5 Things I Like Best and 5 Things I Dislike About USA/California

This was a post that I was meaning to get around to. There so many differences between life here and in Canada that I thought I should break them down into lists of what I like and dislike. Now this is not the definitive list, but what is on the top of my mind. Now, I am trying to avoid the obvious ones like I am writing this on January 25 while the temperature is around 24C.

Top 5 Things I Like
1. Blockbuster Total Access: For $9.99/month gets you one movie at a time mailed to you. When you are finished you return it to a physical Blockbuster store and get a free movie. While you watch that movie, they send you the next movie on your list. Then, repeat. During school, Lindsey and I are able to watch a movie on Friday and Saturday. That works out to 8 movies for $10! During Christmas, I think we were watching 4 movies a week through this deal. Great value for the starving student!
2. Trader Joe's: It's not quite a health food market, although alot of it's products are organic. It is not quite a high end food store because many of its prices vary from inexpensive to very reasonable. It is very hard to define Trader Joe's, but here is my attempt: If you feel like some good food check this place out first! Also, home to the amazing 2 buck Chuck! That brings us to our next point...
3. Cheap Booze: Want a decent table wine - $2 for 2 buck Chuck! Do I want a 20 pack of beer - MGD on sale for $9. Do I want 1.75 litre of Rye or Vodka - how about $12? God Bless America. Thank god I am not in contact with my Sault Ste. Marie friends; they would move out here in an instant and create illegal alien issue of a whole new kind.
4. Mountains, Cliffs, and Ocean, Oh My!: There is something about waking up and walking to class and seeing snow capped mountains in the background. Relative to London, Canada the scenery is so dramatic that it can help but inspire you.
5. American Cell Phone Competition: What??? I will equal to or less than a Canadian provider's base package but you package includes free nation-wide roaming and long-distance plus you will include features that I normally pay extra for in Canada such as voicemail with the base package!! Sign me up. Canadian providers take note. (Honorable mention for U.S. Banks and no fee chequing accounts)

5 Things I Dislike

1. Cellphones and Cars: If I didn't know better there is a law that states that the moment you enter your car, you must get on your cell phone. When I am driving around, I feel like the minority of people who aren't on the cell. Now, I am not talking about using a bluetooth headset. These are people who drive with one hand (if we're lucky) on the steering wheel and one hand glued to the cell on the ear. I even saw a guy and girl in the two front seats each on their own cell phone (God forbid that you talk to one another). Seeing all of this on the road makes you wonder when, not if, they are going to backend you.
2. U.S. Healthcare: I am sorry, but without a PHD in rocket science you will not be able to figure out which plans provide the best value. I still do not no where I am able to go if I need to see a doctor immediately, but where it isn't an emergency room situation. Sorry U.S., but IMHO the availability of a small subset of high level doctors plus the ability to get an x-ray within 5 minutes of spraining your thumb does not outweigh the high costs and confusion surrounding your system.
3. Cheap Booze!: It's a blessing and a curse. My poor liver!
4. What is wrong with these drivers?: Nearly everyday, we see a news report on someone who drove into house or some other bizarre driving accident. I am terrified to be a pedestrian for fear of a car driving on the sidewalk. Maybe it has something to do with the cell phones? I hope so because if it is not we got some problems here.
5. U.S. Work Visa System: It appears they are so focused on keeping people out, they are overlooking the discussion on "how to leverage the talent that is here to help all of us succeed". U.S. unemployment rates are among the lowest in the world, so it is not like internationals are disenfranchising Americans. In fact, arguably there is a great need for more talent to be made available to businesses. This does not mean I am for illegal immigration; I am for improving legal immigration.

Verizion Wireless - Industry Leader???

I was planning to spend this lunch hour at a Verizon Wireless information session. Unfortunately, I was informed that Verizon only hires individuals authorized to work in the U.S., therefore I am spending this lunch hour questioning this supposed industry leader's hiring practices.

This policy demonstrates that Verizon does not make it a priority to hire the best possible talent to serve its customers. While I recognize that there is large pool of potential domestic hires, but Verizon still could hire those people if they were better than an international applicant. Considering international students simply expands Verizon's applicant pool. I can see no reason why to not consider international students, especially when there is no paperwork associated with hiring them as an intern.

All international MBA students under the terms of their F-1 visa are permitted to work in the United States for a cumulative period of 1yr without the need of any other work visa. This means that Verizon does not have any additional paperwork or monitoring to complete while they evaluate the quality of our work. Should they decide that we are a valuable asset, then they may acquire a H1B visa for us to work in the United States. While the H1B does entail some paperwork, it is a process that many companies, with far less resources that Verizon, navigate in order to ensure they have the best people. Furthermore, NAFTA provides an even easier route to hiring North American students post-graduation.

