So, I figured a-bloggin’ I would go.

I get asked this question a lot. In the explosion of startup accelerators, it makes sense. Raising money is hard. Really hard. Doesn’t matter what the tech news blogs say, its hard.

Especially if you aren’t in New York or San Francisco.

As a young entrepreneur, applying to YC or Techstars or 500startups or <insert 1000 other accelerators here> looks like free money. If you can get it. Thats really hard too. Well for some of the accelerators. For others, its super easy.

Oh, and mentors, lots and lots of mentors. Some great; some not so good. Some are dicks; some are super cool.

Space to work, a group of other companies to work with, and the ability to join a network of founders that understand the difficulties that you face.

So why wouldn’t you join an accelerator?

The most common comment I hear is age. Yes, there is a belief that accelerators are for the young. And, more so, for the inexperienced.

Often, you hear Techstars and the rest counter with the founders “of age” that have been successful in the program. Good selling strategy, right?

Here are the facts about an accelerator:

• Being forced to work around companies that are doing an insane amount of work and having to validate that work with the accelerator staff and mentors is probably the single most amazing reality about membership in the accelerator club. Its impossible to replicate this in any coffee shop, co-working space or basement.
• Being held accountable not only by your peers, but by potential investors, is a great litmus test for your ability as a founder to deal with the roller coaster of startupland.
• Having access to mentors drives critical and creative thought in a way that is impossible outside of the accelerator dynamic. Even though that creativity and constructive criticism is overwhelming and not always creative or constructive.
• It is easier to raise money if you have been through a well-regarded accelerator like Techstars, 500 or YC. Its impossible to raise money later if you don’t raise at, around, or just after demo day. Take too long, and your shine wears off.
• Getting into YC, Techstars, 500, etc. is not like getting into a fraternity/college. Its not fucking party time. Its work time. The Bloomberg “reality” show was bullshit. Don’t believe the hype. Its work or die. And as friendly as the other companies are, they will gladly see you die in order to win. (Yes, I am being bombastic. But, in every single class, there are a couple of “favorites” that do extremely well, and then everyone else. Everyone wants to be the favorite, after all, everyone is a Type A. Don’t lose sight of that reality.)
• Some companies are just not made for accelerators. You might not be thinking big enough. Your concept may be outside of the comfort zone of the accelerator’s staff and mentors. There are many reasons why your company just doesn’t fit within the accelerator framework. Its not the accelerators fault.
• If you are worried about the equity you have to give up to the accelerator as part of the program, then don’t go. Seriously, don’t go.

Bottom line. Should you do an accelerator?

Maybe. It’s really your decision. Techstars Boulder’s deadline is 3/16/12. Get on it.

But, if you get in, and decide to do it, then do it 120%. Work harder than everyone else. Push yourself and your team. Become great. Don’t be one of the forgotten companies.

And if you decide that you don’t need an accelerator, well then, thats cool too. Prove to the world that you don’t.

The feeling that this was something important. Something that was needed, and something that we all could be proud to participate in, either as mentors or founders.

Over the years, Techstars has grown, focuses have shifted, competition has heightened but that feeling from the first fall, that we are all part of something important that touches startup communities everywhere. (I get asked about Techstars and Silicon Valley and I always reply that programs like Techstars force Silicon Valley to up their game. As entrepreneurs we are taught that attacking a huge incumbent is often preferable because of blind spots and inability to adapt. If anything is true, Techstars and programs like it have put Silicon Valley on notice that, as the leading startup community, it has to continue to innovate on support infrastructure for startups or see its influence and dominance slip.)

I am proud to be involved in other programs, either directly or indirectly, like 500startups, Advise.me and a stealth mobile accelerator (yes, even accelerators are stealth nowadays), but Techstars is where I was reminded of my love of startups and entrepreneurs, and I am very excited to be part of this video (and is Taylor, my crazy ass dog).

Want to know why community will always define Techstars? Watch this:

Click here to view the embedded video.

New York is a big city. Sounds silly, but one of the charms of Techstars Boulder is that the size of the city increases the focus of the companies during the program, because there are so many fewer distractions. Seattle and Boston for their size certainly allowed for more distraction, but neither are New York.

Throw on top of that a relatively unknown (to me!) general manager, David Tisch, and my concern for the ability for the New York program to perform like a New York program should were certainly heightened as I  entered 92Y for that Techstars reunion / TS4AD.

Boy were my concerns unfounded. Tisch crushed it. The companies crushed it. The mentors crushed it. And more importantly, New York crushed it.

Over the course of the program, which I dropped into, the energy and focus of the companies rivaled anything I had seen at any of the other cities. The program was just as intense, the mentors just as helpful and brutal and the growth in the companies was just as meteoric.

And, most importantly, Tisch became a true leader in New York.

There was still silliness and a lot of bad moves (I hate ‘Series Awesome’ for being childish and taking away from what OnSwipe is doing), but overall it was a successful season. And the new crop of companies, as it should be, is twice as good as the previous bunch.

One of the early knocks on Techstars has always been its secretive nature. When it first moved into the bunker in Boulder, its address was hidden on Brightkite. Then, given the support the community had given Techstars, David Cohen made the right move by including the community versus hiding away from them. The community was invited to Demo Day, the Bunker is used for community events and coworking space in the off-season, and he hired Megan to film the Founders Series (which won an emmy!!)

New York took it to a whole new level bringing in Bloomberg TV to show Techstars as it was, warts and all. Techstars isnt perfect, and the companies are far from perfect.  The mentors, well, most of us understand that our imperfections are part of the reason we have done what we have done, and are willing to share our knowledge.

The new show is coming. Here is the a trailer: And Techstars’ closeup will show the world why I love the program so much, and have been as involved as I have been. Its not perfect. Its about learning who you are…and arent. But mostly, its about building companies collaboratively.

TechStars Trailer from Vortex Media on Vimeo.

Related articles

• New York City TechStars’ reality TV show to air this fall on Bloomberg (thenextweb.com)
• Techstars NYC Announces New Startups Debuting This Summer (nyconvergence.com)
• JWT Sponsors ‘Startup Accelerator’ TechStars (paidcontent.org)
• Making Million-Dollar Connections: 5 Of ThinkNear’s TechStars Mentors Invested In Its $1.63 Million Round (businessinsider.com)
• Startups On TV: TechStars Teams Up With Bloomberg To Offer An Inside Look At Building A Business (techcrunch.com)

Image by Getty Images via @daylife

Last week we announced at Graphicly that we had raised an extension of our Series A of $3 million. For those that are counting, we have now raised $4.2 million in our quest to allow everyone to enjoy the art and the story telling of comic books and associated entertainment.

It wasnt easy to raise that money, and over the past year, besides some serious internal turmoil and spending some real time building a team, refining the vision, we were able to show enough traction to land some top notch investors.

But enough about us.

This morning, I read a post in Techcrunch about the Start Fund, which in essence is a partnership between SV Angel (Ron Conway‘s Fund) and an insanely wealthy dude, Yuri Milner, who’s fund DST has investments in Groupon, Facebook and Twitter, where every single graduate of Y-Combinator gets $150,000 in a no-discount, no-cap convertible note.

Two friends who I respect had very different reactions: Dave McClure tweeted out a congrats, and Ted Rheingold commented on the post that it was bad for the ecosystem.

Personally, I think this puts an enormous burden on Y-combinator and Paul Graham. In fact, I think it puts an enormous burden on all accelerators. Why?

They have to double down on output quality.

The general idea that an angel will invest in a team that is interesting to give them time to come up with something interesting has just gone out the window. Companies now accepted into accelerators be it Y-Combinator (who usually brings in ~40) or Techstars (which brings in 10 per 4 cities, also ~40) or any of the hundred other ones across the country, they can no longer bring in “test” companies or the output will be shit, and the ecosystem will be hurt.

For Techstars, it seems that ~3 companies in each city “dont make it.” Either they dont get funded or just kinda fade away. Y-Combinator seems to have a larger percentage of companies disappear, but that is mostly because of the growth stage of the teams at Techstars. Techstars tends to take companies further along than YC, YC tends to like young hackers coming up with interesting ideas.

Now with this Start Fund, every YC company just got 3-6 months of additional life. I dont think the investment will help any of the companies raise additional funds initially given its the booby prize for graduation, but it allows them to continue to live, and strain the already limited human resource in the San Francisco Bay Area (namely developers).

[Will Techstars follow suit? I have no idea, but my gut tells me it wont. Its not David Cohen's style. But, I could see TS looking for a larger ~$10-$15mm investment to be used to grow the organization and invest in companies. (I have no inside knowledge.)]

For Techstars, they should continue to pride themselves on the large percentage of successful companies as output both in terms of landing a significant funding round, or growing into a viable business. I dont think a Start Fund concept works into their philosophy.

What does the Startup Fund do for the startup ecosystem? In many ways, its helpful. It creates more startups that are connected to more mentors and investors that do interesting things.

But, it also allows startups that should have never seen the light of day a bit of juice.

It is now imperative that not all YC companies graduate. YC’s management team has to serve as a filter to determine if the hot young hackers they are bringing into the program are really entrepreneurs or just hot young hackers. Are the businesses really businesses, or are they interesting ideas.

YC’s output will have to be less than its input.

Which, frankly, would make the program that much more competitive and desirable.

I dont think the companies in YC will work less hard because they know they will be getting some cash at the end of the process, but I do think that the companies have to understand that acceptance into the program is an exploration of their potential, and if they show a lack of potential either as a team, a product or company, Paul Graham must cut them.

The companies that get accepted to YC must understand that the Start Fund has just added $150,000 of expectation, and react accordingly.

It will be amazing to watch over the course of the next few years.

The band was fun, the venue, the Ogden Theatre, is always great (sort of a large version of the Fox in Boulder). As the band began to play, Eric and I were about 5 feet or so from the front. Standing against the stage were three girls. Each under 20 (given the black X’es on the back of their hands), dressed as if this was their big night out and bubbly as if the band was the second coming of Jesus.

When Pinback started playing, the girls started to squeal. Loudly. It was quickly accompanied by dancing around and faces full of smiles.

I chuckled to myself watching them bounce around. You see, earlier that day I signed a termsheet for the project Im working on and found a senior technologist to join the team. If I wasnt so tired, I would have been jumping around.

All in all, I couldnt have picked a better place to be than in a place filled with hundreds of people expressing the pure joy I was feeling.

And as the band played, I was screaming like a girl.  At least on the inside.

When people ask me how I came to be working at Lijit, thats the answer I give them. “I just installed the widget.”

From that first outreach from Tara until today, when I publicly announced my resignation from Lijit, that simple answer completely encapsulates what makes Lijit such an amazing place.

We (It will always be a “we”) built a company centered on the concept that transparency, real interactions with our publishers, and building a great product would lead to success. And so far, we have been right.

The numbers are staggering. 1100% increase in publishers since I have been here, a 3000% increase in pageviews and a doubling in our headcount. As we begin to build out the next pieces of functionality, I truly believe that bloggers who have yet to understand the value of Lijit search brings in both feature set and monetization, will finally figure it out and jump on board.

Do I sound proud? I certainly couldnt be prouder of the Lijit team.

So, why did I decide to move on?

Opportunity. Risk. A healthy amount of alcohol. (Ok, really its the first two. I dont drink and after my 5,345 non-alcoholic beer, I realized the futility of that effort.)

I am a startup guy. I love the beginnings of startups. I love watching entrepreneurs jump of the Startup Cliff with the belief that they will figure it out before they, well, splat.

Current Wisdom, my last (and most successful startup) was started in 2003 as a side project. It was sold in 2007. Its time for me to jump again.

So after mentoring a couple of Techstars teams, one began to ask if I would consider to join them as their CEO. “Two kick-ass developers with a kick-ass product?” I thought to myself.

Jump.

It was more of a running leap.

This time is different that Current Wisdom. Before I leapt with Current Wisdom, we were making about $50k a month in revenue. This time, I am actually financing the parachute on the way down. (Anyone out there want to get involved with the project, lemme know. That ground comes up fast!)

But, I am excited. The founders are amazing. The product is seriously bad-ass. And the opportunity? Well, it may not get a Twitter or Facebook valuation in the seed round, but it might get that $1 billion valuation. One day. (No really. It might. And, its not the non-alcoholic beer talking. I think.)

Most importantly, I have the support of my mentors, and Todd Vernon, Lijit’s CEO. “I cant wait to see you as CEO,” Todd said. (Im 99% sure there was no sarcasm in his voice. I think.) The fact that I will continue to be part of the Lijit family also makes the choice easier.

Having that air screaming by my face as we head into uncertainty is the greatest feeling any entrepreneur feels. (Well, except the feeling of putting a really big check in the bank when its all over.)

Am I worried? Nope.

Great team, amazing product and fantastic concept? What else could any startup want? (Money? Right. forgot about that.)

In about 30 days, I will be able to provide more information about the project once we close our round (which, while I joke, is pretty close to being done) and get the product to market…

…and then, its up, up and away!

BTW: Here is the post I wrote when I joined Lijit: Micah Goes Lijit!

How could this be? I used to ride my bicycle to the comic book store to add to a comic collection that numbered in the 6,000s. I knew what was coming out when. I knew the people that worked there. I felt like it was a place I belonged.

This comic store was pretty empty. Most of the people in it were older (at least mid-twenties) the only kid there was with his dad. There were more collectibles than I remember, and it was silent. Dead silent. On a Saturday.

Now, one of the companies I helped advise this summer was TakeComics, which is building an “iTunes for comics.” I wanted to know if such a thing mattered.

Disruption is a concept that many professional investors love. Things that shake up an industry can often lead to immense returns — if they are timed correctly. Napster was a disruptor in the music industry, but Apple was the first to really make big money selling digital music.

This summer at Techstars –at least in Boulder–disruption seemed to be a theme.

Theming is an interesting art to managing concepts and more importantly thought processes. At Lijit, we apply a theme to each quarter, and each department adjusts their goals and efforts to match that theme. Foundry Group, a Lijit investor, famously invests in companies that fit within their thematic approach to investment. I can only imagine that pitches to Foundry now begin with: “As a company that clearly fits in your Glue theme…” Notice the focus it brings pitches. Dual win for Foundry.

I have begun to look for the themes within a business to determine its potential, and the potential of the management team. Can the business be boiled down to a single metric (revenue per pageview, for example)? Does the management team think thematically about the problems they are trying to solve for? What is the theme of the company?

Which leads us to Techstars theme. If you look at the ten companies in Boulder, they broken down into two themes: Market Efficiency and Industry Disruptors.

Market Efficiency

Everlater, Rezora, Mailana, SendGrid, Spry and TimZon all were applying efficiency to inefficient markets. Everlator (travel memories); Rezora (email marketing for the real estate industry); Mailana (connection discovery); SendGrid (improved transactional email delivery); Spry (product management); and TimZon (online customer service).

In each case, they have built interesting applications. Will they get funding? Probably. They may find the path a bit more difficult, given that while each solution is unique, because it is an improvement on current offerings, they are not completely defensible against competition. For example, if TimZon proves to be right (that customer service is better over video or audio), what stops players like Get Satisfaction, or other large CRM tools from adding video/audio to their offering?

Disruptors

I love this definition of disruption from wikipedia:

Disruption as a method of execution pulling at all four limbs simultaneously with animals or machines so that the body of the execution victim is pulled apart.

When a company truly disrupts an industry it literally tears it apart. Look at the RIAA‘s reaction to Napster and its ilk. Think about how blogging and other online news sources have effected the newspaper industry.

A true disruptor tears apart an industry with verve and violence in a way that, regardless of the success of the company, changes the industry forever.

This summer, TakeComics, Next Big Sound, Retel and Vanilla are looking to truly disrupt their respective industries.

Next Big Sound are looking to provide band management and artists with two things that are currently unavailable or difficult to gather: performance data and interaction data. Artists, more and more, are becoming businesses, and are learning what business has known for a long time: Data rules.

Companies like Soundscan and others provide artists with data thats predicated on the belief that the greatest effect on a band’s success is the marketing efforts of their labels. What artists like Chamillionaire and companies like iMeem, MySpace Music and TopSpin are showing is that the greatest effect on a band’s success is the ability of the artist to go direct to fan. Next Big Sound is providing access to the data that proves out this disruption in the industry.

After all, dont artists (and businesses) want to know what their fans care about, and where they are interacting with their music (or brands)?

Vanilla and Retel are similar in that they are providing both improved market efficiencies (Vanilla with online community tools and Retel with retail employee management and intelligence), and industry disruptors.

While forums and forum software is often forgotten behind the noise created by Facebook and other similar social networks, there is a large amount of focused community interaction and growth that continues to occur on forums. Companies tend to shy away from building community around themselves because 1) most companies pay community lip service; 2) they dont understand how building a strong community filled with fans can create a long-term customer base that grows organically through word of mouth; 3) they dont know how; 4) they are unaware of the ease of a product like Vanilla.

If companies would leverage their own web presence to build community rather than rely on social media tools, they will be better served in the long term, as most people are fickle about sites like Facebook and Twitter, but not about the brands they love.

Retel is similar to Next Big Sound in that they are providing unique and difficult to obtain data to retail store owners that will allow them to make decisions quickly. With Retel, eventually, retail store owners will be understand where the “hot spots” are within a store, perhaps being able to make determinations on how a store should be laid out to optimize things like cleanliness and worker efficiency.

In an industry where the majority of optimization and efficiency decisions are made by “feel” and “experience,” the level of data provided by Retel will have a transformative, disruptive effect.

There are three major indicators that the comics industry is ripe for disruption: its a $6billion industry (big); increase in non-core revenue–movies versus print (focus shift); lack of cost-efficient alternative to core business (no strong digital replacement for print). You could also argue that the comics industry, other than with manga and anime, have leveraged the internet at all.

TakeComics provides an iTunes-like interface for digital comics (including the digital conversion), as well as social tools for interaction around the titles and characters. In addition, TakeComics also uses the comic books as the “center of the pinwheel” providing access to associated merchandise and content to the title and/or character.

Which brings me back to my comic store experience. All I kept thinking about while I drove around Boulder trying to find the stupid comic store, that I wished there was a digital solution for buying comics. I am no longer a collector, I just want to experience the story and then talk about it with my friends. I also, wanted to know how these current stories intertwined with the stories from my youth. I got none of that from walking into that store.

Disruptive technologies and companies tend to fundamentally change how we view and interact with an industry. Will these companies be able to be agents of change?

They have certainly started from some interesting places…

For some, their progress was stunning, for others, it was disappointing.

It got me thinking about why. Why would some teams spend an entire summer, give up 6% of their company, be surrounded by dozens and dozens of mentors to finish the summer in pretty much the exact spot they started the summer?

Could it be that they lack passion? Are they just sending it in, thinking that at the end of the summer, there would be multiple investors waiting to give them hundreds of thousands of dollars just because they were in Techstars?

Here is what I came up with. They are too emotional. Too emotionally attached to either their idea, or their own pride at their ability to execute.

The difference between a person who starts a business and a real entrepreneur is the ability to separate passion from emotion.

Be passionate about the business. Be passionate about your team. Be passionate enough to get other people to become passionate. But dont get emotionally attached to any idea, product or even team member.

The path to failure is paved with emotional attachment.

If the only constant in a startup is a state of constant change, then the reality is that the value of all ideas will continually shift as well. Becoming emotionally attached to any one will almost always guarantee that your startup will stop being flexible and responsive to change. The focus of the startup will become the execution of the idea–regardless of its value or positive effect on the business long term.

At the end of Investor Day, it was this realization that rang true for me. The companies filled with passion and had the ability to share that passion put themselves on the right path towards success.

The companies that clung on to their ideas, that could not divest themselves emotionally, well, put themselves on a different path.

Be passionate. Share your passion, but remember, passion is not emotion.

“Denver”

Immediately, probably given my absolute hatred of that city, I correct. “Actually, its Boulder.”

And then a discussion begins about why Boulder has such a strong entrepreneurial environment. We talk about the number of startups in a small town; we discuss the entrepreneurial history of the region; we explain that Boulder is a weird town that is accepting of weird people, and that the weirdest people of all are entrepreneurs.

Then yesterday I watched the latest Founders video:

and read Brad’s post.

And it hit me.

What is helping Boulder grow, whats helping us become a entrepreneurial center is friendship.

Before you begin to think I have gotten soft, let me explain.

Think about your good friends. What are the core components of that relationship?

Truth.

Trust.

Reliability.

Consistency.

Loyalty.

Now if you apply the same concept to startups, it works just as well.

In Boulder, we all are friends (well, at least supportive). We treat our startups like friends. We treat each other’s startups like friends.

And, like friends, we expect the best. There is no suffering of fools in Boulder.

Extra added bonus:

I was meeting with a couple of friends who are looking for a startup concept to build against. When asked what I thought made a successful startup, here is the advice I gave them.

1) since the internet is about accelerating and facilitating communication and information, so should your startup;

2) it should solve a personal problem. It should scratch a personal itch you have;

3) you should be passionate about the idea. Passion breeds love. Love breeds focus.

Kid is in some contraption that he has so mastered, and the parents are in complete belief in the greatness of that child.

Ok, the kid is me. Those are my biological parents. My mom was 21 at the time, my father 23. Me? I am still amazed that there is not a single picture of me without my mouth open.

I look at this picture a lot. Not 100% sure why. But there is something in the hopefulness of my parents and the dopey look in my eyes that just is comforting.

I see a kid put in some random contraption of the 1970s, probably invented to help children of the 1970s expand their horizons, or some latent hippie bullshit. Or perhaps, it was designed to drive the kid crazy just enough to leave his parents along long enough to not strangle the kid.

Pretty sure I was one of those “just wanna strangle” kids. Pretty sure I never really lost that personality trait.

