Oracle’s acquisition drive was to create the broadest portfolio of traditional enterprise software applications in the industry. With the company’s $1.5 billion acquisition of SaaS CRM applications provider RightNow Technologies (announced in September 2011 and completed in January 2012), Oracle now hopes to work its magic in the SaaS market. Oracle paid more than seven times trailing revenue for RightNow. I bet that in the next year or two, Oracle will make that multiple look like a bargain — just like when IBM bought Tivoli.

Still, Cisco, Oracle and other exceptions to the rule underscore the difficulty of making acquisitions work. It’s even harder when an acquisition happens because a buyer is presented with an unexpected “opportunity” and management decides it’s just “too good to pass up.” These so-called “opportunistic” acquisitions often lead to disappointment or disaster.

The reasons for failure are obvious. Acquirers lured by such a passive approach often have no clearly defined goals, have not thought through the attributes of ideal acquisition candidates, have done little or no pre-acquisition planning, and suffer from a lack of choice.

It reminds me of people who go to Las Vegas for the weekend and end up married. Getting married in Nevada is quick, easy and relatively inexpensive. All you need is a marriage license — no blood tests and no waiting period. And there is a wedding chapel on every corner.

Of course, when you wake up the next morning, there may be hell to pay.

I know. I’ve been there. Not in Las Vegas on the morning after, but at an organization that for many years only bought companies that showed up on its doorstep. We had no strategy and no process for integrating acquisitions into the mothership. I’m convinced that if the owner of the neighborhood car wash had offered us a “good” deal, we’d have taken it.

So here’s my advice for owners of companies seeking to enhance their value through opportunistic acquisitions. Acquisitions can do a lot of good. They can add to your growth and earnings, speed your entry into new markets, allow you to acquire human capital or intellectual property more quickly, and lower your costs through economies of scale. All of these things have the potential to increase the value of your company to a prospective buyer.

But just like marriage, acquisitions should never be decided on a whim. And you should never buy a company just because it’s for sale. Frankly, companies that are not for sale offer juicier profits and are likely a better strategic fit. Better to take some of that money and go have fun with it in Las Vegas.

And if you go there, don’t get married.”

Read more here.

 

Read Full Post »

Article from GigaOm.

Meteor Development, the startup behind a hot, new real-time JavaScript framework, has scored $9 million in initial funding from Andreessen Horowitz, sources said. Company co-founder Matt DeBergalis had no comment on the funding news.

Meteor’s framework, as GigaOM reported in April, allows developers building web apps to work in “pure” JavaScript, and use the same APIs on both client- and server-side devices. The Meteor API works everywhere but development occurs on the local laptop with Meteor taking care of data updates and server synchronization. Developers commenting on Github and Hacker News really liked Meteor’s ability to perform “hot pushes,” which update code to users without interrupting their work.

Initial excitement about the framework was soon tempered by Meteor’s use of the General Public License (GPL) but in response to developer pushback on Github and StackOverflow, Meteor turned around and issued the code under the less restrictive MIT public license. That allows development of both open-source and commercial products.

Meteor, based in San Francisco, was co-founded by Geoff Schmidt, a co-author of the Miro web TV platform and co-founder of MixApp; DeBergalis, founder of the ActBlue fundraising platform; Nick Martin, another MixApp co-founder; and David Greenspan, author of Etherpad. The website features rave blurbs by luminaries including Posterous founder Gary Tan and Facebook co-founder Dustin Moskowitz.

Clearly, as evidenced by this funding, Meteor also has new fans among Silicon Valley investors as well.

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

Article from TechCrunch.

Your Powerpoint pitchdeck is so boring. So. Freaking. Boring. Although tech bloggers aren’t sent startup’s actual pitchdecks as often as investors are (thankfully), we’re still walked through them on dreadful, “let me read to you from my Powerpoint” phone calls more often than should be socially acceptable. That’s why when image aggregator Piccsy, which is simultaneously a competitor to Pinterest as well as a top 20 content source for the site,  pinged us to take a look at its pitch deck, we were pleasantly surprised. A pitchdeck that’s actually fun to read? Can such a thing exist?

Piccsy.com/investors hosts the company’s public pitchdeck, and it’s a striking, visual representation of the data that would be typically found in bullet-pointed slideshows. The format leads you to wander through content and explore, much like Piccsy itself does. CEO Daniel Eckler admits that he doesn’t even know how to use Powerpoint. “I’ve only ever opened the program once or twice in my life,” he says. But it wasn’t just lack of know-how that led the company to ditch the idea of the traditional deck. As outsiders from Toronto, they wanted to stand out, Eckler says.

“We began with a problem (how to get investors to see our deck) and came up with a solution (create something unique, beautiful, informative, and easy to share), as opposed to going with the status quo,” Eckler explains. “This is conceivably the first thing investors are going to relate to when they see a company. Lots of companies that are innovative in other areas are sticking to an old model with their deck, even though they have the resources (dev/design) to do something special.”

Plus, he adds, a generic, Powerpoint-style deck wouldn’t be right for a site that’s all about discovering beautiful imagery.

For what it’s worth, the novel deck has been working. 50,000 pageviews and 15 inbound investor requests came in over the weekend, and the site got linked on Hacker News (where discussion delved into criticisms over content, however, but not the style.) Said one commenter, “it’s a beautiful presentation. I’m jealous….I’d absolutely pay to get a site like that.”

Say, Piccsy – if that whole image aggregation thing doesn’t work out…

The screenshot above is just a snippet. The full site is here.

Read more on Piccsy at www.piccsy.com.

Read the original article here.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »