Today Congress is holding hearings on what, if passed, would effectively become a censorship system for the internet. The threat comes in the form of two bills, currently making their way through the legislative process – Protect IP Act (PIPA – S.968) and Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA – H.R.3261). Below is a video that describes the bills and their potential impact (and you can read more at http://americancensorship.org/):

PROTECT IP Act Breaks The Internet from Fight for the Future on Vimeo.

The effective censorship of websites (by blocking or slowing access to them) is what I find particularly disturbing. We already have a fundamental access problem on the internet. As internet access becomes increasingly important to society – truly part of the fabric of our democratic society – lack of access to the internet (and lack of high speed access) is becoming an increasing social and economic issue. Lack of internet access contributes to an increasing gulf in our society. And it’s a problem that government has recognized – for example when it required Comcast to offer low income households favorable rates on internet access in exchange for granting approval to the Comcast/NBC merger. I’m not arguing (at least in this post) for some kind of universal service fund for broadband access (and as a “capitalist” by title, I hope that the primary solution to this can be a market driven one). I’m pointing out that we already have some challenges around access to the internet that we haven’t even addressed. And now we’re talking about layering on an access hierarchy on the other side of the equation. The vast majority of the increase in the productivity of the american worker that we’ve seen over the past few decades has been driven by technological innovation (we’re working smarter, more than we’re working harder). Do we really want to take a primary driver of that technology innovation – the internet – and set up a system that effectively stifles the ability of new companies and new technologies to reach users? A system that rewards the embedded power structure of big business in the United States? I’m not arguing in favor of web piracy. I’m arguing for common sense. And against trusting the people who sued to block the VCR and MP3 players from coming into existence (two technologies, which they later ended up significantly benefitting from) by giving them the power to effectively shut down new businesses and censor our access to new technologies.

There’s a reason that the backbone of the internet is governed by “peering” relationships. We’re all peers on the internet. Let’s not forget that.

I’ve written a few times about Trada – a business that vastly simplifies search marketing for advertisers through a platform upon which Trada’s crowd of SEM experts build and manage campaigns on behalf of advertisers. The results to far have been impressive. The company has been helping advertisers increase the effectiveness of their search marketing and lower the amount of time required to manage search campaigns. And they’ve done this for companies spending as little as a few thousand dollars a month on search to as much as $500,000 per month. The result has been a rapidly growing company that is increasingly looking to expand the reach of its platform.

Today Trada announced that it has expanded its marketplace to Facebook, allowing advertisers to leverage the Trada crowd of expert optimizers to manage Facebook campaigns. To do this they’ve also launched a creative marketplace that will allow designers to contribute to campaigns on a performance basis. More on that a bit later.

The Facebook opportunity is massive (Facebook generates somewhere around 25%-30% of all display advertising impressions on the internet), but relatively nascent – supported by a limited toolset, requiring very different strategies than search or traditional display marketing, and as a result to date much more difficult for advertisers to take advantage of. The beauty of the Trada model is that it uses humans to perform tasks that are uniquely human in nature. We’ve found this to be effective in search, and expect that the same will hold true for leveraging the unique, but often very disparate data that Facebook enables marketers to make use of. And while entire companies are being built to try to help marketers better take advantage of advertising on Facebook, Trada is using all of their learning in search to extend their marketing capabilities into Facebook – a distinct advantage.

A quick note on the creative marketplace. Trada CEO Niel Robertson and I have been talking about this idea for the better part of 2 years. We knew that we’d need something like this to extend the Trada platform to Facebook (and beyond). “Creative” in search involves the relatively straightforward creation of text ads. Creative on Facebook involves the greater complexity of images and additionally needs to be constantly refreshed (the decay curve of Facebook ads is extremely rapid). I’ve wondered if a business could have been built around this kind of creative marketplace – using performance incentives to reward the creation of various display ad types. Ultimately for Trada, they built their own system (the fact that it is closed loop within the Trada platform solves a number of key issues vs having built this as a stand-alone business). We’ve actually had a version of it up and running for our tests with Facebook for several months now and it works beautifully.

There was great coverage today of the Trada announcement, including mention in The New York Times, Techcrunch and MarketWatch.

I’d encourage you to check out Trada if you’re interested in extending your advertising to Facebook or looking for better performance out of your search campaigns.

The title of this post is meant to be taken literally, not metaphorically. Do you control your domain?