Which brings me back to the picture. I lay this picture against where I am today, and I wonder if when my mom and father were looking at me in this picture, did they think about where I would be? I imagine this is a thought that most parents think of often. At that age, its hard to believe that your child would be anything less than amazing. Even if you dressed him in pink.  At that age, your dreams of what your kid is going to accomplish far outpace reality. At that age, you hope that your kid will, at the bare minimum, surpass anything that you have ever accomplished in your life.

I dont have any kids. Im still pretty young, and I feel pretty strongly that one day, I will have kids. After all, what greater gift can I give the world than a little Micah or two running around. (Thats, right, I said gift. Stop laughing.) Kids are important to me. Something I have always wanted. My two sisters are 7 and 9 years younger than me, so growing up, I spent a lot of time around babies and young children (the pedophile jokes just arent funny, dammit!) and realized quickly that I enjoy spending time with kids much more than adults.

Putting the psychological reasons aside, here is why I think its been that way. With kids, communication and expectations tend to be pure. There is no real reason to be manipulative or guarded. You just get to be, and they just get to be, they way you are. When I was in my early twenties, I actually looked into adoption, but gave it up quickly because clearly it was a really bad idea.

I found an outlet in coaching. (Again, no pedophile jokes, dammit) The communication and expectation one has with a team you are coaching is pure. You can see the impact you are having on the players. You can experience the joy of success, the pain of losing, and the satisfaction of helping kids realize the limits of their abilities.

From there, it was a natural extension, given my background in startups, to get involved helping out entrepreneurs where I could. I was lucky a couple of years ago to get involved with Techstars. The first year, I met most of the teams near the end of the program, and tried to offer help where I could. In a few cases, I think I gave some decent advice, and in other cases I gave a decent kick in the ass.

Year two, jokingly, David and I decided I would be a junior mentor. Mostly, it was to give me the opportunity to evaluate each company quietly, without a need for them (or me) to settle in on one or two companies. More importantly, it gave me the ability to be mentored while I was providing mentorship. Beyond the discussion of the importance of building community and communicating with users (which I did a presentation on), I found that I was pretty good at helping companies with their presentations. I was particularly proud of Adam, Dan and Kevin of Ignighter.

This year has been even more fun. I have taken a much bigger role in helping two companies, Take Comics and Next Big Sound (and a lesser role with Vanilla). This year, I look at Kevin and Thanavath of Take Comics, and Alex, David and Samir of Next Big Sound in much the same way my mom and father looked at me in that photo.

I am amazed at the work both companies have done in taking random contraptions and turned them into real, live viable businesses. Alex, David and Samir are the youngest founders by more than five years, yet their drive, focus and hope bely that age. They came to Techstars and threw away what they had built. An idea that had got me excited enough to heavily recruit and recommend them through the interview process. An idea that garnered national attention and some decent traction. Just tossed it.

They learned by building the Next Big Sound what the real pain points are in an industry that has been absolutely decimated by the Internet. Destroyed. Its impossible for music professionals to make the right decisions. Its impossible to know who the Next Big Sound will be. Not any longer. NBS has built something that is currently amazing, and has the potential to be market changing.

Take Publishing is not much different. The digital age has severely disrupted the print industry. We are seeing newspapers die daily. The comic book industry is no different. Print is no longer king. Marvel, DC and others have moved full force into the entertainment industry finding a retelling of Wolverine’s story more compelling and more profitable than printing more books. Take is on the cutting edge of this shift. Imagine getting comics on any device, pixel perfect, and being able to engage in the universe and community around those stories. Once Take launches, you will never have to wonder again.

Vanilla is focused on building customizable hosted (and self-hosted) forums. The original social media, forums have always been a place for strong community growth. Due to the explosion of profile based social networks like Friendster and Facebook, blogging and micro-blogging, forums, for many, have been forgotten. But for sites truly built around community (such as Mozilla), forums are the life-blood. Community doesnt happen in the stilted conversation of a profile-based social network, or the ephemeral microblog. It happens under the umbrella of focused affinity, which still are driven by forums.

Its impossible to know if teams like Filtrbox, Eventvue, Ignighter, Foodzie, Vanilla, Next Big Sound and Take Comics will be successful in the long term. And, like my mom and father, at some point you have to let the companies drive their own contraptions, hoping that if they crash, it will be full of learning.

But, one thing that wont change is the pride I feel in having been a part of their growth, and the excitement I feel at watching their journeys. I know that my parents feel the same way about their startup, regardless of the bumpiness of that journey.

To Ari, Tom, Matt, Ben, Rob, Josh, Adam, Dan, Kevin, Rob, Emily, Nic, Mark, Todd, Alex, David, Samir, Kevin and Thanavath, I am proud of you my friends, and your progress.

Now dont fuck it up.

And the job of the Rodeo Clown? To keep the bull from doing his job.

I first heard this in the movie The Taking of Pelham 123. The hostage negotiator was explaining to the subway operator the importance of deflecting the bad guy’s attention away from the fact that the deadline would be missed. Be the rodeo clown. Deflect the bad guy’s attention.

This concept has sat in my brain percolating for a couple of weeks.

Does having a singular job, a specific job help the entrepreneur in building a business? Does focus and simplicity lend itself to success?

Over this past week, I spent some time with one of the TechStars teams in New York pitching companies and potential partners. It was clear quickly that while the product was simple, the explanation wasnt. People were getting lost quickly, the ideas within the presentation were creating questions rather than answers.

People that we were hoping to draw in, were being deflected from the guts of the product.

In each startup that I have been part of (well, each successful startup), we had a single mantra. We had a statement that we laid against everything we did to validate the action. For example, at Lijit, our guiding principle is “Publisher Value.” Everything we do is focused on adding value to our publishers. Its why we are so focused on customer service and communication.

