Ads 468x60px

Shoemoney - Skills To Pay The Bills

Shoemoney - Skills To Pay The Bills

Link to ShoeMoney

My Experience in Raising Money In Nebraska via Venture Capital and Angel Funding

Posted: 09 Apr 2014 06:44 AM PDT

Post image for My Experience in Raising Money In Nebraska via Venture Capital and Angel Funding

where_is_nebraska_located.png (1476×1002)If you haven’t yet read my pre-raising money post you might want to do so.

As I would come to learn we were in a very strange position to raise money for the PAR Program… kind of in no mans land.   We didn’t have a “good idea” that was going to require a bunch of money to try to make it work. We had a startup where through beta had generated over 600k in revenue through “beta” with no dedicated sales force or marketing efforts.

After seeing a local Lincoln Nebraska based company raise 500k for a company that had done 6 sales to date of a $10 product that personally I thought was kind of silly,  I figured we should have no problem.  I mean plus look at my track record.  I was confident I would have companies begging to invest.

And a lot of my friends that have raised money agreed.  They were all excited for me because I had never done it before and they had all done it. They were telling me how easy it was going to be for me, but how you've really got to dedicate a lot of time to it. They told me that once I got it all prepared and put together (a business plan, powerpoint, financials, one-sheeter, term documents and all that stuff) they’d do introductions for me.

As I would come to find out I already had a lot of connections to some General Partners at huge firms in San Fran and Seattle.  They were very interested but all of them asked the same question.  Was I open to moving out to the Valley?.  I wasn’t.  They seemed really down on the fact I was going to remain in Lincoln Nebraska.

Some of my friends sent me a huge “hit list” on the west coast that they were willing to do introductions to but I didn’t want to,  nor had the time to, pound the pavement on the west coast.

That was kind of the big drawback of having an existing up and running company generating revenue.  Sure it sounds easy to just put everything on hold and raise money but we had over 30 some clients and still were getting new leads organically every day.   To me it just was not an option to abandon the company and purely focus on raising money.  That just made no sense to me.  In hindsight I would have been much better off to raise money before I started it.  Much better off….  In doing research some of our perceived competitors, lets take Marketo for an example, got 5 million dollars in funding and took 2 years before they even had their beta platform completed and then raised more money.

Besides there were several firms right here in Lincoln Nebraska.  They should see what we are doing and its a perfect time to hit us in stride without taking away from company growth… Right?

My friends who had raised money before were VERY against me raising money in Nebraska and told me it was a complete waste of time.  The general sentiment was, “Don’t try to raise money from dumb farmers in Nebraska who don’t understand technology.”

Now I get shit all the time from being in Nebraska…  But these friends of mine actually had insight into Nebraska Venture Capital and Angel Fund Investing.   Most of them had spoken at Big Omaha.  One of them had even given a keynote talk there.  They had met the general partners at these firms and told me that unless I had a “stupid simple” product that they could understand I was wasting my time.  My friends understood what I was doing and one of them said,  and I quote, “Dude you’re talking geometry to kindergartners”.

I don’t want to say I was offended by all this.  As I said above I am used to getting crap about Nebraska and used to defending it.  Don’t get me wrong there are drawbacks but there are also a LOT of benefits.

Whatever.  I am going to prove them wrong.  I mean look at these local Lincoln Nebraska firms and how tech savvy they are from their websites:

