The more complex and horizontal markets become, the more capturing a core consumer impulse seems a prerequisite to success.
I can’t get away from this thought.
And I can’t stop wondering whether our traditional way of viewing supply and demand as market determinants really matters any longer.
This hit home in a series of conversations with entrepreneurs after my Community as the marketplace post.
Really top notch entrepreneurs who drew passionate pictures of a world populated by communities that were using their marketplace as core to how they lived their lives.
Their decks made it easy to imagine that magical market moment when network effects took hold and it just all worked for them. Where the synergy between buyer and seller got better the more of them there were.
But here’s the rub.
There is no market we can’t justify by its size, and without much imagination visualize a strong demand.
Supply, especially in a consumer marketplace model, is in most every instance I can imagine over abundant.
Is there really a question of whether there are enough people who want home delivery of groceries?
Or have stuff in their basement that they don’t know how to sell easily? Or pine for companionship? Or want healthier food? Or vacations that are built around a common good?
Since Uber made the impossible crowd logistics possible, I can’t think of a single paradigm where aggregating supply is a barrier to entry.
On the flip side, the question of how big is the addressable market is simply less relevant as niches become less distinct, as markets themselves move horizontally cross demographic and groupings.
I am not saying the core economics of supply and demand have vanished certainly.
And I’m very much aware that on the vertical b2b side, there are markets for goods like non-gmo wheat, or (so strangely) watermelons grown on their own root stocks not pumpkin stalks. Where scarcity on the supply side is real and key.
But on the consumer front, it seems marginalized.
Two asides that add some color to this.
My buddy Jeff Carter’s post on Due Diligence for investments is a list of all the right stuff—market size, frictionless supply chain, understanding competition, the quality of the founders. The usual suspects.
But in the end of the checklist, it’s simply his gut that tips the scale to say yes to investments.
In Semil Shaw’s exceptional post this week, where he carefully constructs an investment ecosystem for his new fund yet at the end acknowledges that in actuality he is looking for undiscovered sources of kinetic energy in segments and solutions.
Something that translates to what just feels right. Has the right ‘kinetic’ energy.
There’s a meme bubbling up here.
Experienced people cross their T’s and plot out their checklists certainly but we must acknowledge two things:
-That the market has dramatically changed and embrace that with abandon.
-That at the end of it all, what changes the world the most defies logic and is driven by simple and core consumer reflexes.
In my corner of the marketing world, I’m bumping into this for the third time in as many weeks in my posts.
First, that the corralling of complexity on the data side mirrors a drive for emotional clarity and connection on the other. Post here.
Second, that communities as an emotional construct are really the structure of our markets today, moving horizontally, not vertically, connecting to pieces of peoples core beliefs and emotions. Post here.
And today’s post echoing both ideas.
That our nets are not at all flat but they are certainly horizontal and that all the possibilities of supply and demand already exist. That understanding market size is a checklist step but nary more than that.
And that today, where by dint of human habit and the real estate restrictions of our phones front screen, it is getting so much more challenging to connect with consumer intent.
Damn near impossible to crack a handhold in the collective want of a large enough population of people and have it stick.
And that on the other, when you do, it can be massively explosive as it just touches a nerve horizontally cross the consumer world.
Maybe this is simply a shifting of gravity in a marketing sense.
A reinterpretation and refocusing of what engagement means. And burying the idea of guiding ourselves by approximated scales of sentiment.
Post a dinner party at my place recently I watched the guests milling about, finishing their drinks and waiting for their Uber rides to show up before heading down 25 floors to the street and winter cold.
Impulse reaction pure and simple
Need something, tap and move on. The very pin prick top of a massive network of logistics that is simply a twitch of a finger to hail your ride.
With that you have the world. Without that not a thing.
When I look at projects I think of this as my market lens. My behavioral litmus test.
Can Instacart become that core shopping reflex? Can any one of hundred local delivery services replace the extension of Uber cross the front screen of our phones?
I think we are iterating towards a new definition of personal market dynamics and marketing itself which has lagged far behind.
We see it in out daily lives and the intersection with our mobile habits. Actions that are just reflexes connecting our thoughts to our phones as key to navigating and personalizing our world.
This also determines in many ways how long a play list of actions can really exist on the front screens of our phones and in our conscious thoughts. And limits what can influence us to go here rather than there, do this or something else.
The more choices, the more easy options, the more complex the solutions become to capitalize on a limited number of consumer reflexes.
Starting from that impulse back, not from measurements and approximation forward, is where I think marketing is going and what the market demands.
A blank slate of opportunity just waiting. Unplumbed for the most part.
Discovering and platforming these impulses is I think marketing’s next frontier.
I realized this morning that I’ve been blogging and offering advisory services since September 2009.
The passage of time hit me a bit hard I’ll admit.
Along the way traditions have developed and every year around Thanksgiving I select a few entrepreneurs from the community and offer gratis sessions of my Office Hours advisory services.
This is both my way of giving back and of course, works to build new connections for my business itself.
A mini two-sided marketplace of sorts where both sides win.
Office Hours is my light advisory model that works really well for clients that need an outside strategic partnership that often touches on CEO coaching as well.
Trust me–this is fun, engaging and serious work. And a great way to get to know each other.
We schedule a series of sessions, create goals and set a rolling agenda.
The overall objective is to tackle usually one item, maybe market positioning, or often, an outside view of the strategy behind your fund raising docs.
The goal of course is to find a match and continue to work together.
Over the years this has been the entre to shared projects, advisory roles and even a stand in CMO role now and again.
But most gratifying, a handful of great friendships have developed out of this.
You already know me from the community. My approach to building markets and brand is a few hundred posts deep here.
If you are interested and can see an outside expert with a strong market point of view becoming part of your team, send me a mail.
Make me want to get to know more about you and your project. And even more why you want to do these sessions with me.
If this sounds right to you, just do it!
Looking forward to hearing from a number of you.
Questions in the comments or via email please.
And most important, have a great Thanksgiving!
There’s a melancholy bubbling up across my networks.
A murmuring that as a tech culture we’ve lost the ability to compartmentalize our work and personal lives.
That the ability to put things in separate buckets is somewhat akin to personal happiness and work productivity.
Maybe this is coming from the yearly slide towards winter and ennui that comes with the holiday season.
Or that the startup world has hit a wall of stress, with fundraising at a seasonal slowdown and the realities of an increasingly challenging market taking their toll on entrepreneurs across the board.
Or even that the entrepreneurial culture is now mature enough now to realize that for all its many positives, at its core it’s a hyper stressful and challenging business model.
Exuberant when you exit and crushing for the majority that don’t.
Whatever the cause, this ennui is real and palpable, cropping up in friends and clients alike.
This year I feel it as well.
But the idea that there is a separation of work and life in any real way seems more myth and nostalgia than reality to me. I think we are chasing our tails looking for balance in all the wrong places.
I wonder whether this view of work and life as polar opposites has ever existed in a real sense.
Certainly within the culture of startups and creative endeavors, it’s simply an unnatural state.
So what’s going on?
When today we talk about the need to unplug and head to the beach we may certainly be looking for balance. We are pining for healing and a more uncluttered point of view.
Maybe we are looking for a truer sense of ourselves and an inside view of what it means to be happy.
I’m all in with this but I don’t think it has anything to do with compartmentalizing our lives.
In fact, I’m beginning to realize that technology itself, to many the culprit and the source of the problem, is in actuality a large part of the answer.
Think of it this way.
There is an innate conflict between the freneticism of an entrepreneurial activity and the aspirations for a balanced life.
Neither our aspirations nor the day to day of work is going to change that.
That doesn’t obviate our natural need for quietude nor does it really mitigate the conflict.
What I aspire for is not disconnecting, but control and focus to be disconnected and still be in touch.
There are those whose ideal is a cabin with no connectivity and cutting the strings to free the mind.
To me nothing could be more stressful.
I want the overdraft of knowing that things are in control in real time so that I can do that 3-hour bike ride without my phone. So I can go diving or skiing for the afternoon knowing that I’ve managed the pieces of my life and business.
Here’s the rub.
You need to separate tech as a tool and tech as a busy box driving distraction.
Having everything in the cloud, always available from any device is a gift.