At Techstars many of the teams are very young and excited about what they are doing. They are focused on “what will I look like when I get big” and excitingly talk about it. It comes out in their pitches; it shows in their passion. But, for some of them, it also shows in the mess of their pitches.

Here is a hint if you are pitching a company. Answer these questions:

1) why is your company important (or why does it exist)?

• what conditions in the marketplace drove the need for your business?
• what is the itch you are trying to scratch?
• How many people have the same itch?

2) why is your company the best at solving this problem?

• what do you do better than anyone else?
• why will people use your product?
• how much will it cost?

3) how close are you to solving the problem?

• Does your product work?
• Is anyone using it now?
• can you demonstrate success?

Startups, especially young startups spend too much time worrying about things that dont matter. Logos, names and what their tshirts will look like. They spend too much time on small feature sets and putting a ten pound bag of sand in a one pound container.

If you want to kill the cowboy, you have to understand your purpose. Everything else doesnt matter. Everything else is a rodeo clown.

So as the Techstars teams get closer to Investor/Demo day, I hope to see each of them simplify their pitches. Figure out their matra. Understand what it is about what they have built that it interesting. And then kill the cowboy.

This is the third year. The first year, I was re-engaging with the Denver/Boulder tech scene after spending the previous four years heads down building Current Wisdom. It was a revolutionary experience for me. For years, I was the only person I knew that loved ideas. Loved testing those ideas. Loved failing at those ideas, and trying the next idea.

Yet, here was 20-30 people who were neck deep in the process of building on an idea and turning into something real. I got involved with Techstars that first year near its end, and I was lucky to see some companies start to figure it out (Eventvue and Filtrbox), others beginning to tap into their potential (SocialThing, Intense Debate and Brightkite), and others sort of either hit a growth plateau or peter out (SearchtoPhone, JSquared and MadKast). I tried to be as helpful as I could be, sometimes with a quiet push and sometimes with something a bit louder.

I knew that in year two, I wanted to be involved. David and I became good friends over the course of the year, I had spent more time at Lijit, and I moved to Boulder. When I looked at the breath of mentors that had been selected in year two, I felt that I just didnt have as much to provide, so I convinced David to allow me to be a “floater” mentor (Yes Adam, just like the East River, but not like the toilet) where I helped several teams with specific projects or activities. I helped Gyminee with search marketing strategy and Ignighter, Foodzie and People Software with their presentations. During the summer I even gave a presentation on the importance of blogging and transparency for the young companies.

The teams in year two seemed to be more “complete.” They had moved beyond the “just ideas” that the first year teams entered the program with, and spent the summer refining their focus and strategies.

If it was possible, I was more impressed by the second year group, because the teams that “got it,” REALLY got it, and those that didnt, REALLY didnt. It was easier to see the separation, and easier to know where to spend time.

It was in year two where I had an “ah-hah” moment with mentoring. In truth, I had never mentored before. I have coached. I have advised. I have taught, but never mentored.

The “ah-ha” moment? My job as mentor is not to advise, coach or teach. My job as mentor is to guide.

The difference?

Let me paint a picture, if you will (I always wanted to write that).

Most companies when they are formed have a clear picture of where they are and where they want to go, but not what the path between the beginning and the end will look like.

Guidance is soft suggestion and support of the path the team has chosen EVEN if the chosen path could potentially be wrong. Advice is strong suggestion and direction on what path to take.

Guidance disallows a team from losing focus. Advice provides the team with the “best” focus as determined by the advisor.

Guidance teaches teams that failure is a possibility and a probability. Advice teaches teams nothing, except you will help them avoid failure.

Make sense?

As the third year of Techstars begins, I am excited to assume the role of a lead mentor for one of this year’s team. I am excited because in many ways, I discovered and advised this team to apply to Techstars. Yes, I advised. Strongly.

I am also excited to work with Jason Mendelson. Jason and I have had colorful interactions in the past and I look forward to the guidance he will provide me to become a better mentor. (Yes Dan, Jason and I will become an Ignighter group* so we can pick up chicks. Thinking of calling it BJ and the Bear).

This year I challenge all the Techstars teams to demand the best guidance from their mentors. I challenge the teams to take the guidance provided by their mentors and become this year’s standout team. I challenge the teams to be fearless in their choices.

But mostly, I challenge the teams to make all of us forget about the past two years of Techstars, and I will provide this guidance: Success comes from intense passion, focus and execution; failure comes from listening to too much advice.

Related articles by Zemanta

• TechStars founder levels up with $2.5M fund (venturebeat.com)
• Announcing my new startup seed fund (coloradostartups.com)

Dan Osit of Inighter was heading back to New York to run his company. Adam Sachs, his co-founder, will soon follow him. The women of People’s Software have moved back to their respective cities, as has many of the other teams. (Of course, some are staying Boulder, which is fantastic).

This was the first year that I was a mentor. I guess, an official mentor. I kinda helped some folks out at the tail end of last year, but that almost doesnt count.

The Techstars teams talk so much about what they learned from the mentors, but what did the mentors learn from the Techstars teams? (At least, what did this mentor learn?)

1. You are a piece of meat.

As a mentor, whether its for a program like Techstars or for the local college, you are viewed in terms of what value you bring to the table. Mentees get advice from so many people, that its difficult to wade through all the various pieces of advice and pick the pieces that are directly relevant.

Interestingly, every mentor feels that the information they are providing is the best. There is no question that the advice I gave Foodzie or Travelfli was the one missing piece of information that they needed to be successful. I mean it was, right?