  • Dundee Capital :  ”DVC invests $50,000 – 500,000 in growth companies with an ecommerce and web services focus. We understand it. We’ve built these types of businesses. Instead of investing in a restaurant or bar, we stick to what we know best. With all of the challenges and untapped horizons, ecommerce businesses excite us. Why Midwest? It's underserved, historically ignored, but now very vibrant, hard working, and innovative. ”  - HELL YA
  • Nebraska Global :  ”Founded on the idea that when nerds and money meet, amazing things can happen. We have the money. Now, we need more nerds. We know software. It's our passion, our love. In fact, the only thing we love as much as software is this great state of Nebraska. And we’re looking for more people like us—software-loving Nebraska nerds who want to build a life around this unique passion. Nebraska Global isn't your typical venture capital fund. Unlike most VC firms, we want to focus on building a sustainable tech environment by helping establish healthy, hearty software businesses within the state and not focus solely on a 30x return and pre-determined exit strategy. Our mission is to build profitable companies, but it isn't to squeeze every last dollar out of entrepreneurs or "spray and pray" (We promise. Read our mission). We’re just nerds with money who want to see more of both stay in Nebraska and prosper.” -um could there be a better fit?

Now this was just the 2 firms that positioned themselves as extremely “tech savvy”.  They are going to get it and this is going to be a no brainer for them… or so I thought.

In all we met with 5 firms.  I wrote about my experience with each one.  For those that want to read the details just click on them.  I thought it was best to make separate posts for each one to keep this from being a epic F.R.A.T (fu*k reading all that).

Going in I felt I had the deck stacked:

  • I have never lost money in 13 years of being in business.
  • I have already sold 3 companies.  One for a pretty large exit.
  • Im going to blow these Nebraska guys minds.  They have never seen anyone with my track record and reach.  Shit I have more daily readers on my blog then our Silicon Prairie News (midwest TechCrunch) and all their websites combined.
  • I’m fricking ShoeMoney wtf?
  • Technically speaking we are about as good as they come.  I have great programmers and access to some of the best programmers on the planet.
  • Marketing wise I don’t feel there is anyone better.

So how did it go?

If I could summarize the process in one word it would be “frustrating”.   But the most successful companies or projects I have ever done were,  at times,  the most frustrating.  And its always the things you don’t see coming.

But not frustrating for reasons you would probably think.

  • During one of the pitches at one of the VC’s office they asked me if I could walk them through a live demo.  Only they did not have WIFI.  Seriously…
  • After one of the presentations to the partners of one of the groups I was asked to explain what a convertible note was.

These 2 things I could hear my friends screaming, “TOLD YOU SO”.    But honestly I could see those happening anywhere.  (maybe?).

The biggest thing I did not see coming but in hindsight I should have was character issues.

For instance after my first meeting with Nebraska Global (the company that connects nerds with money) I thought it went really well.  Then one of the partners there told me their biggest concern was that I had a striper pole in our office.  I thought he was kidding…  but he was very serious.  I asked him what they thought about the pitch, company and what not and he kind of skated around it like that was a show stopper…

It wasn’t said to my face but I was told after some of my other pitches to some of the companies they had similar concerns after reading my blog,  my book,  or read articles/interview online.

One of them said to me in a private conversation that I was way to open and honest about myself.

While I don’t understand why those were primary concerns,  I certainly don’t want to have partners in my company that I can’t be open and honest with or feel like I have to put on some persona that is not me around them.

I am sure you can guess the reaction of my friends at high profile west coast firms and people that have raised money when I told them that…   But whatever I know I am in a very conservative area.  I should have seen that coming and been more prepared for it.   Probably even more upfront about it knowing now what a primary concern it would be to them.

If you remember back to my other post in my reasons for even starting down this journey it was because I was looking for more than money…  but primarily someone that brought experience in running a company day to day and figuring out the internal infrastructure (and money that came with that to build that out).

Some of the companies,  like Treetop Ventures,  right out of the gate told me this was not something they would invest in.  But they were willing to hear my pitch.

The questions were like ok you’re here what is your key indicator of growth,  how many client managers do you need per client,  how many copywriters do you need per client,  accounts receivable people, how many programmers, system admins, servers, this, this, this, this, and that and  so much more.  What’s your cost per acquisition if you take the cost of sales labor, marketing and sales expenses.   “Your pricing structure is based on the client’s user base so what is your profit per each of their users?”  WHAAAAAT.

