Qwilr

qwilr

The web is in an awkward phase right now. We’re transitioning from an era where a website was simply a collection of linked pages to one where even using the term “page” to describe a particular screen is a giant oversimplification. When I first started web development, the job was mostly . . . Type up some HTML Add a little styling FTP that baby up to your server and . . . Boom; you’ve published to the internet. Let’s just say it’s rarely that simple anymore. While it’s tempting to bemoan the loss of that simple early web, it’s important to realize that . The web was primarily an online index of documents that could link to each other. the early web was simple because the use cases were simple The modern web is a mixture of complex interactions, responsive content, and social layers that make a document-centric approach an awkward paradigm that isn’t scaling well to user expectations or needs. The web wasn’t meant to be this way It’s a little known fact that the simple document-based approach to the web was not the desired outcome for the early-innovators who built the foundations for the web we know now. Pioneers like , , and pushed for ideas that go far beyond what we have today. They presented fantastic visions of a future where computing embraced its true digital and collaborative nature to become something entirely new and more powerful. Ted Nelson Alan Kay Doug Engelbart What we got instead was a bunch of digital documents in digital folders; it does the job, it’s familiar and comfortable, but we’ve lost a lot by taking that path. The web we wanted / The web we got . I would argue the web should be built in blocks (or components if you will), not documents. Documents and pages are the wrong construct for the modern web Blocks provide a different way of thinking about web content as a self-contained unit. Perhaps it’s helpful to visualize at a lego brick which you can build documents (or apps) with. In the developer world we call these “components” whereas content creators might call this “micro-content.” For the sake of this article I’m referring to both of these concerns, among others, simply as a block. I’ll explain what I mean and why this is a better approach for publishers, end users, and developers alike. 1. Blocks are structured An open text document, which is where the web started, has no inherit meaning. Any added meaning has to be layered on through tags, meta information, or formatting. There have been many efforts to enrich textual content with more structured meaning over the years and most of these have fallen flat ( for example). the semantic web The problem is multi-faceted, but I think the root of the issue is that the meaning and structure is layered on rather than being . after the fact core part of the creation process Blocks flip that idea on its head: you don’t markup content as being a heading, you that content as a heading. That’s a subtle but profound difference. create 2. Blocks are composable Blocks provide a way to take discrete units of both content and function and put them together in different ways without sacrificing the integrity of the system. Much effort has been spent trying do this with “native” web technology via complex CSS schemes (BEM, SMACKS etc.), XML, web components, etc. While some solutions are more elegant than others, these techniques try to force a modular, block-centric workflow on document-centric medium and the results are awkward and cumbersome at best. This problems is largely solved with component-centric frameworks like React or Vue that make the components first class citizen. the That said, these frameworks have to rely on complex tooling to get out of that document-centric paradigm and put components (blocks) at the top where they should have been all along. 3. Blocks are resilient Encapsulation is a principle used by programmers to make code more reusable and reliable for decades but it applies equally well to blocks. Thinking of your content and UI as modular units and then removes the dissonance of trying to develop block-based content with document-based tech and makes it much easier to ensure quality. actually developing them that way Our team has components we haven’t touched in years that are completely self-contained and Just Work™. 4. Blocks improve collaboration Blocks are structured enough to allow for a richer form of collaboration than a document can. Historically editors have had to “get out the red pen” or highlight, underline, and leave notes in the margin to give feedback on documents. Imagine how much better it could be if feedback and reference tools were actually of the type of content referenced? For instance, leaving feedback on a video block might timestamp to exactly the spot the feedback was for. Checking the source of a quote could be done automatically in quote block. aware Content editing tools are far more powerful when the structure and meaning of a piece of content is known from the beginning and not just layered on afterwards. I could elaborate more on all of this but this post is getting quite long so I’ll leave you with this: As awkward as web development can be these days, I think the tides are turning. We’re moving toward something much better that can embrace the digital medium’s true nature. For now we have to circumvent the document-centric nature of web development through tooling and component based web frameworks, but I’m optimistic these patterns will become more native to the platform over time. Meanwhile, some of the content creation tools of the future are being built right now using a blocks-centric approach so you can already experience the difference for yourself. Here a few of my favorite examples: : a block-based collaborative workspace for practically any type of content. Notion is probably the best example of the power of a block-based approach to collaborative content. Notion : An iOS app for creating web pages from your phone using simple but powerful blocks. Universe : A block-based tool for creating sale pages, proposals and contracts. This one has been super helpful for creating quick proposals that look great and convert even better. Qwilr : The new Wordpress editor is betting heavily on a blocks-based approach to content publishing (a little awkwardly at this point IMO). Wordpress Gutenberg We’re only at the beginning of this shift. My hope is that we can all work together to build the web we’ve always wanted, one block at a time. 🤘Block on. Originally published at www.pathwright.com .