In addition, with a program like Techstars (I imagine its the same for Y-Combinator, or other such programs), the team are eventually looking to have their companies financed. As a mentor, you then fall into three camps: people that can give money; people that know people that can give money; and not either of the previous two camps.

As a mentor, you have to be aware and accept the classification you fall into, and understand that there is a direct relation between the time spent with you and your ability to help finance the company. Is this a bad thing? No. Is it a reality? Yes.

2. The value you bring is not always the value that other mentors feel you bring.

I was an SEO expert for a long time. I have not done any real SEO in years. Do other mentors still suggest that people talk to me about SEO. Of course.

Whats interesting about this occurrence, is that it teaches me how my peers value my skill set. Is it bad? No. Is it a reality? Yes.

I bet Eric Marcouiller of Gnip is a little tired of telling the MyBlogLog story. But, what is he often asked to do? Talk about MyBlogLog.

3. Pick an area of expertise.

When I owned an interactive agency, we focused on Search Marketing. It was great. I would speak on a panel, and the other panelist would talk about the million things they focused on. I would talk about search. Who got the most business afterward? This guy!

There are many mentors with many areas of expertise. Figure out the one thing you can add to the conversation, and focus on that. Can you provide more information around other things? Sure. But focus. I chose to help teams on their presentations. Was it helpful? I dunno, but the three teams I spent the most time with have all closed rounds or are awful close to doing it. I wasnt “the reason”, but I am sure my help was “a reason,” which is all I can hope to offer as a mentor.

4. Dont let mentees pick you.

There is a big fault that most mentors have. Ego. To feel that you have information or experiences to share, indicates a belief that your knowledge or experiences are valuable. Almost the definition of ego.

Many mentors will sit back and let the teams decide who they want to work with. Remember the classifications the teams will put mentors in? The mentors that have the highest potential to invest in the teams will always be selected over the other two classifications.

As a mentor, you must swallow your ego. Find a team that you are interested in working with (even if just the idea is interesting) and offer your help.

Its a privilege to be asked to be a mentor; its an accomplishment if you actually help the teams become better.

5. Learn from your fellow mentors.

The moment I stop learning, I hope to be dead.

I tried to attend all the sessions that other mentors gave. I listened and asked questions. I grabbed mentors afterward and spent time with them.

Its not just at Techstars that I try to learn from my peers. I probably ask someone a question every day. I do talk a lot, which probably hides the amount of listening I do.

Truthfully, its not just mentors you can learn from. You know how much I knew about artisan food producers or how frequent flier programs were cash cows for the airlines? What about how to technically and mathematically determine how photos fit together?

6. Be friendly, but not friends.

I sort of hesitated to list this one, because its so hard to define. But there should be a magic, invisible, hard line between the teams and their mentors. This line keeps both groups honest. This line makes everything easier.

After all, spending time with people you like, will always create the air of friendship. I do consider many of the members of the various Techstar teams my friends. But, I try to be overly careful to not cross that really weird, hard to define line. To be an effective mentor one must be able to critique without judging, be honest without being harsh, and support without requirement. That goes out the window when a mentor becomes too friendly with mentees.

7. Be good. Be great.

Realize that the more you give, the better a mentor you are. Be good. Dont hold back.

Be great. Be someone that the teams can look up to. You want them telling David or each other, “man, that <MENTOR> was great!” Not, “Jeez, who let that idiot in the Bunker?”

So, there you have it. My 7 rules for being a good Techstars mentor.

Oh, I guess there is an 8th rule, but it will only drive David’s ego.

Whats that? its impossible to blow that balloon any bigger?

Okay, here it is:

8. Be like David.

Do the one thing that David excels at: Answer the question asked; and the question that should have been asked. Then shut up. Let the teams figure out the rest.

Reflect? What happened to the good ol’ Micah snark?

Good point.

There is an interesting line one has to tread when you are intimately involved as a mentor to the teams. You want to be overly positive, but as I firmly believe, honesty is always more helpful than positivity.

Now the teams who are reading this are worried, everyone else smells blood. I think I will surprise them both.

Here is my team by team analysis: (*I saw only the dress rehearsal pitches not the Demo Day pitches*) For me, the teams fell into three groups: The ones that should have no problem getting funded and moving down an interesting path; the teams that will have a tough road, but if they get lucky or leverage their networks, could do well; and the teams that I think really have little chance, either because they lost vision, or never found the right path.

Here my choices for the the teams with the highest chance for success:

Ignighter -”Group Dating”

My take on their value proposition: College provides structure which makes it easier to meet people. Online dating services focus on a 35+ demographic (makes sense, we old people are more likely to pay for services, are deeper into our careers, thereby reducing time for pursing dates.) The 23-30 demographic is under-served. Inighter attempts to serve that demographic by providing some of the screening features of a dating site with the structure of college.

One of the easiest teams to personally like. I met with them within their first week, and I saw an idea that had merit, but lacked focus. My biggest piece of advice for these guys was to make sure that they were “making” jokes, not “being” jokes. Over the course of the summer, they held true to the vision of their product, but were extremely coachable. Of all the presentations, their’s did the best of telling a story, and explaining the problem they were looking to fill. I placed these guys in my personal top 4.

Team: 8/10 (Young. Light on leadership and technical focus)

Idea: 7/10 (One of those “doesnt this exist?”)

Fundability: 9/10 (Lots of passion and excitement)

Chance for Success: 8/10 (Should grow quickly, or die fast)

Devver – “Tools for Developers”

My take on their value proposition: Devver provides tools to developers to make them more productive.

Anyone that knows me knows that I consider myself rather non-technical. Dan, one of the founders of Devver, worked at Indigio, which was the company that bought mine, so I have had the pleasure of seeing him work. He and his cofounder Ben, are the type of nerds that make people like me immediately envision wedgies and Ogre screaming “Nerds!” at the beginning of Revenge of the Nerds. But, they’re are also the type of tinkers that make people like me really sit up and take notice. I believe Devver is the third or fourth company these guys have built, and when I show it to developer friends, I see the drool begin to flow. Guess that means its pretty cool stuff. Extremely coachable, Dan and Ben are a great example of where the people make the product.

Team: 9/10 (lack some business awareness)

Idea: 8/10 (only because I am sure they can bleed all my bank accounts)

Fundability: 8/10 (as more companies are built on open source platforms, more proficiency tools will need to be developed)

Chance for Success: 8/10 (If they engage and interact with the developer community, it will be a no-brainer)

Foodzie: “Bringing specialty food to the masses”

My take on their value proposition: Help small speciality food manufacturers develop an online presence.

Foodzie definitely came into the summer with the most buzz, and surprisingly (until you meet Rob, Nik and Emily…well maybe not Emily) kept the buzz going for the summer. Their progress was fantastic, extremely coachable, probably the biggest slam dunk of the summer. It will be interesting to see how they move past being a basic ecommerce play, and really develop a set of tools that small, extremely busy, artisan producers can, and will use.

Team: 9/10 (Strong focus; need a larger dev team)

Idea: 9/10 (As long as they focus on the producers)

Fundability: 9/10 (buzz at the beginning, buzz at the end will help)

Chance of Success: 8/10 (very focused, high level of passion and drive)

TravelFli: “Loyalty Program Manager”

My take on their value proposition: Manage all your travel loyalty programs from a central location.

I met with Krista from TravelFli early on, we discussed the various customers they hoped to service. We had some interesting discussions around the Airlines and Hotel groups (I didnt know that loyalty programs are such a cash cow for the airlines). As the summer went on, they continually refined their message, and improved their product. It was easy for them to get feedback, since all the mentors are heavy travellers, and we all had a lot of ideas on how to improve the system. The coolest feature they built out was the ability to book an entire trip based on awards miles, hotel rewards and rental awards. Very cool.

Team: 7/10 (big team, need more leadership focus)

Idea: 9/10 (one of those “I thought someone does this”)

Fundability: 9/10 (no brainer)

Chance for Success: 7/10 (is this a feature or a company? How far can it grow?)

Here are links to the other teams: The Highway Girl, BuyPlayWin, Occipital (they rightly explained that they have no company, yet. But the technical is awesome), PeopleSoftware, AppX, Gyminee.

Good luck to all the teams!

At least once, if not twice, during his yelling at me (I think it was often after my seventeenth mumbled “yes”) he would say:

“Micah, are you listening to me or just hearing me?”

“Shit dad,” I used to think to myself, “everyone in the neighborhood can hear you!”

“I am listening,” I would say, shuffling my feet, hoping his tirade would be over soon.

Now I find myself thinking the exact same thing when I see companies attempt to reach out to their communities. Are you listening? Or are you just hearing your community?

Today, Intense Debate, a company that I have been both publicly and privately critical, showed me that they hadnt just heard what I had to say, hoping that my tirade would soon be over and I would move on to other targets, but listened. Really listened.

Even though I know the team and investors well, and have watched them grow (and go through growing pains) ever since their time in TechStars, I chose to go with their competitor, Disqus. My decision was not based on features, it was based solely on one fact: Daniel Ha, CEO of Disqus listens and responds to his community. Intense Debate did not.

I wrote a blog post about my decision.

Offline, given the proximity of Intense Debate to me, there was much discussion. I havent changed my mind, Disqus is still on my blog. From a feature perspective, the two products are basically the same, it really comes down to preference (whether its look and feel, or a specific feature, etc.), and my preference is for a company that listens to my needs, evaluates them and innovates or iterates around them.

It seems that Intense Debate heard me. Recently, they release a feature where a tweet was sent every time a person left a comment. I wrote that I felt it was a good step, but way too noisy. Intense Debate heard and iterated. Now the commenter can decide at the point of commenting to send it out as a tweet, or not.

Great move guys. Hope to see more of it. I hope you will see the benefit of listening to your community rather than just listening.

Later in the day, I got an email from my friend Ari Newman, CEO of Filtrbox, showing me a prototype of a new feature they are looking to launch. (I so wish I could talk about it, but Ari promised to kill my dogs if I leaked it).

What was gratifying for me, was that two days ago, I IM’d Ari that I had a great idea for his product, and wanted to show him what I had come up with. Two day later, the feature was implemented. Two days.

In a very private way, Ari did what all great leaders do: listened to my suggestion, evaluated its value to the product and its users, and made a decision. He had listened me. And even more so, took the extra step Intense Debate did, and did something about it.

I am very impressed with both companies and their leadership. In the span of twelve hours, two companies, two friends, took steps to make me feel both welcome and valued, which is how all community members should feel. I hope they both continue down this path.

If you are a startup, and dont think you have the time or resources to listen to your community, you will not survive. Even Twitter finally realized the error of their ways. And, companies like Get Satisfaction make listening so simple.  There is really no excuse to do it right.

So remember, any company that hopes I become part of their community and use their product:

Are you listening or just hearing me?

—–

If you are interested in either Intense Debate or Disqus‘ comment system, they are in an open beta, head over and install. They are both great, and its even better than they can be searched from the Lijit search bar in my side bar.

If you are interested in Filtrbox, which is in a closed beta, Ari has given me a special code: douchebag. Funny Ari, very funny.