And when I thought I had the right answer they shredded that and I had to go back and figure out more about my own company to answer those.   And it seemed like every answer only led to 5 more questions.    It reminded me of back in the days when you would try to crack software how you would have to stack trace back and reverse engineer everything where every line sometimes led to 5 lines which led to 5 lines for each of those and continued until you found the code you were looking for.

Now I am sure to most people out there this seems silly or obvious that I should know all of that.  But I didn’t.

Figuring out the answers to all these questions was one of the most humbling and frustrating experiences of my life.  I knew I was fairly ignorant about how to run and scale a business… but I had no idea how.

The ironic thing was the firm that had zero interest in investing in the PAR Program gave me the greatest value.  In drilling me on all these items they gave me an incredible education for exactly what I need to do. And they even volunteered to be available as I grow.

I started to execute that plan immediately.  Even though I didn’t get a check in the bank for a couple months.

In the next post I will talk about how it shakes out in the end.

ProBlogger: Getty Images vs Creative Commons and Privacy: What Bloggers Need to Know

ProBlogger: Getty Images vs Creative Commons and Privacy: What Bloggers Need to Know

Link to @ProBlogger

Getty Images vs Creative Commons and Privacy: What Bloggers Need to Know

Posted: 08 Apr 2014 08:12 AM PDT

This is a guest post written by Simon Schmid of iubenda.

Getty Images recently announced a new image embed feature that allows bloggers (and others) to access and use their vast library of images for non-commercial purposes. This rather remarkable change in policy by Getty Images shows that it’s ready to work with content creators and adapt to the times we live in.

Even WordPress also published an announcement post in which they share the details of Getty’s new offering and how easy it is to embed an image into your blog. There’s now a “</>” below every image in the catalogue that lets you effortlessly publish that particular image into your post (to be completely accurate and to quote from the terms for the first time, “Not all Getty Images Content will be available for embedded use, and availability may change without notice”).

How easy is it really over all though? And is it entirely without complications? Let’s review some of the most important clauses in theterms of the embed feature and we’ll do this by comparing this with another very popular image source (images under a Creative Commons license) for bloggers.

What can you use Getty’s embed for?

At first you must to be very clear about the fact that Getty’s model is the licensing of images. Therefore you will have to play by their rules and expect to do something for them in return. I’ve read comments on the WordPress announcement that communicated their leave from using the system as soon as ads start appearing. What I’m saying is, that this is something that might be in the works and something that you’ll have to be willing to give back in exchange.

“You may only use embedded Getty Images Content for editorial purposes (meaning relating to events that are newsworthy or of public interest).”

Using the “Embedded Viewer” you consent to use the images for editorial purposes only. Editorial purposes are in a very wide sense non-commercial purposes. This becomes more clear when you read the rest of the terms regarding the “Embedded Viewer”. It outlines that you may not use the images in any of the following ways:

  • (a) for any commercial purpose (for example, in advertising, promotions or merchandising) or to suggest endorsement or sponsorship;
  • (b) in violation of any stated restriction;
  • (c) in a defamatory, pornographic or otherwise unlawful manner; or
  • (d) outside of the context of the Embedded Viewer

Therefore the most important question that needs to be answered is the notion of “commercial”. What kind of use constitutes commercial use, and therefore exceeds the limits of what is allowed with the viewer? Is Here’s an official statement by Craig Peters that goes into detail and helps us at understanding non-commercial use:

Blogs that draw revenues from Google Ads will still be able to use the Getty Images embed player at no cost. "We would not consider this commercial use," says Peters. "The fact today that a website is generating revenue would not limit the use of the embed. What would limit that use is if they used our imagery to promote a service, a product or their business. They would need to get a license." A spokeswoman for Getty Images confirms to BJP that editorial websites, from The New York Times to Buzzfeed, will also be able to use the embed feature as long as images are used in an editorial context.

