Showing posts with label entrepreneur owner. Show all posts
Showing posts with label entrepreneur owner. Show all posts

Thursday, August 06, 2009

The Startup Thought Process Series: Commuter Rants

Series Initation Note: This kicks off a series on my conversations with folks starting digital media companies with the objective of assisting the enterpreneurs.

The Startup: I met an owner close to rolling out a site for commuter rants. Simply put, the site is a forum for commuters to rant about their commute.

Our relatively brief conversation focused on helping him with the vision/ raison d’ĂȘtre for the site. Snippets of the conversation are listed below. These are really interconnected factors, however you need to be able to think through them linearly once, before you iterate through the options and interdependencies. As with a few startups, these answers may change with time, however, it helps to have concrete thoughts about these questions at the start of the journey.

I. Market Potential
The entrepreneur's first area of uncertainty was: how frequently would a commuter rant at his site? We broke that down into market sizing and frequency of usage.

i. Who is the target user of this site? What is the market size?
What kind of commuter? Someone who takes the NJ Transit or Metro North to and fro work? Or does it include someone stuck on the D.C. beltway on a Friday evening? The idea here is to understand an existing unmet need and customer behavior tied to this unmet need.

For sizing, there are several ways to generate the numbers- by geography, by demographics, etc.

ii. What would the growth and usage trends be like?
Would they be like that of Twitter (where 30% of the users tweet once never to return) or like that of Facebook?

II. Business Model and Market Strategy
We are really thinking about distribution channels, partners, customer relationships, core capabilities and revenue models here, all of which can be expressed pithily as:
Would you prefer a B2C model or would you modify the site for a B2B model?

Note: We explicitly kept aside market defensibility to assist in brainstorming.

A> B2C Model
i. How would you grow the B2C site?
Would you eventually develop features tied to hyperlocal search to enable customer stick? E.g. Regulars in a train compartment can connect with each other?

ii. How would you monetize the site?
Through Ads, and possibly, viral content (to help folks cool down, for starters)?

B> B2B Model
i. How would you grow the B2B site?
After an initial push to bring on site users, would you consider tying up with media companies who may leverage feed from this site? E.g. TV Weather and traffic update has a ticker running at the bottom which shows "selected"/ "near real time" commuter "rants"?

ii. How would you monetize the B2B site?
How many media companies would buy into this? What would such features be worth to the media companies?

III. Product Strategy
Would you roll this out as an independent site/ platform? Or,
Would you leverage existing platforms like the iPhone and/ or Facebook?

The questions for you:
1> How would you have looked at this differently?
2> Would you invest?
3> What changes, if any, would change your investment decision?


What do you think?

--

Saturday, March 14, 2009

Panel: Middle Market LBO and Changing Capital Structures

The panelists were seeing transactions in the middle market, but these transactions had some sort of distress component. The insight here was about the ownership structure of mid market firms, which had entrepreneurs with strong stakes. Entrepreneurs running firms with strong fundamentals did not have much of an incentive to sell. Quoting a panelist- why sell when you can make as much money and still own the company?

Some numbers from the end of Q1:
The panel had seen loans being sold at a discount of upto 90%. LIBOR floor was at 3.5% and mezzanine coupons were at 15% to 17%. Debt multiples, in terms of EBITDA, for first lien were around 2.5, for second lien, around 3.3 and for subordinate debt, around 4.3. Mezzanine debt had more senior debt than ever.

Transaction multiples had held, however, leverage multiples had gone down, while equity component had gone up. The more complicated structures cause deals to take longer to pull off.

Banks were interested in private transactions, as they provided rates better than LIBOR + 500 bps, and were delivering via mezzanine and equity.

There was an interesting demonstration of over-equalization of seller and buyer expectations with supply of capital as a key factor. It would be interesting to see a similar analysis with supply of transactions as the key factor.

It was pointed out that transaction multiples had held:
1> Is ita real estate like effect in the relatively less liquid middle market where the selling price of the last house sold on the block sets the price for future sales? Or.
2> Are mid market firms with capital left to invest crowding around fewer transactions?
3> Banks investing in private transactions would be an important source of liquidity- how many of these investments were really follow up transactions to investments already made?

What do you think?

The Usual Disclaimer: This is purely a knowledge sharing resource and I have been careful to protect panelist interests. Ethically, context is everything, and I will gladly retract anything that affects the parties mentioned. Call this my mini OpenCourseWare, if you will, where Open signifies life experiences.