Bottom line: I can see little excuse for companies relying on human capital to ignore international students. The only excuse can be ignorance of the process.

I think I am going to check out Sprint's policies.

What a Difference 10% Makes

Well, to break the suspense: We came 3rd in the VCIC Wildcard. It came down to a matter of percents. While I believe we did many things better than our competitors, we made the fatal mistake of asking for only 30% of the company instead of 40%. Our preparation for the tournament helped in many areas, but we really needed a bottom line valuation guideline for various stages of a company.
Our company of choice just finished their prototype and had received some commitments for sales in 2007. Our preparation told us to ask for 25%-50% of a company. The key was to get appropriate exit numbers. Our exit numbers demonstrated a solid multiple after 5yrs when only controlling 30%. So, as a team we agreed to a pre-money valuation of $3.5M and to fund them an additional $1.5M (giving us 30%). This was our undoing. Our funding number was correct, but the valuation fell between $1-2M. Feedback was "you need to get 40%" period. After all our preparation, it was a tough lesson to learn.
The worst part of it was that I remember at our first group meeting I quoted a passage from a book called "Start-Up to IPO" which stated that VC's compute how much a business needs and assumes that is worth 40% of the company and computes its pre-money value back from that. Now after all our research and learning, this rule faded from my mind. If we had followed it, it would have delivered a pre-money value of $2.25M (before our $1.5M investment) and that could have won us the competition (no guarantee, but it would have made it close).
Now, I not saying I was right and my team mates were wrong. I agreed to our valuation like everyone else. The point is I think we really bought in to the idea that there had to be some science behind a VC valuation, when really it is as simple as what do you need? Well, that is worth 40% of your company!
Well, the lesson is loud and clear. I think the 1st years from our team will be able to instruct next years team to a victory. We were close ... but for some simple rules. We will deliver the simple rules to next years team and combine it with our more scientific to create a winning combination next year.
One other side lesson. We were given instruction to find the key weaknesses in the business plan and to hit them hard to let the judges know we understood them. Well, we hit them alright - probably a bit too hard. The judges were impressed we knew the weaknesses (some which they may had not know about), but in the end you have to partner with one of these businesses. Therefore, you need a friendly, but direct tone that will delve deep enough to clarify the problems, but not alienate the entrepreneur. This is not as easy as it seems, but it is do-able. Since we had so much feedback to go in for the kill, we may have crossed that diplomatic line (and anyone who knows me we, I can ruthlessly attack weaknesses with the best of them). Unfortunately, in the past few years I have learned some diplomacy that I could have used if so instructed. Again, no blame - lesson learned.
There are a few other minor lessons, but this post is long enough. Overall, the VCIC is an amazing experience. Anyone interested in entrepreneurship or finance should look into participating in this competition. You will learn an enormous amount about how the real world works. I am indebted to my team mates Ben Alarcon, Chris MacKenzie, David Lee and Simon Singh and the people who donated there time to help us Sharif El-Badawi, Bob Holmen, Thor Clark, and John Creelman. It was a great experience.
Now excuse me while I drown my sorrows.

Professionalism in the Classroom?

One of those issues that have been simmering with me since first quarter is professionalism in the classroom. While not trying to indict the majority of my classmates, but I can not help but notice the lack of professionalism within our classrooms. And I am sure it is not just this school; my guess is that these behaviors are a common hallmark of most business schools. I keep asking myself if I am out of touch or if I am expecting too much, but I keep coming to the conclusion that professionalism is lacking.
Looking back, law school, early on, made it clear that we chose to be in a school that produces professionals and, therefore, we had a duty to behave accordingly. I remember thinking that it was a bit elitist, but I now recognize that it did help to set a professional tone in the classroom when the teacher was teaching.
I wonder if, when we have graduated and are leaders of teams, we will tolerate these common behaviors in our meetings (that I equate to classes):

• Not being prepared - It is alright that circumstances did not allow you to complete the class readings, but it should not become a habit and you shouldn't waste class time by asking questions about the basic concepts that would have been obvious if you did the readings.
• Talking - Why are there conversations going on when the teacher is talking? I understand you may have a pressing question, but make a note and continue to listen. How would you react if you are instructing your team and they are not listening because they are talking amongst themselves?
• Cell Phone Ringing - I understand that there will be that one time that you forget to turn your phone off or set to vibrate, but there are people who are frequent re-offenders. A professional knows to look at his phone before he walks into a meeting to make sure it will not disturb the meeting. I feel bad for the first team I lead after graduating because if someone's phone goes off in my meeting I will make it very uncomfortable for that person.

