Matt McCall (Draper Portage Ventures) wrote a very interesting post yesterday. In it, he describes the current venture capital landscape as having “flatlined”. Matt is an ultra bright, fairly conservative venture capitalist (at least he was way back when Portage was a key investor in one of my past lives - MetalMaker). A good read if you are currently launching a startup, and/or you are seeking funding for one.

I’m certainly not an economist, but I will say this: things could certainly be better. The job market sucks, the housing market is nonexistent in many places, and we’re staring $5 gasoline in the face. But how does it really affect the capital-seeking early-stage entrepreneur? It doesn’t sound like this is a particularly compelling time to start a new venture. Possibly, but not necessarily.

I founded my last company in 2000 - unless you were living on a deserted island then, you will remember how nasty the market was. Nevertheless, through persistence and self-funding, I managed to keep the thing going until I could exit (2005 - when the market was more in my favor). Timing is everything, as they say. Granted, the exit wasn’t overly lucrative, but we made money, and no one got hurt in the process.

I do want to point out one thing, though (and Mike and I are going to discuss this a bit in our podcast recording session later today). If you are an entrepreneur that is banking on someone else’s funding to help you to build, launch, and realize your dream - your expectations were probably out of line to begin with, so now it gets doubly hard for you. I see deals like this all the time (as do most investors):

Acme Software provides a world-changing solution to the way consumers shop online! Our cutting-edge, paradoxical approach to e-commerce will drive us to $1B in revenues in just 24 months. Seeking $5M to hire a team, build out the product, and start selling it.

Sorry, not gonna cut it. This is laughable. Telling an investor that “with my time and your money, all things are possible” is not a value proposition. If anything, it a nice fat red flag to any serious investor that you aren’t a bankable jockey (rightly or wrongly - this is the reality).
A tough capital market makes the second mile on your journey possibly more arduous - however, the first mile should not be affected. Innovate, sell, and meet the investors halfway.

In an underserved market like Atlanta, you are not likely to waltz in and secure a first round of capital with an idea alone (save for the occasional angel that truly gets what you are doing). Even if you have a prototype product, your chances may only marginally better. So guess what? Nothing has really changed for you. However, once people are buying what you’re selling, the opportunity will stand out like a diamond in the rough. This is your challenge.

If Acme came in with this pitch, however, things get interesting:

Acme Software’s beta product currently provides over 50,000 consumers with a very unique way to shop online. For the first 12 months after launch, the company generated revenues of $1M, and we’re now at cash-flow break-even. Seeking $2M to expand our product and to expand our sales efforts.

When markets get tough, investors withdraw. Their margin for error is already small, and it gets even smaller in tight markets (true for most entrepreneurs as well). However, entrepreneurs are in a slightly different position. They have the “x factor” - the gene. The thing that makes them drive for success even through the toughest of times. The thing that separates mid-level Fortune 1,000 managers from someone who will try the unthinkable. When the landscape sucks, it actually drives innovation and resourcefulness even further. A blessing in disguise to a serious entrepreneur. Not the same for investors - they are often content to ride out the storm - as well they should, since they are most likely investing someone else’s money. But if your deal represents a chance to return even a mild multiple in a tough market, you may find takers.

Good deals get funding … still. They likely always will. But proving yourself to be a “good deal” could be getting a lot harder if you are on the uber-early end of the spectrum. So adjust your expectations if you need to, then get out there, execute, and don’t worry about things you can’t control. Turn a bad market into an opportunity to move forward, while many others sit on the sidelines. If you can’t (or aren’t willing to) do this, you are most likely going to find the next 12 months to be a colossal waste of your time, energy, and precious capital.

Of course, if your venture is already off and running, Matt serves up some pretty good advice to try and insulate yourself. Good reading, for sure.

Cheers.

I had a fun lunch with Drew Ermenc from Catalyst Magazine last week. Our office is actually upstairs from theirs, so it was pretty convenient. Among the many things we talked about was the status of “rockstar entrepreneurs” here in Atlanta. Specifically, they are working on some events for later in the year, and were trying to put together a list of entrepreneurs that would make great panelists and/or speakers.

I was asked if I could suggest some “rockstar” caliber entrepreneurs that they could engage here in Atlanta (or Georgia). Ideally, this would be someone who was currently enjoying a great deal of success, and who also had “name recognition”. Obviously, the combination lends itself to “street cred”, and the ability to draw enough people to fill a venue.