Blocks, Not Pages, Are the Future Of the Web

From Warm Intro to $107M: Qwil’s Step-By-Step Fundraising Journey

Welcome to HackerNoon’s interview series. This section is curated by our Editorial team to spotlight bold and disruptive startups across the globe. If you’ve been nominated, and answer these questions Startups-Of-The-Year create a brand profile here. Hey Hackers, has been nominated in HackerNoon's annual Startup of the Year awards in London, United Kingdom. Hubforce Please vote for us here: https://startups.hackernoon.com/europe/europe-london-england-uk Read more about us below to understand why we deserve your vote. Meet Hubforce First, let us start with this statement: today, everyone is in the business of sales. Whether you’re a Sales Director at an enterprise company, a Customer Success Manager at a growing business, a technical founder of a startup, a freelance designer, or a candidate looking for a new role, you have to learn to sell your product, services, or skills. how Imagine that what you’re selling wouldn’t fit into a one-paragraph email. And heavy attachments or file transfer links might help, but you have absolutely no visibility into how people on the receiving end view the content you’ve shared with them, who they forward it to, and what materials they might be still missing. Unless they say directly… But how often do they? Silence sucks, right? Luckily, a quiet customer is now a thing of the past. Because that’s where Hubforce comes to the rescue. With Hubforce, you can easily to create a personalized selling experience at any stage of your customer journey. build a dedicated interactive micro-site From outreach to post-demo to onboarding to renewal, you can and spark timely follow-ups and sales-ready conversations. track how your customers engage with your content Our Role Since 2017, Victor and Thomas, co-founders at Hubforce, have worked on an e-learning software product. Having grown their team, they successfully merged design and learning practices, both so integrated into our lives yet so fragmented in most organizations. Five years later, they brought this approach to sales at Hubforce – making the buyer engagement process more personalized, more intuitive, and more convenient. How We're Changing the Digital Sales Room Industry Although quite new, digital sales room platforms can be complex in user design and basic in analytics. Come on, guys, if we want to take on the outdated email practices collectively, we should aim for the opposite. Or, at least, that’s how we at Hubforce do things. Standing Out From the Crowd So, what’s different about Hubforce? It’s intuitively easy: you don’t have to be a designer to design beautiful, compelling sales content hubs. It integrates with your current stack: you don’t need to reinvent your processes but rather bring them under one connected roof. It is both smart and visual: using its dynamic engagement score formula, it adapts over time to your deal size, timeline, and process, whilst offering a clear, visual interpretation of buyer engagement for you to base your decisions on. It takes minimal effort to connect on a personal level: its automatic white-labeling feature allows you to personalize every new hub to each new client. It’s free to use and scalable for growth: Our basic plan is free for all to access and play with, and our pricing model scales together with your business with no unpredicted fees. Our Thoughts on the Digital Sales Room Industry in 2023 We believe that there will be a lot of exciting development and investment for digital sales rooms in 2023. First, we have already seen how the industry players like Trumpet, Workbounce, Valuecase, Dock, and Qwirl all went through their fundraising rounds in the last year – to take their products off the ground beyond just an MVP. Cheers to healthy competition and finding a niche in which each of us would thrive! 🍻 Second, with the rise of generative AI, analytics become a game-changer. The better data visibility our products can offer, the more effective yet personal our customers’ sales processes will become. If previously automation used to cost personalization, now we don’t have to choose – it’s both, in one place, at the right time. Finally, we see a flaw in the name: “digital room.” Going back to our first statement in this post, across business departments (and, frankly, without them, too) has to know how to sell. sales everyone We see a future where . Our industry needs to take a step away from CPQ software and become the best friend of CRM, CSM, and asset management. a digital room can also be a room, an room, a room, or a room sales customer success onboarding renewal partner training What word defines the state of Digital Sales Software in 2023? Intuitive. Why we decided to participate in HackerNoon's Startup of the Year awards We would love more people to know about digital sales rooms and share our story. And also our marketing manager is obsessed with everything that HackerNoon does. Final Thoughts Thank you for reading about our story. Our fate is in your hands – may Hubforce be with you! ⚡️ Vote for us today! https://hackernoon.com/startups/europe/europe-london-england-uk

Startups of the Year 2023: Hubforce - A New Way to Sell

As an Android/Flutter software engineer with over 11 years of experience in various industries, I have seen my fair share of lay-offs throughout my career. Currently, I am “potentially affected” by my company’s cost-cutting measures, and I will soon be unemployed. However, rather than wallow in self-pity, I am taking this opportunity to reflect on my experience and explore the potential it could bring. My Mobile Experience Throughout my career, I have been focused on crafting and ensuring the quality of native Android applications. While I was not interested in expanding my knowledge to backend or web development, I was always eager to push myself to become a pro in my area. Later on, I discovered the Flutter framework, which was presented by Google, the same company that owns Android. With over three years of experience using Flutter, I decided to achieve another milestone and work for a FAANG company. The self-education process was initially intimidating, but it has been the best thing that could have happened to me as I have learned more than I ever expected. Lay-Offs History I have experienced three layoffs throughout my career, and I don’t believe that it will be the last. The world is constantly changing, and the economy is not always stable. Even the tech industry is not infinite and immortal. back in 2015 when I worked for Samsung R&D Ukraine. It felt personal and was a bit of a bummer. However, because of the political situation in my home country, some exact conditions were not met, and the company had to cut staff, moving some roles to India or Korea. My first lay-off happened It was a shocking experience, but as I was in my home country, I was able to return home, and in a month, I found another position. Doors were opened for me. happened while I was working for a UK-based startup called Qwil Messenger. It was an amazing experience working with so many talented personalities and on a new tech stack (Flutter was not even released for public usage yet). My second lay-off The leadership was transparent and open to explaining the reason for the lay-off. I learned that layoffs are not because of your skills or personality; it is merely a business decision. happened recently, due to Instagram’s staff shortage in London, where I was working. The experience was unexpected and not ideal, but the leadership was transparent about the situation. Although I was supposed to change teams and organisations twice already, the transactions were ultimately reverted. While it may feel unfair, it is a matter of fate. However, I am in the UK on a Skilled Worker visa, so I am working on my next steps. The third time I experienced a lay-off Keep in Mind Facing a layoff can be a difficult experience, but it’s important to keep a few things in mind. Firstly, it’s essential to understand that redundancy is not the same as being fired, and it does not reflect on your skills or performance. It’s a business decision, and even the most skilled and valuable employees may be impacted. Secondly, it can be a shock, but it’s important to focus on what you can control, such as updating your resume and networking to find new opportunities. Companies may be generous with severance packages, so it’s important to know your rights. If you are on a work visa, it’s crucial to start working on obtaining a new one as soon as possible. In the UK, the process involves notification (announcing the redundancy), selection of representatives (1 week to find the best representatives of employees to work on severance package with HR), consultation (1–2 months of discussion of the severance), and a notice period/garden leave (1–3 months). Finally, it’s important not to idealise any company and remember that leaving one job doesn’t mean the end of your career. A lay-off can be a new beginning and an opportunity to start fresh in a new role or even a new industry. Summary In summary, being laid off from a big tech company is not the end of the world. It can be an opportunity to learn new skills, explore other areas of technology, and potentially find a more fulfilling role at a different company. It is important to remember that no company is perfect and to avoid idealising any one organisation. Ultimately, a lay-off is a business decision and does not reflect on your personal worth or value as an employee. Keep an open mind and stay focused on your goals, and you may find that a lay-off can be a chance for a fresh start.

Navigating Lay-Offs in the Tech Industry: My Experience and What It Means

A collection of insider tips from our "How I Raised It" podcast On Foundersuite’s podcast, we take an open-source approach to sharing knowledge about the wild ride of funding a startup. We asked both veteran and emerging founders to spill their secrets on everything from finding your dream VC to knowing when to make the ask –– and how to slay your pitch. Regardless of where you are in the process, we’ve uncovered some excellent –– and sometimes unexpected –– advice to help you master your raise. “How I Raised It ,” Here’s a compendium of some of the best ideas we’ve heard so far. Entrepreneurs, buckle up: we’re about to accelerate your learning. Finding Your Perfect Match Rousseau Kazi of collaborative decision-making platform believes it’s important to look for “subjective” qualities in an investor. “We’re not only building a product; we're building a company,” he says. “So it was important that I found someone that I knew was aligned with me, who cared about diversity and inclusion, and who recognized my strengths –– but also would push me on my weaknesses.” Look for investors who align with your values . Threads founder Andrew Farah suggests , and not being intimidated if some of them actually hate your pitch. . Some firms want to take on companies that spark big feelings. “The thing that you never want to feel as an investor is ‘meh,’” Andrew says. Safe to say he doesn’t have that problem, since he counts partner , Mark Suster of and as backers. Density taking as many meetings with different people from a particular firm as you can Contention can be attractive Founders Fund Cyan Banister Upfront Ventures Jason Calacanis When fundraising for his ethical meat startup , Hawaiian rancher Jack Beutell quickly realized that traditional VCs and angels weren’t the best fit. So he looked for people who were interested in grass-fed beef, impact investing, climate change or even just Hawaii in general. “We ended up succeeding primarily with high-net-worth individuals, fund managers and grocery CEOs who have some kind of connection to our work,” Jack says. Buck the system . Kunoa Cattle Company K.J. Miller, co-founder of inclusive cosmetics brand , . At one point, she says, “I reached out to every single woman from business school who listed herself as an angel investor and emailed every single one of them, no matter what she’d funded in the past. I was like, ‘You're a woman. You’ve probably worn makeup, and you might understand.’” Mented cast a wide net when seeking investors –– but made sure to leverage her network Susan Ho did just that with certain investors who initially turned down the pitch for her travel startup Journy. on her progress from time to time. After Susan revamped her business plan, a few of those VCs were eager to meet again. One such firm was Menlo Ventures, which eventually led her seed round. Unlike other investors who hadn’t even downloaded the app, one of Menlo’s principals had used Journy a few times and understood the potential. “It just felt like the right fit,” she says. Keep in touch . She’d call them with an update says Debbie Wei Mullin. At 500 Startups, she was told to expect about 100 meetings for every million she wanted to raise. for her specialty beverage company, . “About three-fourths of those were with actual VCs and about a fourth were to get leads to VCs,” she says. “Finding an investor who’s looking for a company just like yours is like finding a needle in a haystack,” Debbie estimates that she had about 200 meetings to raise the $3 million Copper Cow Coffee Perfecting Your Pitch (And The Deck, Too) “We almost never opened our presentation,” says Jessica Chang, founder of childcare platform . “We had one, but we went into every single pitch focused on engaging the investors’ issues. If we needed to pivot based on their interests, we did.” While later-round pitches might need to be more metrics-driven, the seed round is all about story, she says. “When you want to capture a room of investors, you really only have five minutes. Talk to them directly. Showcase your story and your passion.” First lesson of pitch decks? Don’t rely on pitch decks . WeeCare Matt Randall, co-founder of short-term life insurance startup , shares a tip from one of his mentors: “In the early days, you're pitching a vision. You're not pitching the numbers you currently have or anything like that.” In his fundraising decks, Matt “Take the feedback you get from your first meetings and figure out how to improve upon it,” says Yin Wu, who raised a $3 million seed round for her crypto startup . , and had a succinct answer for each one by the next meeting. Spot focuses on storytelling and describing why the company will succeed. He doesn’t even include revenue numbers. Don’t approach dream investors until your pitch is nailed down. Dirt Protocol She wrote down a list of common questions investors asked It took serial entrepreneur Andrew Hoag 14 months to refine his pitch for his brainchild, . “In the beginning, ,” he says. “What wins an investment deal are the slides you take out of the deck, not the slides you put in it.” Teampay test the story, knowing it's going to change . Then simplify things “ ,” says Density’s Andrew Farah. “ If you don't, you won't be excited when the next slide comes up. But if you're stoked, that communicates volumes and dramatically improves the quality of your pitch.” A deck is your best friend You should love every sentence in your deck. Timing Is Everything says Jameson Toole of AI startup . Everyone's out enjoying the nice weather, so . At one point, I was like, “Don't try to raise money in the summer,” Fritz it’s noticeably harder to track people down in July and August I'm going to rent a boat, find all these VCs in Nantucket, and pitch them there. ” ’s Gregory Robinson : If it happens right away, be thankful but wary. Investors who lend money quickly might lock onto what I like to call a false consensus –– something they think makes the business work, but maybe it's not the bigger opportunity,” he says. The Mom Project cautions founders who want to raise capital in the earliest stages of their business “The biggest thing about raising money is not running out of time. When you're raising earlier, it'll take longer. One of founder Jeff Cripe’s goals was to raise a seed round immediately after completing the Techstars accelerator. “The program ended in September. he says. “Afterwards, it's nearly impossible to get a deal done. I knew it normally takes three to six months to raise a round. So I started raising pretty much as soon as we got into the program. It ended up working out pretty well for us.” Cargo We had been warned that if you're going to try and raise capital, you've got to raise it before Thanksgiving ,” Enrico Palmerino raised $4.5 million for his bookkeeping startup, , in two months by maintaining a packed schedule of . That helped him build a reputation of desirability and stoked competition among investors. Although he put everything else –– including most of his email inbox –– on the back burner, he , Enrico says: “Even if they sent me something at 10 p.m., they got it at 2 a.m.” Prepare to be busy –– really busy. Botkeeper three to four meetings per day always responded to requests from VCs within hours Aim High -- Apply For That Accelerator As a former M&A lawyer and crypto exec, ’s Johnny Reinsch . “I was like he says. But 500 Startups’ Sheel Monot managed to change his mind, Johnny explains. “Sheel said, ‘I don't really think you get it. I’ll help with debt and help deal with regulatory.’ He knew exactly what concerns I had –– we didn't have enough money to grow. Plus, we’re flirting with a bunch of highly regulated industries.” Qwil joined the program and raised a $5 million Series A shortly thereafter. “The 500 Startups fintech track, in particular, is great,” says Johnny. “It gives a stamp of approval to VCs.” Even business veterans can benefit. Qwil was skeptical about what an accelerator could do for him , dude, we don't really need to join an accelerator. We understand what we're doing,” “I would absolutely do Y Combinator again,” says Cameron Yarbrough, CEO and co-founder of . I would do it three more times. It was that good.” In addition to the invaluable guidance on building the right deck and approaching the right investors, he points to what he calls . “It creates positive pressure, which you really need early on,” he notes. Plus, “Many startups fail because they try to do too many things, rather than focus on a few they could do really well,” Cameron says. Torch the “batch phenomenon” –– the momentum that arises in a group of peers YC helps you decide what not to do . First-time founder Mile Selden of cellular agriculture startup found invaluable resources in a specialized accelerator, biotech-focused . He also leaned on “ , which I love,” says Mike. “I can't recommend that enough.” Finless Foods IndieBio support from founders of similar companies when the going got tough. It was 12 sets of mistakes for the price of one “Techstars encouraged us to , and send it out monthly to investors,” says Cargo founder Jeff Cripe. “I resisted for a while. But honestly, probably . We've .” do a newsletter 40 to 50 percent of the capital we've raised came as a result of those newsletters kept ourselves top of mind with investors Y Combinator, says Stephen Kuhl, CEO of sofa-in-a-box company , pushes founders to raise on SAFE notes. “It allows you to push off the conversation about valuation to a much later date, when you actually have traction.” That strategy also helps startups get money faster. That was key for Stephen and his co-founder, who were still tinkering with product design while completing the accelerator program –– and finishing business school to boot. “ . So we just raised on SAFE notes from people who were interested.” Those early investors helped Burrow raise its valuation from $7 million (pre-YC) to $12 million afterward. Play it SAFE. Burrow We couldn't afford to take two months off and raise full-time Think Outside The Round (And Other Non-Obvious Advice) As a repeat founder who’s also an angel investor, Bill Boebel with his companies. “ ,” Bill says. “We're going to invest every dollar we can.” That means that his startup might have zero in its bank account at some point. But at the same time, he says, “we're designing it profitably, which means we're in full control of our destiny. If we invest more than that, we're not in control. If we spend any less than that, we're not growing as quickly as we can.” chases the balance between growth and profitability I call it a ‘touch zero’ operating model Pingboard If it’s an option, Allie Magyar of event-planning platform suggests founders “If you get 10 angels, they may write checks for $25,000 apiece,” she says. “But then you're dealing with 10 different people with 10 different sets of questions, views and perspectives.” But at a fund? All of the investors contribute, and entrepreneurs only deal with a single point of contact. Hubb focus on funds instead of individual angels . Serial entrepreneur and founder Bob Moore says he doesn’t even consider raising another round until he feels like he has “a really strong universe of representative clients, all of who are willing to pick up the phone and say, ‘this thing changed my life,’” he says. Work toward becoming indispensable . Crossbeam That was Matthew Klein’s strategy when fundraising for his design and product development software, . “I really wanted somebody who was going to be hands on, rolling up their sleeves and helping us with product-market fit strategy,” he says. Find a great lead investor who isn’t too large if you’re a growing business. Backbone PLM Another tip? “We never were ‘out’ around the funding,” Matthew says. Instead, he while playing up the buzz around Backbone’s customers, like Stitch Fix, Warby Parker and Outdoor Voices. “We were starting to work with some exciting companies, and then we started getting a lot of excitement from top funds throughout the country.” Don’t promote the fact that you’re fundraising. focused on building rapport with potential investors “It’s hard to run a business at the same time that you're ,” says Ryan Boyko, who has raised more than $6 million for his dog DNA kit company, . He advises to “ . .” running a fundraising process Embark Vet either have a really wonderful co-founder who can keep everything moving forward, or hire somebody who can We lost opportunities to grow and to make good hires while I was busy fundraising Jessica Chang made a point of To raise funds for her company WeeCare, a platform connecting daycare providers and parents, she spent time building relationships kicking off her seed round. When she did, those investors already had context for the company and could see the progress it made. Her meetings were “mostly about updates and metrics,” says Jessica. “Investors had done a little bit of research, so they were excited about the daycare space.” starting conversations with potential investors before actually pitching them. before . founder Lewis Gersh would open investor meetings by throwing down a stack of postcards on the table and announcing that they were worth more than Google Adwords. “It would grab their attention and create a fun intro,” Lewis says. “ ” Create a memorable impression PebblePost Like let's go old school, let's have a discussion. Sean Byrnes says, noting that it’s vital to understand the fine print on any cap table. “As founders, we get kind of obsessed with dollar signs on a piece of paper.” The co-founder adds: “I believe in . . It’s an ego boost to say, But really all you're doing is constraining yourself and reducing optionality in the future.” “Terms are always more important than the amount of money in the valuation,” Outlier AI raising as little as possible That's how you control your own destiny I just raised 10 million. Nathan Beckord is the CEO of Foundersuite.com which makes software for raising capital. Foundersuite has helped entrepreneurs raise over $1.5 billion in seed and venture capital since 2016. This article is based on Foundersuite’s How I Raised It podcast , a behind-the-scenes look at how startup founders raise money.