Am I being too hard? I encourage your comments. My opinion is that you are not a professional simply because you can handle multiple information sources at once. A professional knows how to handle multiple information sources, but gives each source the proper respect and attention that it deserves. That means preparing beforehand for a meeting; listening to a speaker; and turning off outside stimulus to allow everyone else to focus.

We're Back and Running Hard!

The MBA winter quarter has started with a vengeance. Those students who thought that that Fall quarter was busy are now longing for those days. They have really piled on the work in these first couple of weeks. My gut tells me that is will begin to balance out and be manageable, but that does nothing to help these first couple of weeks.
Adding to the workload is my preparation for the Wildcard VCIC event. Our team is leaving for Santa Clara tomorrow afternoon and will return late Friday night. We having been preparing fairly diligently of the past few weeks; tweaking our valuation methods and finalizing our strategy. While it could always be better, I feel good about our preparation and think we will represent well at the competition. If we place first, we will get to move on to the West coast regional.
As I have mentioned in my early posts, this is a school that I believe in and love its strategic vision for the future. I my opinion, this school was more attractive than many established MBA programs. But my research and real world reputation are two different things. By winning this wildcard and making a solid showing at the regional will go a long way to raising our national profile. I want to be a part of improving our national reputation.

What am I reading over Christmas break? Part II

As I may have mentioned, I purchased two business-related books that I planned to read over the Christmas break. The second of these books is Crossing the Chasm by Geoffrey Moore. This book is the must have books for new technology ventures (and for those who experience some success, but suddenly found new sales coming in very slowly).
In the past, I have read parts of this book, but never read the whole thing cover to cover. After finishing reading it, I want to kick myself. Numerous companies that I worked with back in London were hitting the chasm and did not recognize it or know what to do. I even remember mentioning to an owner of an extremely successful London company that they hit the chasm and should read this book, but I never took the initiative to read it then (in my defense, I was in the process of learning a completely new software and networking environment).
For those of you that are saying, "'Chasm' what are you talking about, Speirs?": when a new company is formed and offers a new, innovative piece of technology that would solve or improve some problem, they often work hard over a year or two to get that first sale. They may even get a second or more sales depending on the market and product. They all pop out champagne believing that they are soon going to dominate the market, but something happens. The next sales are very difficult. They are confused because they have some satisfied customer references, yet they do not move these new prospects. It is at this moment that they have arrived at the Chasm.
Across the Chasm are these new prospects who are not impressed by the current batch of customer references or the current marketing approaches. To be clear, these new prospects are the holy grail; they represent the path to solid profitability for the company. Many companies die at the Chasm because to cross it requires some radical changes about how the company operates. Crossing the Chasm gives these companies a step-by-step playbook on how to attack the Chasm. Must have for all tech entrepreneurs.

Trip Up the Coast to Malibu

On December 27th, Lindsey, Gisele, and I drove north up the PCH to see coastal L.A. Since we are driving through a basin, the scenery is not dramatic until we hit Malibu. Unfortunately, this day L.A. just survived a big rainstorm and was experiencing ridiculous winds.

There were some nice-looking areas. We really liked the Manhattan Beach and El Segundo beachside areas. They had the look of a quaint beachside town. You would never know that it is the part of the L.A. sprawl. Lindsey and Gisele braved the winds to take pictures of Manhattan beach. Lindsey came back complaining of sand blown into her ears and mouth.

Driving up Oceans Avenue in Santa Monica is very cool. I am not sure what is the type of architecture of the buildings, but they had a great retro feel. We were warned of a prevalence of "grimy" people in the Santa Monica area, but we didn't see many. The pier looked very cool from afar, but with the winds we were not going to get close to it.

Continuing on, we drove up the coast to Malibu where we start going up into the mountains right along the coast. Frankly, that is all I can say about Malibu. It is neat seeing the ocean on one side with Mountains on all other sides, but Malibu appears to be solely a residential town with little commercial life (I guess they just go into L.A.). Oh yeah, we even saw a castle up in the Malibu Hills - A castle!

That was the trip, we turned around, found our way to the 405 and zipped home. As we continue to visit different parts of L.A., it is starting to lose its intimidation factor with us "small town" folks.