I thought about it for a few minutes, and I must admit, I was a little stuck. I mentally sifted through a few dozen names, but they generally fell into one of the following buckets:

• They satisfied one criteria (are currently enjoying success in a venture), but not the other (they bring name recognition), or vice-versa.
• They are too “new” - they haven’t had a big hit yet, although I’m bullish on them. But they don’t have the street cred yet as a result.
• They had a great deal of success at some time in the past, but are not currently doing much of anything.
• They are ultra successful (cash-wise), and do not currently face the challenges that early-stage entrepreneurs face.
• They are “tired” - everyone has trotted them out over the past 5 or 10 years as a speaker, and thus wouldn’t bring a fresh perspective.
• They are “real estate” moguls, or in some other industry which is driven more by how much cash you can deploy rather than swinging for the fences as a bootstrapping upstart.

If I were to plot this as a distribution curve, there are lots of people on either side of the bell (the long tail!), but not many people inside of the sweet spot (currency/relevant now, street cred, success, etc.)

The only name that really jumped out at me was Mitch Free from MFG.com. MFG went from being bootstrapped from an Excel spreadsheet/sneaker-ware marketplace to an international B2B player backed by Jeff Bezos. And they are still going strong.

Who am I missing?

While I think there may be some gaps now, this won’t always be the case. I think in the next few years we’ll have a new wave of rockstars that will emerge from what is happening here now. But boy, if we were to hold a Woodstock and try to populate it with current Rockstars in Georgia, it wouldn’t be a terribly long show.

Cheers.

10 years ago, Catalyst Magazine was a great resource for Atlanta entrepreneurs. Sadly, they fell dormant for a while and ceased publication. Not too long ago, they were sold to Billian Publishing and are now making strides towards resurrecting the magazine. This is cool … I’ve had a number of discussions with them over the past few months and they are really excited about the emerging wave of entrepreneurship that is occuring in the Southeast.

You may also remember Catalyst for their “Top 25 Entrepreneur” (and the “ones-to-watch”) awards. They’ve been quietly soliciting applications for the past month or so for the 2008 awards - and have extended it for a month. Click here for more info.

Cheers.

If you haven’t heard by now (Lance Weatherby), ATM Direct won the 2008 TAG/GRA Business Launch Competition. On the one hand, I congratulate the ATM Direct team for their victory. They walked away with $100K in cash and $200K in services from various sponsors and partners. Not bad!

My other hand, however, is left wondering why a company that at one point was a significant going-concern, and was eventually bought out of bankruptcy court was even allowed to enter a competition aimed at fostering “new” companies. According to the rules of the competition:

The competition is aimed at “new” businesses, however the time and effort required to launch a successful business in the targeted areas may require that an entrepreneur form a company and begin certain limited functions before any meaningful business operations occur. These functions could include prototype or Intellectual Property development and for these or similar reasons up to $500K in external funding may be allowed. Market trials may also be required and for this or a similar reason some limited revenue may be allowed.

Some incredibly cursory research on the web revealed that back in 2005 or so, ATM Direct was bought by Pay to Touch for a little over $30M. One person told me that deal was a bankruptcy matter as well, although I can’t seem to find any reference to it. Just a few months ago (February, 2008), ATM Direct (or at least their patent portfolio) was sold under bankruptcy court supervision for a mere $600K to Accullink LLC (also located here in Atlanta).

No matter how you slice this, it bothers me. It bothers a lot of people that I’ve talked to over the past few days.

I volunteered this year as a pitch mentor for the other three companies that were in the competition (Skybloxx, Global Crypto Systems, and ProperNotice). Each of these embryonic teams worked extremely hard to make it to the finals of the competition. During our pitch mentoring sessions, ATM Direct was absent - no idea why. But I know the other 3 teams came in and walked away with newly gleaned insights into their stories, and a genuine hope that they had a shot to win and get their companies off the ground. Instead, they lost to a company that had been auctioned off on the bankruptcy circuit (at least once, possibly twice).

In any event, the TAG/GRA business launch competition should be aimed at promoting and fostering the launch of new companies here in Georgia. Unless I am missing something obvious here, I can’t help but feel a little shame in this year’s affair. It sort of reminds me of a 16 year old trying to play on a little league team - great for the team that recruited him, but not terribly fair for the other teams. I suppose one argument would be that since the assets of ATM Direct were sold to Accullink, it is a new incarnation, new company, etc. So that would qualify them for the competition. I still don’t like it, though. It just doesn’t give me that warm and fuzzy feeling that I expect from a winner of a competition like this.

In fact, one could counter-argue since the assets were purchased for $600K, that alone would disqualify Accullink/ATM Direct as that would constitute an investment that is greater than the $500K limit outlined in the rules of the competition. I’d have much rather seen a true green-field idea company in that slot (like the other three contestants).

Nevertheless, I sincerely hope that TAG/GRA addresses this matter at some point, if nothing else than to send a message to would-be entrepreneurs here in Georgia that your dreams and efforts still matter. Due diligence is a good thing. Hopefully, someone from TAG or GRA will come and post here and help make some sense of this.

Cheers.