25 Startup Tips From 25 Venture Backed Founders

A note on what follows: As I take what’s been a five-year night-job I’m putting pen to pixel in an attempt to articulate my lens on early-stage investing. I call this framework my own, though in truth it’s a synthesis of counsel from wise predecessors, observation of fantastic (and not-so-fantastic) entrepreneurs, industry literature (more history than blogs), personal experience — including more mis-steps than I would like to admit — and a splash of my own techno-optimism. full-time This is far from a formula. It is not meant to be an absolute calculus on predicting the future (I’ll leave that to or the ) but rather a lens through which to standardize the hundreds of pitches you see as an early-stage technology investor. Contrary to what many established VCs will have you believe, it’s not difficult to pick startups with prospects; investing is as much about avoiding the bad ones as identifying the good. While operational, financial, and technical knowledge are part and parcel to savvy early-stage investing, they have diminishing marginal returns. Hari Seldon TechnoCore The highest contributor to portfolio success (read “IRR”) is quantity*quality of deal flow, and ability to get into the best. VC is an access game, and in access games the motto is location, location, and likability. Criterion 1 of 2: Scored (100 of 120pts req’d for fiduciary-level conviction) i.) Founder + Founding Team (40pts) Ability * Background: I look for uncanny founder-market fit, industry-familiar smart creatives who intimately understand a vertical but approach it in a novel way with new technology–e.g. at , who’s an amputee building human augmentation software, or Jenna Brown at , who became frustrated with the software in dry bulk shipping while at a commodities house. Unusual familiarity with a market is an easy, early defensibility-driver. Jeff Huber Standard Cyborg Shipamax Determination (Grit) * Passion (Conviction): i.e. Are they truly with solving the problem at hand? Why? What would make them give up? The entrepreneur’s motivation (or lack thereof) is a major risk factor. All seems fine and dandy when you close your seed round, but you know, Murphy’s Law. obsessed Honesty + Character (gut read, ‘reference checks’): i.e. Can I trust them? At Seed the entrepreneur has total control — . Not to mention, culture stems from leadership, especially the CEO (a certain Lyft competitor comes to mind). It is my firm belief that Silicon Valley has without regard for empiricism largely deified the wrong entrepreneurs (and investors, for that matter). as they should, though that’s another post Vision * Pragmatism (user-centricity): i.e. Can they inspire others to see a common vision while building a realistic bridge? It’s often easier to see the long-term than the mid. Salespersonship * Connectedness: i.e. Can they sell, and who will read their emails? Note: I believe the Sales Ability-to-Success curve is non-linear. That is, past a certain point it is dangerous to be better at selling as it can disconnect expectation from reality. I’ve seen a lot of vaporware shortsightedly sold to both customers and investors. Your product should largely sell itself. Team history & Cohesiveness: How do they know one another, and for how long? By what mechanism do co-founders resolve disagreement and how well do they move on? There’s no room for resentment on their journey, or for ego. Co-founder disputes are one of a startup’s greatest risk factors. Capacity for speed. A good measure of this is how many code commits you have per week. Bonus points for women, minorities, ‘disabilities’. Venture capitalists systemically undervalue these founders. Notes: Brand and culture are more important (for growth and defensibility) than most entrepreneurs realize. However, both largely extend from the CEO and are incredibly nuanced. I will judge your e-book by its homepage. I look for CEOs who hate raising capital, because they love building businesses that make money. Funding should be a function of traction on positive gross margins, not vice versa. If you’re spending more time fundraising than running your business, you’ve got a problem. Drop VCs who drag their feet — they’re not investing. ii.) Technology * Defensibility / Competitive Landscape (35pts) Numerator: (15pts:) UNDERLYING TECHNOLOGY: If you just hired a freelance developer to build you an MVP then your company probably isn’t for me. If your problem wasn’t hard to solve then you’ll have quite a few competitors who are likely at least as smart as you are. . If you don’t have that — and no one has network effects from the start — then a great team with a head start will buy you a year, two (I saw this first-hand when Common Bond fast-followed SoFi). I’ll only bet on a ‘head start’ if there’s what I call “Competitive Osmosis” (see Note below). There are really only two ways to be long-term defensible: IP and Network Effects maybe : Only acceptable if you’re truly ‘deep-tech’, but by then your defensibility likely derives more from a world-class team than from the patents themselves. I care not a lick for business process patents (they’re circumventable) and steeply discount software patents by “1,000 ways to code a cat”. IP : When this term came into vogue a decade ago it referred to social network effects — i.e. each new user makes the network more valuable. This is why VCs like marketplaces so much: once the network is big enough then it’s difficult to build a viable competitor. You wouldn’t start an Airbnb competitor today and network effects are why. But I’m more interested in a new type of network effect: ML/DL. Machine learning models improve, definitionally, with more data. Network Effects very I believe that any software company not leveraging machine learning (or that’s built as a distributed application vis-a-vis blockchain) has a very good chance of not being around in 5–10 years. (13pts:) Why now? A solution can easily be too late or too early. What technological, societal, regulatory, or market development prevented this company from being started three years ago? Note: Technologies can be too late or early too… IMO, AR/VR and drones are a bit too early (and over-hyped), while mobile is (way) too late. (3pts:) Brand (this is often under-valued, esp. by 1st-time entrepreneurs) (2pts:) Do they have killer advisers? I don’t mean your buddy who’s worked in the industry a few years more than you, I mean people who can pick up the phone and get you your first five customers or coach your engineers through technical problems no one has ever solved before. (2pt:) Cash on hand (Note: Cash-to-Defensibility is non-linear; too much cash breeds profligacy and complacency.) Denominator: # of competitors (direct & possible; there’s always a competitor you don’t know about yet–maybe I’ve seen their deck) Agility of competitors Competitors’ cash on hand (over the “can catch up fast” threshold, discounted by solution’s prioritization on their product roadmap) As frustrating as it is, there are certain entrepreneurs and funds the lion’s share of VCs simply won’t bet against — e.g. Musk, Bezos, Sequoia. Notes on Verticals & Competitive Osmosis (more on this in an upcoming post): First of all, I don’t invest in consumer technology . I don’t pretend to know what consumers want. While the largest technology companies are predominantly B2C, the competition is more fierce, defensibility more difficult, and the risk profile such that it requires a large fund that’s able to make many bets and follow on big in the winners. That doesn’t work with a small fund like Cantos. Companies are much more predictable. They only want to do two things: Increase top-line and reduce cost. Venture capital is a game of statistics, and I like my odds in B2B much better. Now, this is where vertical really matters. I look for sectors that have big, slow movers, and where your average Millennial entrepreneur isn’t yet focused (i.e. NOT social networking, ad-tech, marketing-tech, CRM/sales-tech, on-demand, e-comm, cloud infrastructure, dev tools). This could mean manufacturing (e.g. Bigfinite , Standard Cyborg ), construction (e.g. BuildingConnected , ALICE ), finance (e.g. Qwil , Maxwell ), healthcare (e.g. Patch , GreenLight Medical ), logistics (e.g. Shipamax , EasyPost ), agriculture (e.g. Arable , AgriData ) and other niche sectors that require knowledge thereof. Generally speaking… YES: Finance/insurance (blockchain solutions only; pure software solutions have been played out), manufacturing (esp. +AI), logistics, agriculture (though sensitive to robotics), construction (though ALICE may be my only bet here), gov/law (where ‘humans are serving as middleware’, to borrow a quote from Manan Mehta at Unshackled), synthetic biology (non-clinical), infrastructure for a decentralized web NO: Social, on-demand, ad/marketing/sales-tech, e-commerce, hospitality-tech, hiring tech (too many of you), AR/VR (too soon), bio-pharma (takes a whole other skill set), real estate (played out) Because I don’t/can’t know all of these sectors intimately, be prepared for me to ferret out a SME and revert with more specific questions. iii.) Clarity of Business Model, Unit Economics (10pts) Numerator: Business model simplicity (do one thing, do it well). One of my mantras is: Sell one product to one demographic. Know your fixed and variable costs! Model in ~20-30% uncertainty. Complexity is the enemy of speed. Day 1 revenue or <6-month path to product-related revenue. I typically invest in companies with $5–30K monthly revenue, even at ‘pre-seed’ (pre-money valuation under $5M). Gross-margins > 60%. While I wouldn’t echo his hallmark condescension, a quote from Don Valentine comes to mind: “We need guys [/girls] to have 70% gross margins, because they abuse so much money. You need to be in a business that has huge gross margins, because the managements are not very experienced. You start with a 60% minimum margin as the ideal, because you know the management is going to spend 20% on marketing and 20% on research. We have guys who are 27 years old and have never managed anything.” LTV/CAC > 300%. Payback period also needs to be taken into account–can’t be longer than your ability to fundraise! Churn < 3%. Past that you eventually churn through the entire market. The revenue model must be aligned to incentives of the customers. Note: Its violation of this principle is my fundamental problem with companies driven by ad revenue. Denominator: Extreme bias toward low burn (sub-$50K/mo at pre-seed, $100K at seed). Use advisers for early sales, not FTEs, and don’t sign a lease before product-market fit! CEO will consider herself cash-poor until $5M+ raised. Until then use the currency you have: equity! Notes: Major preference toward enterprise — lower risk profile (granted, lower possible upside), lower churn, deeper pockets I will not invest in anything I feel is or could quickly become commoditized — UI-based products, storage, algorithms on publicly accessible datasets, cybersecurity, on-demand services (better called “labor arbitrage”), or anything that is ‘trending’. Advertising (eyeball-based) revenue is an unacceptable answer for my risk/return profile iv.) Exit Opportunities / Valuation (10pts) Numerator: Natural acquirers at multiple stages. I believe in optionality, not IPO-or-bust. Assume Google won’t buy you (though I do think their acq. activity will pick up; what else will they do with all that cash?) I want to know your market is large enough that a 10% share means at least $100M in revenue–$100M ARR roughly being the hurdle for a SaaS IPO Vertical has high M&A activity, incumbents have large cash reserves, industry is facing or will soon face sweeping changes at the hands of innovation Denominator: Look for “arbitrage” opportunities, i.e. underpriced deals. Note: these are in fact fairly priced deals, often found outside of the Bay Area, where we’ve accustomed ourselves to price inflation. Bias against seed round >$10M post-money valuation, as most acquisitions happen under $50M Berkeley, MIT, & other engineering-heavy universities are overlooked opportunities. Stanford is a fantastic school but over-emphasized. Note: Wary of scientist CEOs unless innate business acumen is present. Notes: If your total addressable market (TAM) — and this should be real revenue potential, NOT GMV! — is under $2B, you’re wasting your time speaking with most VCs, particularly $100M+ funds. What types of outcomes VCs will bet on are primarily a function of their AUM & # of investment professionals. Acquisitions have slowed in recent months but Google, Apple, Facebook, Oracle, and others (e.g. Berkshire Hathaway’s $60B war chest) are sitting on huge piles of cash that they need to put to work. These cash piles will be heightened should the current administration incentivize repatriation of foreign cash. I believe Google & Facebook will become the Berkshire Hathaway’s of tech. I like the types of acquirers that are more likely to be in $BRK’s portfolio than Benchmark’s — e.g. GE, GM, Marmon, Honeywell, Mastercard, Verisk, John Deere Train thoroughbreds, don’t hunt unicorns. Nine-figure exits are OK for a small fund like Cantos, though I do need conviction you’ll be able to raise Series A. Seed is less affected by bear markets due to lower burn and valuation. As NEA Co-Founder Dick Kramlich once said, “Good ideas don’t go on strike.” Companies seed funded in ‘08-’09 include Airbnb, Twilio, Dropbox, Slack, Credit Karma. v.) Financing Risk (5pts) Since I will write smaller checks, my co-investors must be able to carry the day. My $50–100K check will buy a seed-stage startup only 1–2 months… …Or the company must be riding a wave/in a market/run by a CEO that I’m confident up-stack VCs are likely to fund. Note: I know enough VCs to have a fairly good read on this ;) If the latter is the case, I want to be familiar with the metrics that will be required for a strong Series A and confident the CEO can hit them I want the round I’m participating in to buy the startup at least 12 months of runway. In this wary market, 18+ is preferable. Note: I always test companies against a few friendly VCs at larger funds before writing a check. I’m showing my hand here but if I introduce you to another investor I’m not being 100% altruistic. [Shout-out to some of my usual suspects… Arianna Simpson , Shivon Zilis , Zavain Dar , Vaughn Blake , John Komkov , Nan Li , Katherine Boyle, Ela Madej , Zal Bilimoria , Michael Berolzheimer , Trae Stephens , Anya Schiess , Mo.ElBibany , Howie Diamond , Alastair Trueger , Ryan Gembala , Seth Winterroth ] vi.) Additive Business (10pts) The company’s product or service is “additive” to the world, i.e. contributes to: Health (e.g. , , ) Patch Recursion Enlitic Financial Inclusion & Private Sector Accountability (e.g. Robinhood, , ) Qwil Ethic Democratization & Public Sector Accountability (e.g. OpenGov, ) Vendor Registry Environment, Waste Reduction, & Food Security (e.g. , , ) Opus 12 Tri Alpha Energy Arable Education (e.g. Duolingo, AltSchool, Treehouse) Quality of Worklife (e.g. Slack, WeWork, ) Ambition Notes: I acknowledge this is highly subjective but hey, it’s my fund! This may read as an ‘impact investing’ filter but is in fact a financial decision. IRR stems from value-creation, and I believe the most valuable companies are created by solving the largest pain points. This is also a meaningful differentiator in hiring talented Millennials… as sometimes even getting away with under-paying them (until you can afford market rates). vii.) Gut (5pts) The indescribable feeling that you should invest despite non-obvious reasons Note: I believe what we call “gut” is the brain’s own deep learning. It is a complex layering of so much information as to feel intuitive when it is in fact deeply logical. While it has an explicit 5% here, it affects all of the scores above. Criterion 2 of 2: Binary (e.g. technical risk, market risk, funding risk, competitive risk, hiring risk, retention risk, co-founder fallout risk) I typically frame this by asking, Then I attempt to give a % likelihood for each over 5- and 10-year timeframes. What risks am I taking, specifically , and am I willing to take them as a fiduciary? What assumptions must hold true for this company to succeed? Or, as one veteran VC put, “Ask yourself, ” What price glory?