Compare these facts above to going with Creative Commons content instead:

Creative Commons: Creative Commons-licensed images can be used for any purpose, by anyone, anywhere. That’s as long as you follow the terms of that specific license. None of the CC licences outlines that a piece of licensed content may only be used for a specific purpose–editorial or otherwise.

Creative Commons II: NonCommercial in CC’s Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 means “not primarily intended for or directed towards commercial advantage or monetary compensation” which naturally is a much friendlier definition.

Creative Commons III: the restriction of not displaying outside of the Embedded Viewer does not apply to CC-licensed content, in fact it expressly states that you are allowed to exercise the licensed rights in “all media and formats whether now known or hereafter created, and to make technical modifications necessary to do so”. This can be a deal breaker for things like image carousels or videos or the like.

One more very interesting fact is that Getty can revoke the access to the embedded imagery at any time: “Upon request, you agree to take prompt action to stop using the Embedded Viewer and/or Getty Images Content”. Creative Commons on the other hand declares their licensing to be irrevocable. This ensures that you don’t have to go back and make changes anytime down the road.

Let’s take a look at both solutions side by side:

What a Creative Commons embed looks like…
…links to author plus the right license.

vincentsl / CC BY 2.0

What a Getty embed looks like, yaaay well done…
…shows the viewer with the branding, some picture credits and the sharing buttons.

Apart from the very obvious branding that the embed gives you, we may have another issue that you should at least know about and isn’t immediately obvious. Embedding services like Youtube and others (like the embedding of your image) and even a like button open up another legal field: data privacy.

Looking at a page with Getty embed in Chrome’s cookie window.

What you can see in this window (Chrome’s developer tools, right click and then “Inspect Element”) are the cookies that this page sets with just the embedded image. There are two main elements. The first being the tracking by Getty’s embedding window, the other one caused by the social sharing buttons by Twitter and Tumblr, both also part of the Embedded Viewer.

So why is this so problematic? Essentially, an iframe like this allows their owner (Google, Facebook, Getty…) to make a connection. That connection is between the embedding site, their reader and the third-party host. Or how EFF puts it:

The third-party host can possibly get and log your IP address and the exact time of the request; information about the web browser you’re using, your browser’s version, your operating system, processor information, language settings, and other data; the URL of the website you’re coming from; and sometimes tracking cookies.

The way this affects you as a site owner is that the least you can do is to minimize legal implications and include a description of this data collection in your privacy policy. Above all in Europe there’s a stance by regulators that assumes that cookies may only be placed without user consent if services wouldn’t work without them. That’s not the case for social sharing buttons (mostly). The vague privacy policy posted on Getty’s site is cause for doubting the future use on a site that’s compliant with privacy laws around the world and most of all, in Europe.

Takeaway I: Getty is taking the right steps by making their images easy to use for editorial purposes, however there are still a couple of issues concerning their acceptable use policy (alleged first comments surfaced claiming that Getty Germany denied a blogger/freelancer the free embedding because of his blog being on the same domain as his freelancer page).

If you aren’t ready to accept some of the drawbacks described above, Creative Commons is more than an interesting alternative.

Takeaway II: the knowledge about Getty’s future data collection is murky at best. At least European bloggers should consider including statements about Getty’s iframe and the Twitter/Tumblr sharing buttons included in the iframe. There are a couple of resources out there that help you with crafting a privacy policy. We at iubenda make it really easy for bloggers to generate their legal document with a couple of clicks by simply adding the Twitter/Tumblr and Getty services to their privacy policy.

Addendum:

How to choose Getty Images for your posts

It’s really as simple as clicking on the “</>” provided below the images and then using the embedding code.

How to choose Creative Commons licensed images for your posts

It isn’t that hard to find CC-licensed pictures either, use one of the following methods below:

Resources used:

IIIIIIIV

Simon Schmid blogs at thegodfounder.com and works on iubenda.

Originally at: Blog Tips at ProBlogger
Build a Better Blog in 31 Days

Getty Images vs Creative Commons and Privacy: What Bloggers Need to Know