All posts by Jim Muttram

Q&A with Werner Vogels of Amazon

Werner Vogels has just presented the Amazon suite of web services which I didn’t blog as it’s been done to death by now. However, in the Q&A he described the Amazon approach to web development – the services are built on many small services which are built and maintained by small “Two Pizza teams” – teams which you can feed on two pizzas. He says they developed the web services EC2 and S3 after perfecting the approach on their own services. He says all the services can be used by Brits except Mechanical Turk “because of labour laws”.

Technorati Tags:

ThinkFree – online document management

T J King of ThinkFree is on. He’s talking about the online product which offers online word processing, spreadsheets and presentations which are completely compatible with MS Office. They are working on monitising with contextual advertising, he says. He announced that ThinkFree had released a free API mashup for blogs which will allow Office documents to be viewed online without having to have Office installed.

Technorati Tags: ,

Last FM – the challenge of growth

Matt Ogle and Anil Bawa Cavia from Last FM, which tags itself “social music revolution” , spoke about how they built the business. Matthew starts with some stats: 15 million tracks being played and “scrobbled” (metadata sent to the servers), 10 million artists, 70 million tracks, 700,000 tracks which are streamable, 145k artist wikis.

The service works like this: user listens to track, metadata sent to server, other tracks with similar metadata recommended to user, user listens…. The more you listen the better it gets, they say.

The early growth lessons: don’t overextend, make sure revenue scales with usage, involve users in the web application’s story. They recommend putting the blog at the forefront so that there is an open conversation. People prefer to be told the bad news than no news at all. People will be more likely to tolerate your problems.

Anil takes up the story of growing up. “People trump process”, he says. Have simple process and good people. Take simple tools and customise them. Radiate information across different channels in the company. “We use IRC to communicate across our office which we customised.”

He recommends opening up the product as a platform so that users and companies can extend the power of the product. This is a key way to harness critical mas”.

“Openness is the key to web apps.”

Matt is back on stage. He talks about Scrobbling data – it’s “attention data” . The server knows when you listen, when you stop. It’s a kind of “spyware” he says, but people will accept that if there is a real benefit to it. Then it’s called “myware” – spying on yourself.

The social web – attention aggregators – is where the action is.

Some examples of what they do with attention data – a custom “Time Out” for your tastes and your area; blog recommendations based on your taste.

Anil back on. Monitising attention: microchunkit , free it, syndicate it, monetise it. In Last FM’s case they sell labels the chance to pay to have music played to a very targeted audience, and they provide really detailed feedback of what listeners liked, and what they didn’t.

He spoke about tag cloud moderation. The principle is censorship is not acceptable. But by weighting tags by attention then those people who listen to a particular artist count more than those that done.

Matt is back. The future for Last FM?

More:
growth, streamable music, ambient findability, personalisation (things you can do with your data)

Less:
interfaces (rationalise and streamline), barriers to entry (collaborative filters have a cold start).

Technorati Tags:

The venture capitalist’s view

Ben Holmes from Index Ventures spoke about the venture business. First some stats: in the States there was $25.7bn venture money in 2006, with 1,446 transactions with an average transaction size of $10.5m. In Europe the equivalent was €4.1bn with 867 transactions with an average values of €14m. Around 55% of investments are in IT with a rapid increase in web application development.

In Index’s case the mechanics are as follows: about half of all investments lose money, a third break even and a sixth make (lots) of money.

What a good VC will add: advice and strategy, hiring, partnerships, profile and PR, internationalisation, trusted service provider relationships and exit optimisation.

He outlined the basic deal terms, which he admits many entrepreneurs find offensive:

  • target 20-35% ownership (enough to make a difference)
  • board representation
  • liquidation preference (to make sure the exit is big enough)
  • participation rights (want to be able to maintain stake)
  • element of reverse vesting (owners lose equity if they bale out early)
  • certain control and veto right (to stop a low-value exit)
  • option pool
  • period of exclusivity to close legals

He says the main reasons for not raising VC money are: it’s a feature not an application; the market size is too small; the owner’s motivation isn’t financial. “We spend out time looking for teams which have done amazing things with no money.”

The pitch to the VC, he says, should ideally be a 20 page Powerpoint presentation covering:

  • product
  • market
  • business model
  • team
  • competition
  • product roadmap
  • technology overview
  • business development
  • financial status

Update: there’s a great mindmap of the whole presentation uploaded to Flickr.

Technorati Tags: ,

Fostering Online Communities

Tara Hunt, of Citizen Agency, asks the question: what makes a community? The characteristics? personal homepage/profile; personal content creation; the ability to interact with others’ content; the ability to befriend and share content. The benefits: heightened customer loyalty; self-policing; amplified by word of mouth; better feedback; stronger and more interesting filters on content.

Three levels of communities: 1. lightweight social processes (low-barrier social involvement like voting and the recording of personal participation);
2. Collaborative information structures (enhanced by social participation); 3. High end end collaboration (groups using systems to make sense and share complex materials)

Common themes:

  • sense of fun and play (the founders very publicly have fun, playful messaging and images on the side)
  • keeping the dialogue going (“eating their own dogfood” – “it’s amazing how many people don’t use their own product”, answering your own customer support emails, greeting new customers and introducing them to others – “being the host of a party”
  • wouldn’t it be awesome if…. (taking an experimental approach to development, throw away the business plan and embrace the chaos, )
  • the power of the word of mouth (built-in a variety of ways ot share early on [rss, copy and paste urls etc], adding more on-ramps (email, SMS etc)
  • involve community in decisions (listen to your users and be flexible, let the community create the content and make the decisions)
  • simple platform to build on (building blocks – tools built be experts but used by non-experts eg. WordPress [users add extensions] Flickr api, focus on one function well
  • Compelling stories
  • rewarding of community members (feature super users, more privileges)

There are four characteristics of successful communities that she identifies:
Feelings of membership (creation of community boundaries, perception of emotional safety) Personal profile pages, allowing for lots of personal and group expression.
Feelings of influence (being able to influence the group, feedback responsiveness, rule enforcement) Include forums, chat, comments etc
Integration and fulfillment of needs (feeling of being supported by others, reward of being and member, such as status, shared values, feeling of competence) Karma points etc
Shared emotional connection (personal investment of time and resources, high quality, frequent interaction) Add face-to-face opportunities
The bottom line: building communities is hard work and can take a long time to build.

Technorati Tags:

Mike Arrington – Techcrunch

What is the right formula for a successful start-up? Mike Arrington offers what he calls “the magic forumla”. First, though, he tries to convince the audience that we are not in “bubble 2.0” . He cites two main reasons – Sarbanes Oxley has put considerable barriers for public companies and investors won’t accept unprofitable floatations. In addition, we are seeing companies fail. In the first internet bubble no companies failed; they were just rolled into other venture funded vehicles.
Now to the tips:
1. Have a good idea!
Either invent a market, destroy a market or remove friction
2. Have a business plan – though, not essential (see Digg)
3. Have a revenue model
4. Build it cheap, test the waters (Digg spent $2,000 building the site)
5. Avoid a high burn rate

However, YouTube didn’t do any of these things! But…they removed friction by providing a much needed service (IPTV not user generated video) and they were first to market. That was enough to compensate.

So what are the shared attributes of winners? passion, doing something extraordinary and he obvious. More importantly, what are the shared attributed of losers?

  • Poor founder team/ choices
  • Lifestyle/ego entrepreneurs
  • raised too much money
  • spending too much money
  • over business planned
  • forget about scaling

Technorati Tags: