Something good is going on here, now if only we could infuse this level of community investment into our government (truly)

Skelly and the Bean: When is a restaurant more than a restaurant?

Posted by Rebekah Denn

 

-->

BOOKS 062.jpg

When is a restaurant more than a restaurant? I've been wondering how we even define "restaurant" anymore, watching projects like Belle Clementine, where subscribers more or less buy season tickets to dine, or Thierry Rautureau's customer-investors at bistro Luc, or the pop-up restaurants coming and going and coming back again. But I don't think I've seen a more dedicated leap into new territory than "Skelly and the Bean," the new gathering place coming this month from Zephyr Paquette.

You might remember Paquette cooking "Real Good Food" at Carol Nockold and Connie Palmore's late beloved Dandelion in Ballard, or more recently searing Moroccon skirt steaks with Tamara Murphy at Elliott Bay Cafe. She's putting the finishing touches now on a restaurant-slash-"incubator" on the north end of Capitol Hill (2359 10th Ave. E.), open to everyone but fueled by friends and fans. Dinners Wednesday through Sunday (plus Sunday brunch) will feature what you think of as a traditional eatery, with Paquette's locally focused foods. The rest is devoted to the incubator, for fellow cooks trying out new projects. Paquette pictures it as a space "for the semi-popups, the graduates who have really nailed it, the people who want to try out their food truck ideas," for classes, for whatever else may come her way.

Why share her spot?

"How did I get to where I am? Well, I went into kitchens that I liked and said, "Can you teach me what you know?" she said. Her business plan is based on profits from the restaurant side; she sees the rest as a chance to contribute to the community and learn some new things herself. One night might be a Persian feast, another a cheese-making class, another a showcase for a top local culinary student.

The restaurant is nicknamed for a young family friend, Pascal ("Skelly"), now 9, who handed her three dollar bills and $7 in coins when they were playing Legos one day. His father wouldn't let her return it. "Pascal thinks you're supposed to open a restaurant," he told her. She hung on to that first investment for two years, and shared naming honors between the boy and his litttle sister Nina ("The Bean").

After the little boy's push, she became inspired by Thierry Rautureau's strategy of selling memberships to finance bistro Luc. And sure enough, she found enough supporters to make the restaurant a reality, with an $1,000 investment paying back $125 in food per month over the next year, plus guaranteed tables and pre-sale tickets to events. To her delight, people are showing up with more than money.

In these last few weeks before opening day, fellow cooks and members and supporters are coming in to paint, to line the walls with wood reclaimed from a Montana barn, to donate or barter equipment from a fryer to place settings.

"I really am trying to make it a community space...where people walk in and go, "I did that. I painted that wall. This is my place. I built that," Paquette said.

Sound like fun? Or does it sound far out? If you're thinking the latter, there's always the traditional side of her new venture, which reminds me what my favorite restaurants are all about -- good food and good community. In the end, as innovative as her restaurant hopes may be, they're about fundamentals too.

"I miss Carol, she said.

"When I get to tough points, I pull out her rolling pin and make a pie, or I whip open one of the cookbooks...but I miss the food that Dandelion did. I don't see that around very much, stuff that's got that comfort food quality but with a little edge of fun to it.

"I think it's a little bit trying to get back to that comfortable place."

Nancy Leson photo of Zephyr Paquette at Elliott Bay Cafe.

 

Lessons learned from Googled: The End of the World As We Know It

Media_httpecximagesam_kodbg

Google ethos: shoot for the moon, not the tops of trees.

Paul Bucheit, their 23rd employee, coined the mantra, "Don't be evil."

Page and Brin wrote "A Letter from the Founders" and attached it to their SEC IPO filing. Excerpts from that:

"We believe that our user focus is the foundation of our success to date. We also believe that this focus is critical for the creation of long-term value. We do not intent to compromise our user focus for short term economic gain."

In the same letter, they declared that they would "not accept money for search result ranking or inclusion." And even more breathtaking, "A management team distracted by a series of short-term targets is as pointless as a dieter stepping on a scale every half hour."

Google has not learned from failure as say, Steve Jobs has (when kicked out of his own company at age 30). There is wisdom in failure.

Power and behavior sabotage trusted brands.

The Google 20% (amount of engineers time dedicated to a passion project) equals intellectual freedom. According to Marissa Mayer, this accounts for about 50% of Google's product innovations.

From Jeff Bezos, instead of asking yourself what's going to change in 5-10 years and innovating around that, instead ask yourself what's NOT going to change? Go there.

Auletta's idea that "a brand often means trust." That gets back to the IPO letter and why Google is such a trusted brand. Along that line, Auletta talks about Jim Stengal, former P&G global marketing chief, who started a consulting firm concerned with advising companies in how to create "emotional equity" (page 291) and prove to consumers that a company really cares about them and not just their dollars. This reflects a new trend in branding whereby strategy aims to reveal interests and values (vs just demographics) through ethnography like in-home visits, shop alongs, etc. The example given is Pampers, which consulted with parents on the redesign of diapers to feel more like cloth and keep babies warmer. Google is also relentless about user testing.

And finally, the importance of timing, serendipity and luck. Google's discovery of the right advertising formula was according to Page, "probably an accident more than a plan."

Would this biz model work for corporate blogs? Or as a way to source fresh, ongoing content from different voices?

John Cook on Friday, February 11, 2011, 8:30am PST
 |  Permalink

Startup WeekStartupsWeb

Loudlever is looking to make life a little bit easier for writers and publishers. And with the media industry currently in a state of flux there's certainly plenty of work to do in that arena. We chatted with Loudlever CEO Richard Luck, a graduate of the Founder Institute program, for the latest installment of Startup of the Week.

What’s your elevator pitch... HeyPublisher.com is an online content distribution service that brings together talented writers and eager publishers in need of great content. We're like iTunes for the written word.

We came up with the idea... I was talking with the folks at a local online magazine and they said: 'We have a problem. Our submissions are overwhelming. Our author communications are a disaster. And we have 15 years worth of great content in our archives that we can't figure out how to monetize.' At first I thought it was just an operational problem with the magazine. But then I started talking with other magazine publishers online and realized they each had very similar problems. The issue is that you have very creative types (editors, writers, publishers) being forced to deal with publishing tools written by engineers for bloggers. They don't speak the same language. They don't have the same needs. That's when the light bulb went on.

The word that best describes our company culture is... Creative. We work day in and day out with publishers and writers. We're constantly having to reassess our assumptions - and this is fantastic. The creative community is very dynamic, very close-knit. It's great to be a part of that.

Richard Luck

We are different from the competition because... I believe we see the 'big picture' more clearly than anyone else currently in the market. Online publishers need more than just a submission management service. They need new and different ways to make money for their publications so they can continue doing what it is they do best. We're the only service in the marketplace at present that "scores" submissions based upon how similar the piece is to the publishers own archives, so we help editors find what they need more quickly. And with the launch of our online marketplace, we'll be the only service where small to mid sized magazine publishers can syndicate their back content to other like-minded publications, monetizing their archives. Newspaper columnists have been executing on this idea for years. Why doesn't this same platform exist for magazine writers and publishers?

The biggest challenge we face is... Responding to the requests we're getting from publishers and writers. We're four people, currently. We're moving as fast as we can. But it doesn't feel like we're moving fast enough at times. That - and finding developers in this town. It's like all of the available developers have been sucked into some Facebook/Google/Amazon vortex. Reminds me of 1999.

We’ve raised... Nada. We decided to bootstrap in the beginning while we figured out the business model. Now that we've focused in on that, we may look at outside investment to help us scale quicker.

If we had $3 million, we’d invest in... two acquisitions that would leapfrog us into segments of the market that would otherwise take us about a year to build into on our own. Oh, and our team tells me they have some 'perks' they'd like to see.

The oddest thing about our company is... Three quarters of our staff are published writers. We are all neck deep in the business of writing, so we tend to geek out about things that would only interest folks in the industry. Like, did you know Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance was rejected 121 times before a publisher picked it up?

The one thing missing from our business is... Top-down management. If someone sees that something needs to be done - they just do it. I love that about this team.

We won’t fail because... We absolutely love what we're doing. And we love who we get to work with on a daily basis. Imagine working in a company where you receive emails from writers thanking you for them being published. How cool is that?

Editor's note: Have an interesting Seattle area startup that you'd like featured on TechFlash? Answer the 10 questions above with some flair and personality and submit them, along with a headshot, to johncook@bizjournals.com. Please, only founders of Seattle area startup companies should apply.

How to use PR Firms at Startups | Both Sides of the Table

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed, follow me on Twitter, or subscribe via email. Thanks for visiting!

One of the most frequent questions entrepreneurs ask about when they raise a little bit of money or are getting close to launching their first product is whether they should hire a PR firm.

There is obviously no black-or-white answer, but I’ve tried everything from working a large international agency, to hiring in-house people to doing it myself.  This post is a short guide to what I’ve learned:

1. PR is a process, not an event - For starters let me say that you shouldn’t do PR around milestones.  It’s a continual process.  You need to take months & years to build relationships with journalists.  You help them on stories, act as a source, develop real relationships, read their stories and eventually when you have news they’re more willing to have a conversation. They get pitched by so many blowhards that more genuine people who aren’t in it for just a story stand out from the crowd.  I wrote about how to build relationships with journalists in this post.

2. PR isn’t something that can be delegated – The other thing that tech execs often want to do is to delegate the PR to their marketing person. Obviously you should have somebody that helps you research journalists, gets you meetings, pitches stories, helps prep you for interviews & helps make sure your writing is cogent.  But some CEOs then try to have more junior people in the company take the interview.  In a startup this is a mistake.  Heck, even in a big, successful company like Salesforce.com the CEO, Marc Benioff, still takes many of the interviews himself.

The reality is that a journalist who’s writing a story about you – a relatively unknown entity – wants to hear directly from the founders and/or the CEO.  You have to learn how to interact with journalists, understand how to do interviews, understand how to frame a story and get comfortable with the fact that if you want PR coverage you’re going to have to dedicate a non-trivial amount of time to it.

I was talking a month ago with a founding team who was lamenting the fact that their competitors got way better coverage than they did when they felt that their traffic numbers were > 2x the competition.  I pointed out the fact that they only ever talked to the press when the had an announcement and that it was a continual process.  They seemed to understand what I was saying but not be interested in putting in the effort.  Their competitors took it seriously.  And as a result their competitors were able to raise a considerable VC round from well-known firms.

3. PR on a limited budget – So, should you use an external firm?  Let’s say you’ve raised only a modest sum of money (sub $2 million) yet you still want to get coverage.  In this instance I typically recommend that startups NOT hire a big, well-known PR firm.  My rationale is that you won’t have enough budget to be able to get enough of the senior team’s focus.

All too often I’ve seen senior PR people from big firms come in and pitch for new business to startups while having 22 year-olds who do all the work once it’s won.  And even then this newly minted college graduate will be working on multiple clients at the same time.  They don’t have enough billable hours to be able to really understand what you do or effectively pitch it.  Plus, with so many other clients they will likely be pitching a journalist several stories.

If you feel you need outside help I recommend either going with a small firm local to you or an individual who is working as their own agency.  You need somebody for whom your business is important enough for them to care about the results (and they’re obviously hoping you’ll grow and become more successful).  Actually, this is usually the same advice I give people about recruiters, accountants, lawyers and similar trade professionals.

There is one carve out.  There are some excellent PR firms that will occasionally take a “strategic view” on you as a startup.  Maybe they think you have a terrific background & solid investors so they’re betting you’ll become a big deal and they want to get in early.  I’ve seen this model work really successfully for others.  But generally I think it’s best to go small until you become larger and have larger budgets for PR.

One successful model has been to find the uber-connected people who led the shift in PR from traditional to social media – people like Brian Solis or Shel Israel - and work with them to drive extraordinary results relative to costs.  There are a few people out there with these skills but they’re in great demand.  And I know that Brian has a much broader practice now covering research, business strategy & change management.

4. PR in house – Equally I often recommend that teams hire somebody in-house.  You can do this by hiring somebody who has multiple functions of which one is PR, hiring an intern who has PR experience, hiring a consultant 2 days / week or hiring somebody full time.  Obviously this is dependent upon available budgets.

But as I often tell teams, working with an agency (in whatever capacity) is mostly a waste if you don’t have somebody on the inside of your company who is working closely with the outside firm.  You need somebody who is helping push out information on what is up-and-coming in the company.  You need somebody who can react quickly to inbound journalist questions.  You need somebody who is thinking laterally about how to creatively get extra attention at conferences or trade-shows.  You need somebody who REALLY understands your company, its customers and its competitors. And you need somebody who is committed to keeping up your presence in blogs, social media and other online forums.

At almost every portfolio company I work with I encourage them to think hard about hiring internal PR staff.  In my opinion it’s worth its weight in gold.   Whether we like to admit it or not, PR drives behavior with customers, investors, employees and competition.  What is said about you publicly matters.  And one of my favorite sayings about PR is, “if you don’t define the story about you, somebody else will.”  I believe in a good offense.

5. PR with a major firm – Once your business is scaling and you have the money to pay for a major agency I personally can’t think of any marketing budget that is more effective.  A great PR firm coupled with a business that is doing meaningful things is golden.  It’s the best marketing ROI in my opinion.  The ability to get inches in major journals (NY Times, WSJ, The Economist) as well as your industry trade journals and tech blogs in invaluable.  I can’t overstate how important it is in shaping influencers.  The number of stories that I have in my career about a senior executive who read about a company in a magazine on a flight, clipped the article and then followed up directly are numerous.

And when you work with an external PR firm you can’t keep them on a short leash, trying to measure their immediate impact one whether they got you X number of articles or Y numbers of inches.  It will take them time to know your company, socialize your story with the right journalists, wait until those journalists are gearing up to write relevant stories, etc.  You need to have a longer-term view on PR results.

Some final thoughts on PR

1. Be authentic – Nobody likes being spun.  Nobody likes talking to a robotron who spews out corporate BS again & again like a politician on a Sunday morning talk show avoiding the questions.  Talk like a human.  Give real answers.  Show a sense of humor and humility.  I notice, for example, that some CEO’s on Twitter never do anything but parrot their companies news.  I find this so inauthentic.  And then others will send out company info but occasionally show a human side.  Always more appealing.  That’s why keeping a personal blog is so great.

2. Have a point-of-view – Too many senior executives are risk averse when it comes to talking with the press so they tend to either be milquetoast in their responses or sit on the fence.  That’s fine if you’re a senior exec at Apple – you’ll get inches anyways.  But for you as a startup you need to have a point-of-view on topics.  You need to be wiling to take risks and be out-on-a-limb with your views.  I’m not talking about being aggressive against companies, disparaging people or saying inappropriate things to get covered.  I see too many people who do that.  But be willing to have an informed view about – GroupOn, Google doing social networking, whether apps is a better metaphor than browsers, whether Quora is really a transformational product – whatever!  In doesn’t have to be these cliched topics – you just have to have & express opinions.

3. Don’t cry wolf - There are companies who send press releases every time they launch anything – practically putting out press releases announcing they fixed a bunch of bugs.  And then when they have substantive news they’re surprised that nobody takes it seriously.  Make sure you’re not spewing out meaningless reams of press releases.  It’s OK to push out extra ones on your website or blog.  It’s OK to produce a lot and then selectively push them out via different news sources.  Just don’t spam people.  Or when you send the good stuff it will get lost in the sauce.

4. Get media training - One of the most useful exercises I did with a major agency was “media training” where they taught me how to do interviews & how to handle TV.  It was invaluable and has shaped my press interviews ever since.

I’m the kind of person who likes to answer every question in detail.  I feel it’s my duty to respond to every question and make sure the person asking understands my answer.  The problem with this in interviews is that you can take an interview totally off course of the journalists asks questions that aren’t relevant to your story.  Media training helped me figure out how to keep interviews on track and focused on the story I’m trying to communicate.  They taught me to keep things simple and repeat the key points to make sure that they come across.

Thank you to Nathan Lustig who reminded me to included this by writing his excellent commentary here in the comments section, the key points of which are:

“We hired a PR firm to help us for about 2 months around our launch. They helped us get some good stories, but their biggest value add to me was that they gave my cofounder and me media training and actionable feedback.

They gave us a few mock interviews, helped us distill our 8-10 big points into the three most important that would interest journalists most and then listened to us giving our for 5-6 interviews. Then we did “after action reports” where the person who listened in told us what we did well and where we sucked.”

This is some of the most valuable knowledge you will acquire the first time you work with a PR firm.

*** Appendix (just an aside, no need to read):
Wait a second.  How can you advise on PR?  You? The guy who has typo’s in every blog post?

Once / month I get comments on my blog about how horrified some reader was because I spelled your as “you’re” or some similar mistake.  Yes, I went to school.  And I actually got pretty decent grades in English and writing overall.  And yes I learned that you can’t start a sentence with “and.”

When I write I’m looking for human tone rather than perfect sentences.  I write on my blog how I think in my head.  When I write business letters I use perfect sentence structure.  And complete sentences.  And no irony.  I optimize for output of thoughts over spelling perfection.  If I worried about that latter I’d write half as much.  Which I know would greatly please those who are so annoyed by typos ;-)

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter

  • Facebook

  • LinkedIn

  • FriendFeed

  • del.icio.us

  • Google Bookmarks

  • Digg

  • StumbleUpon

  • HackerNews

  • Suggest to Techmeme via Twitter

  • email

  • Print

Prudent naming strategy for early stage companies: Why we changed the name of our startup...

by Adam Schoenfeld on Thursday, January 27, 2011, 5:29pm PST
 |  Permalink

From the TrenchesTechnologyWeb

Adam Schoenfeld

Adam Schoenfeld: This is the kind of call we've had from accounting departments at a few large customers recently:

Me: "Hello. This is Adam."

Caller: " Hi. [Awkward Pause] I have a $500 charge on my credit card from "Untitled." This number was listed. What the hell is going on here?"

Me: "Let me explain..."

When we set out on this startup journey, we took the name Untitled Startup Inc. It was really the perfect fit given our completely undefined vision about the business and product we wanted to build.

The company was founded with a vision for process, not product or market. We knew that we loved creating simple useful stuff that solved big customer problems and generally we liked the social media/PR space.

Beyond that vague, high level idea, there was no vision about what we wanted to be when we grew up. With that, there was always a question about when we would take a title. When would we have a sufficiently clear focus that Untitled Startup was no longer appropriate?

We didn't have a great answer, but figured that it would be obvious when the time was right. Well, it's obvious now.

This didn't happen in one moment, but evolved over the last several months.

One major sign of course, is a shift from creating content and being obsessed with the "startup lifestyle", to buckling down and building a business. As we push out our new branding this week, I thought about the recent developments that dictated this decision.

These highlights stood out when deciding to take a title and commit to our vision:

1. We've zoomed in on a product/market focus. This happened as a result of our "Untitled" process, finding problems quickly, putting out solutions quicker, and charging on day one. We've now locked in on a core mission; helping marketers become data rockstars with shockingly easy to use measurement and reporting tools. We got here by following our open title-less process, but now that we're here, it's created a feeling that we're ready for that title. It didn't go exactly as we thought, but but we got here anyway.

2. Perhaps the most important data is our customer validation. We now have two products around our mission that customers are paying for. We're getting constant feedback that has helped guide our direction. We're now expanding on what we've done with RowFeeder and Exportly, and wrapping the customer value proposition into the Simply Measured name and product.

3. We reached break-even on our core team and expenses in January. This was a major goal for us at the outset. We didn't know what our business would be, but we knew focusing on revenue early and controlling our destiny would be a core value. We're now increasing headcount, growing more aggressively, and setting new, more ambitious revenue goals. These all felt like things that a titled company would do.

4. We went through our first acquisition talks and decided to stay the course building our business (more on this in a later post). We learned a ton through this and it was a big part of the growing up process.

5. Doing business with big companies, "Untitled Startup" on the contracts and credit card receipts just wasn't always going to fly :) When the SVP at a big brand or agency is signing off on our contract and they see "Untitled Startup, Inc" or the same on a credit card statement, it can certainly throw up a few awkward questions. As we're addressing this market, we need a name that doesn't through up red flags with our buyers.

Startups are often pivoting or changing focus. The data you use to decide on a change, narrowing, or shift in direction can vary.

In our case, these were the things that made us realize it was time to take that next step. I suspect a lot of companies start out with a broad, undefined vision and later narrow their mission.

In our case, it just happened to align perfectly with our name, so finding our focus also means getting a title. This week you can say goodbye to Untitled Startup and hello to Simply Measured.

Editor's Note: Startup Confidential is written by Aviel Ginzburg, Damon Cortesi and Adam Schoenfeld. The series follows the ups and downs of the Seattle technology entrepreneurs as they try to get their new business off the ground. Adam Schoenfeld is a co-founder of Simply Measured.

WhitePages use of video in their war on phone books

A cheeky video from my client WhitePages for their Ban the Phone Book campaign (http://www.banthephonebook.org/).

It's a good example of video setting the tone for a brand. I'd like to see their website lighten up and use less of the scorched-earth metaphor. I hope to see more of this tongue-in-check approach as/if the movement gains momentum.