From finances to roll outs to calendars to knowing where the pieces are and communicating within context, at a click is what tech gives me. These tools, the front screen on my phone, are what make possible balance for me.
If you think that social nets are you most important marketing channel and need every second response—you are simply screwed—as well as wrong.
I’m a believer that the more seamless the integration of work and life I have the more balanced and productive I become.
This to me is about acceptance and embracing reality not pining for a different one.
The more I do this the less I find myself staring at my phone walking down the street.
As both a tech and personal wellness fanatic, this idea of personal and work integration is how I see, for myself, the key to being better at play and work both.
The gift of a connected world is just that we can always be connected and keep the pieces in sync and in our mind’s eye when they need to be.
It’s a bit of a bait and switch of course.
You can spend your time imagining a more separate world so you can truly relax.
Or you spend your time wiring stuff together so that you are free to choose and jump into each completely.
A wise friend said to me recently:
“You take yourself with you wherever you go”.
Embracing that is the only way for me to truly get beyond myself.
Sometimes there are cultural shifts that we experience long before we become aware of their impact on how we live and work.
We wake up and realize that we are using old world tools and ideas for a vastly different new world order.
This is happening today where the idea of community meets the reality of the marketplace.
In the 90s, Geoffrey Moore nailed community and the power of interest groups as the power play of an early-wired world
His idea that you can leverage an early adopter interest group as a sling shot leap into the mass market was brilliant.
Geoff’s vision of the chasm, and Seth Godin’s idea of tribes on hilltops pounding on drums to send signals were connected.
Seth’s idea came later and went further but both defined an Alice’s Restaurant sort of market spread for both the building of brands and the anchoring of commerce around it.
The web as the amplifier and aggregator of groups with connecting individuals as their market momentum was the big aha.
That was then though and this is now.
There is a reason that marketing has fallen into such disrepair and lack of respect.
We’ve focused on approximation and virtual scales of sentiment rather than the tangible and powerful result of social grouping—community–and how that drives change in the markets that form naturally around it.
We’ve ignored the key change in how community functions in a world that is both different in how we navigate it and different in the core of our behaviors.
Today, there are no more chasms.
There are no more hilltops. No individual nodes and no gated communities.
There are only atomic connections that move horizontally across the threads of the world on social nets and in mobile communities.
The more you look to focus them narrowly the more you will miss the thread.
This dawned on me a few years ago that the communities on Kickstarter where not on their site but everywhere cross the web.
Somehow the emotional clarity of a creative project spread out across the nets and tied together people in a loose chain of support aggregated in the transaction.
The project was not the community, the emotional clarity of the idea was the connector.
Community was not a layer nor an entity nor exclusive.
Brand, while born out of belief, was less an idea and more of an emotion.
And marketing needed to be redefined as a language that connects what we believe in naturally to a market that supports it.
I don’t know what the operational manual for a world where community is the definition of a market is going to look like.
We are in many ways living it before we understand it.
What I do know is that we are different today as people then we were. The markets are different along with us.
If you are an entrepreneur, I can guarantee that your company is already firmly in a community and in market from day one.
You need to start right there.
If you think your community is simply the enthusiasts that you’ve gathered you are thinking too narrowly. That was the reality in the 90s.
You are missing community in a networked world as inclusive and expansive by definition, horizontal from the beliefs that make it real.
You need to discard the idea that there is a place where community ends and market begins. That you need to approximate and measure community in order to leverage it to a market.
You can’t imagine your market into place certainly.
I’m going to get asked: Is there a new list of tactics we need to implement?
The wrong question to ask first.
You need to step back.
You need to imagine when Kickstarter realized that by the simple act of empowering people to support things that inspired them, they had touched a primal need whose community was as broad as the world.
When Airbnb or Sound Cloud realized that at their most elemental value they touched a community of common interests that opened a market that was as big as the global market itself.
Take a huge whiteboard.
Gather your team and your advisors around you. Fill the entire thing then wipe it clean.
Find the one phrase. Isolate the one emotion, the one core truth that makes you special and unstoppable.
Makes you essential to the market size you imagine.
Understand that community as marketplace is both the message and the medium in today’s world.
Companies succeed on execution but not without that core.
Selling below cost is a race that when you win, you loose.
From the top down this is simply building a business with a negative gross margin.
From the bottoms up this is just plain suicidal to me. Like lemmings sprinting towards the cliff.
I’m simply not smart enough to understand how when you sell below cost (negative gross margin) you can get to net operating profit.
Crazy corner cases aside, this is when street math and startup math are the same.
This is becoming strangely endemic and not just in the rarified world of big players with big dollars scorching the earth to buy market share.
I see it on the shelves of Whole Foods. I see it in many pitches of startups. I see it in every company when they face the truth of building a market for their product and it just doesn’t go as planned.
First some biases:
-I don’t believe that markets can be bought. You can roll up capabilities and lock down distribution but the market is its own master. It will humiliate the most audacious and drain the bank account of the most well funded.
-I don’t ascribe to the tactic that acquiring a customer at any cost is the right action. Beware of forecasting a very long brand life and using LTV as a justification for acting crazy with your checkbook.
-I am absolutely certain that recognition built on discounts and sales is simply reflex consumer responses to a deal, not connected to building a market nor deepening brand value.
This happened a few weeks ago.
I was talking to a startup founder around his new strategy for penetrating a market segment that was drawing a lot of attention and investment.
He has a really cool brand, grounded in innovation though quite small but facing stiff growth inertia.
After a large acquisition in the space, he was embracing a Trojan horse strategy with a low cost, below cogs and entry-level product that could leverage them into broader based distribution. He had decided that it was OK to loose money on each and every sale.
This is a dangerous and desperate game to play with little odds of winning.
I seriously understand the frustration of stalled growth.
Most of the time we are stymied over not growing fast enough or nervous that our market share is being taken by someone else.
I understand the massive anxiety that comes from being out there raising capital and being told day in and day out, that you are building a business that is solid but doesn’t have escape velocity to warrant a high multiple investment.
And the then unnatural acts as you convince yourself you have to be to be that company.
As a commenter responded to me on a blog string and I paraphrase from memory—a fruit stand peddler at the dawn of civilization knows that if you sell every apple at a loss, you will run out of product before you make any money.
Seems to be a lesson that forever needs to be relearned.
It’s too easy to be a curmudgeon and talk about the impatience of both funders and entrepreneurs. I find that people are smarter than the generalizations we make of their actions.
But it’s a riddle why time and again, we are comfortable with the process of patiently building products, then completely unrealistic about the rigors of getting them to market momentum.
I think there are two truths that bear repeating.
-You are building your brand at the point of sale with each and every transaction. Be it online or across the check out counter.
Throw away your common distinctions of sales and marketing and think of yourself in the customer’s eyes.
If business were a board game Monopoly money our currency, always on sale would still be a loosing strategy.
You need to build value—build brand—before discounts and sales become a strategy. People buy cheap, then they buy something else cheap.
Communities of buyers connect to brand, then take sales and discounts as a personal gift. The stronger the attachment to the undiscounted value of what you make the more powerful a sale can be.
If you evaluate a sale by its revenue you are missing the point. If you evaluate pricing and discounts as a brand and customer acquisition tool, you look at lift post discounts as the true measure of success.
-Business models iterate, business fundamentals usually don’t
I’ve never built a budget or a plan that didn’t change.
But the fundamentals of margin, of cost with volume of the relationship of what you build and the resources to acquire customers are fundamental.
Someone said that you need to understand your brand value and your market dynamics but you don’t early on need to understand how to scale.
This captures it all for me.
This is why I keep building spreadsheets that go up and to the right for investors, but what I really care about is the dynamics of the brand and how it can capture market fit and that the business fundamentals are sane.
If you have these pieces and enough capital to be patient, you have a shot.
The tech world especially is steeped in the mythos of the unimaginable.
The Freemium model that got acquired for billions of dollars when their model was gushing cash at a loss. The overnight success that went from zero to acquisition in a handful of years.
It happens but your plan should be that it will never happen to you. Don’t fall prey to unnatural thinking that negative gross margins somehow make sense.
Put the pieces together.
Know why people can love what you do or make. Understand the fundamental business blocks of your vision.
Then go make it so.