Just got back from Silicon Valley. It was a short trip this time, specifically for the DFJ venture challenge (we were a finalist team), but we also packed it full of meetings, including First Round, DFJ, and a former Infoseek founder.
I'm again amazed at the cultural difference between Seattle and Silicon Valley. This has been poked at a bit on the Seattle Tech Startup list, but just being there for four days this time generated a few observations.
Go work for Microsoft
Obviously, there aren't a lot of startups in Seattle compared to the valley. But what's striking about Silicon Valley is the tone of the city, more than anything else. Starting a software company in the valley about as common and widely legitimate as "working for Microsoft" is here. It speaks towards Paul Graham's thoughts about the message a city sends you.
A city speaks to you mostly by accident—in things you see
through windows, in conversations you overhear. It's not something
you have to seek out, but something you can't turn off.
Brent and I were sitting in Red Rock Coffee in Mountain View, and everyone was talking about executive summaries, and term sheets, and viral activation loops. It's hard for a beginning entrepreneur to find conversation that sharp in a public place in Seattle, but in Mountain View, it was just in a coffee shop.
Advertising as a legitimate model
Pitching in Seattle, we almost always have people asking questions about our monetization strategy. Athleon makes money in a variety of ways, but the best received here is the "application model", providing software as a desktop app or software as a service. It's hard to ignore that a lot of the internet investors and entrepreneurs here are ex-Microsoft, and that people paying to use software makes the most sense to them.
In Seattle, we got used to our monetization model being the first thing people asked about, and we preemptively led talks in that direction to make sure we were proactive about explaining it in more detail. In the Valley, people said "yes, we get it. premium software + ads". Instead, they wanted to talk about everything else -- how much traction we had, how big it could get, and how much money we needed to do it.
The next big thing
What seemed to be the most important to the people we talked to was if Athleon could be "a billion dollar business" (we heard this many many times.) Andrew Chen, a popular Seattle transplant into Silicon Valley, suggested that in order to get the very best employees and the investors with the most value-add, a company could not be anything less than a game-changing 1B dollar company. DFJ gives a full-size, solid gold frisbee to all its companies that sell for more than a billion.
A 50-million dollar business is considered highly successful in Seattle. In the valley, its called a "lifestyle business". Yikes.
Obviously not all Valley investors are looking for huge plays like this, but I think it was substantially more common than in Seattle.
Not better, just different.
What I took away from the trip was not that Seattle doesn't understand startups (though based on our difficulties raising capital, it would be very gratifying to assert that). Instead, the key idea is this: If you're the next big thing, then advertising makes sense. And if you're not going to go for the advertising play, you don't have to be next big thing.
If you're an application model, you can have 50 paying users, and you'll be making money. It's hard to make a lot of money, though, because revenue scales up linearly with the number of users you have. But it gives you something to bootstrap on.
In the advertising model, you have to get big, fast. Because in most cases, brand advertising rewards having a large number of uniques in a vertical market, each new user you add increases the overall CPM of your site. And if you're under a certain pageview threshold, nobody will give you crap for CPMs. Revenue scales non-linearly, which gives the potential for huge revenue numbers, but those early ramp-up years really suck.
Seattle's Message
To go back to what message a city sends, I'll speculate that Seattle says "make something sustainable." I don't have a lot of evidence to back this up, and if I did it would be another blog post entirely. But there's a certain desire to "get rich slowly" here in Seattle, more, I think than other places.
Food for thought anyways.