My Seed Investing Source Code

Are we talking about supercycles and putting lasers in our eyes again? Not yet? Ok, that’s fine, we will soon. When that happens, seemingly everybody will tell you the same thing: the bull market will never end. You may already believe this. Don’t It’s the biggest lie you will ever hear. I circled the end of each bull market in this chart: For those like me who look at on-chain data, you’ll include April 2013 as a market cycle peak. We got an 83% crash and months of bleeding afterward. Even if throw that one out, the truth remains: Bull markets always end. Always. Complacency Kills The problem is, even within bull markets, you get really big swings. Like, big swings, 100-400% booms between +40% crashes and long consolidations. really In the moment, you never know whether that boom brings the end of the bull market or one of the many “up, then down” movements of a volatile market. Twitter may tell you it’s a bull or bear market, but usually, it’s just prices going up for a while, then going down for a while within a big multiyear bull run. As a result, each time the price recovers, a few more people get the idea that the bull market will never end—simply because it didn’t end the last time prices went crazy and then crashed. After all, if Facebook, China, COVID-19, financial crisis, US regulators, ETF rejections, and [you can fill in the blank] can’t stop this market from going up, nothing can, right? Now that everybody uses on-chain data, we will never have bull and bear markets, just ups and downs. Everybody will borrow against their bitcoin, never sell. Miners are putting their bitcoins into savings accounts. Institutions will never let bitcoin go into a bear market. And so on. Bull market forever. We will ruin it What’s the one thing that can always crush this market? Us. More specifically, our greed and complacency. The glee with which we dump our crypto on others, I mean, “take profits.” The satisfaction that comes with putting lasers in our eyes so everybody else will NGMI and have fun being poor. All the people who rush in as the market goes parabolic, trying to flip a quick 2x or hop on that super-hot secret altcoin that’s about to pump. Our complacency in celebrating every new all-time high with a little purchase of bitcoin because “it has to go up.” The cavalier way we call out FUD whenever somebody says something we don’t want to hear. Our reliance on data models for security and comfort—but only the data models that confirm what we want to believe, not the ones that suggest something we don’t want to believe. Choose your beliefs wisely At some point, we will see signs of a market cycle peak. The signs are very clear, do not depend on any data model, and have nothing to do with time or price. They come regardless of inflation, hyperinflation, ETFs, laser eyes, memes, and whatever social media is talking about. They reflect behaviors we only see as the market approaches its peaks, as evidenced by the movements of bitcoins on the blockchain and among entities that use bitcoin. When will those signals come? We shall see. I’ll let you know when I see those signals in my newsletter. Crypto is Easy Read the Crypto is Easy Newsletter Hopefully, not for a long time. Certainly not today. Today, we don’t even need to think about the peak. It’s too far off. Let’s see where the market takes us and what people do as prices go up, if they go up at all. When Twitter or YouTube tells you “sure, we’ll have crashes and dips, but there’s no way the bull market could end now,” come back to this article. At some point, the bull market will end. We will fall into a 1- or 2-year bear market that sends bitcoin’s price down 85% and altcoins down 95% or more. The only question is when. When that time comes, make sure you’re honest with yourself. Others will not give you the same courtesy. Mark Helfman publishes the newsletter. He is also the author of three books and a top bitcoin writer on and . Learn more about him in his . Crypto is Easy Medium Hacker Noon bio Originally published in Cryptowriter . Nothing in this article constitutes professional investment advice. Please do your own thorough research before making any investment deicisons. Disclaimer:

Bitcoin Bull Markets Always End

Organizations today are rushing to implement the buzz-infused AI and ML technologies everyone is talking about. These technologies have the ability to automate processes, recognize patterns, provide incomparable insights, and quite generally, bring innovation to almost any sector. But, as the AI frontier has grown, and become a massive buzzword, organizations are running to implement these technologies, too often without doing their homework. In fact, According to Gartner research, only 15% of AI solutions deployed by 2022 will be successful, let alone create ROI positive value. While I am the last person who will tell you not to leverage advanced technologies for improvement, what I have been seeing recently is too many companies taking templates like engines and throwing them on top of their existing operations without taking the relevant steps beforehand. The outcome of this is usually one of two options. Either the technology will be successfully implemented, but won’t even remotely provide as much value as it could. Or, it will completely fail with companies often not even able to dissect what the root cause of this outcome is. This is especially relevant to existing organizations who are trying to now optimize, rather than new startups who are building their operation AI-Infused from the ground-up. Rather than throwing mud (AI/ML engines) against the wall, and seeing what sticks, companies must take a more analytical approach. Rather than taking general-usage engines and throwing them on top of the existing tech stack and data set, companies should first set out on a journey of company measurement, analysis, and mapping. Here are some key points to keep in mind when pursuing this approach - First Achieve Data Superiority (BI Before AI) Answer the “why” before the “how” - In other words, first, gather and analyze your company data. Use it to work out what’s not working well enough, or what you would like to work better, and then find the tech solution that is actually built for it (or better yet, build it yourself). Just like a startup needs to prove there is a “need” in order to define product-market fit, every aspect of a company’s AI Transformation must also be suited to the organization’s strengths, weaknesses, challenges, and bottlenecks. If you aren’t capable of identifying these, it’s time to take a step back, and first, shift your organization to one driven by data. In other words, BI (Business Intelligence) solutions must be implemented alongside protocol shifts, in order to measure performance and processes and allow management to recognize key pain points. Adjust Operations Strategically Thinking that you can just throw an engine in your company’s mixing bowl and move on with life is going to result in failure. While AI can save hundreds and thousands of work hours, it also requires a time (and often financial) investment. In order for the solutions to be as effective as possible, part of the core company functions must become understanding, training, maintaining, and improving these algorithms. Moreover, in order to approach a transformation well-prepared, protocols and tools must be put in place in order to collect, gather, clean, and tag the relevant data that will be used in the process. For this to be done effectively, the company must first put together a long-term transformation strategy, enabling them to foresee what data they will need later, so they can collect it as part of day-to-day operations. Otherwise, they will be forced to implement retro-active and ineffective collections methods later on. Or even worse, not have the data when the time comes, and have no way of producing it. Shift Company Culture AI transformation requires cultural, operational, and management shifts. Most existing companies will need to edify their staff on the subject. If you’re letting an algorithm perform certain business functions, the humans, who once performed or managed these functions, must shift to a role where they are the ones guiding the engines, nurturing them, and measuring their performance. Often, the biggest barrier to this is the language barrier. Companies must empower their employees by giving them the linguistic tools to discuss and analyze these issues in depth. This requires education, enrichment, and openness to change. If your company culture is one that already embraces these values - the process is going to be a lot easier. Enable Bottom-Up Innovation More often than not, it will be senior management or an external advisor who will be pushing for this transformation. While that’s fine, in order to really optimize or contribute to functions that are being performed by humans, the company must recognize and harness the immense expertise these employees have developed in their field, giving the AI the best chance to succeed, and opening the door to bottom-up innovative initiatives. Finally, In order for existing organizations to undergo a successful AI transformation, companies must remember that they are creating human-machine teams. This means the humans must become experts in this craft, and the company must build a long-term strategy with this in mind. While we all assume AI transformation will require a technological shift, we need to remember that it also must include a human-cultural shift. Moreover, In other words, the companies that will lead the best AI transformations are the ones that previously led the best BI transformations. BI’s role in the age of AI is not just to map where AI is needed, and measure performance, it's also the safety net we have to make sure we are on the right track and are building the best future versions of our companies. if companies want to lead a successful transformation, they must approach it from a place of knowledge and data superiority .

Stories, News & Mentions about QWILR

Qwilr’s Stories on HackerNoon