Last Friday one of our portfolio companies briefly lost control of its domain. It wasn’t the fist time we’ve seen this happen and, as you can imagine, the result could have been disastrous (in this case we were able to lock down the domain before anything nefarious happened, but people don’t steal control of your domain for anything other than doing bad things, so it was lucky that we were able to avoid a serious issue). Different registrars have different rules for transferring domains around. In this case all it apparently took was someone writing the registrar and claiming the domain was in fact theirs. We believe (but aren’t positive) that the registrar did send an email to the contact listed in our account stating that the domain was to be transferred unless action was taken by us (that the process is that simple is a matter for another post altogether). But this email either didn’t get to us or was not acted upon promptly enough to prevent the transfer. The company then jumped through hoops for several hours to get the domain first locked down (so the party who stole it from us couldn’t redirect it) and ultimately transferred back.

We rarely (really never) talk about domain security when we’re talking about other security measures that companies take to lock down their data, transact securely, etc. But clearly it’s extremely important to make sure that you have (and always maintain) control over your domain. This starts with making sure your domain is a corporate asset – meaning that it’s not in the account of a founder but in an account that is owned and controlled by the company itself. It’s also extremely important to make sure the contact information in this account is up to date. And that you pay attention to any notices that your registrar might send you (in a timely mannor).

So seriously. Make sure you are the master of your domain.

For the past several years Shareholder Representative Services (SRS) has been publishing aggregate data on trends in M&A. These aren’t just high level observations, but rather are nitty gritty, details around the some of the most important terms contained in purchase agreements. As a self proclaimed M&A geek, I live for this stuff. And if information is power, this study dishes out plenty. And as a result helps level the playing field for companies (who transact very infrequently), their investors (who transact a bit more often) and buyers (who often have dedicated M&A practices who do nothing but execute transactions).

I’ve been fortunate to be involved in a number of Foundry related transactions in the past year. Knowing market trends (and in some cases – and here’s where your VC may really be able to help you – knowing details of a specific buyer’s historic willingness to negotiate around certain terms) is extraordinarily valuable.

You’ll find the full SRS report here. There’s a brief statement about their methodology at the beginning that’s worth taking a quick perusal through before you dig in (the data are based on the 196 transactions on which SRS acted as representative).

A couple of trends that stood out to me:

- 86% of all transactions were all cash. With a favorable borrowing environment and many companies holding on to large cash reserves an increasing number of deals are all cash.
- 24% of transactions contained an earn-out. I’m generally not a fan of earn-outs and the continued relatively frequent use of them is a little surprising to me (this figure was 25% last year).
- Average Escrow period was 15 months. The detail here is pretty interesting. The most common escrow period was 18 months (44% of deals), and 12 months was the 2nd most common period (24% of deals).
- Escrow size averaged just under 13%. This is always a hotly debated issue in transactions. Interestingly the median escrow size was over a point lower at 11.7%. There’s a chart below showing the distribution of escrow size.

One item that wasn’t covered in the study but which I think would be interesting is to see the % of transactions where there is a buyer initiated management incentive plan of size (say above 10% of the total consideration). We’re seeing more and more buyers use this tactic to either incent management (nice view) or separate management from their investors (the not nice view). Either way, they can be significant and I’d love to see how common they are and what percentage of deal proceeds are set aside for this purpose.

Remember when I said that Brad can’t sing? Here’s the proof – a recording session in Jason’s studio for our I’m a VC video (Brad is wearing headphones with the music track piped in – all the better for us to clearly hear Brad himself in this outtake). Enjoy!

There’s a wealth of experience and expertise around us every day. We probably don’t give most people we pass running around our respective busy cities a second look, but rushing by you are people with interesting expertise and experience. Artists and actors; olympic athletes and monks; sailors and graffiti artists.

SideTour looks to unlock this community and enable them to market and generate income off of their unique expertise. These experts – “hosts” in SideTour’s terminology – use the SideTour platform to advertise their experiences. SideTour helps them market these experiences and handles bookings, billing, refunds, etc. on their behalf. SideTour events are designed to be shared in groups – often people who haven’t met each other before the experience (although the platform does allow for group booking). And the entire experience ultimately becomes about the event, about the host and about the participants. The results so far have been fantastic.

Importantly, SideTour isn’t just a listing service for events, as some other companies pursuing similar models are. And SideTour heavily curates the experiences hosted on its site to ensure that they are both unique and that the hosts have true expertise. The variety of experience on SideTour really show the effect of this curation (and you thought I was kidding about luging and monks).

I met the SideTour team at the beginning of TechStars NYC and immediately loved what they were up to. And I love the story of four founders, friends and colleagues for over a decade, coming together to form a business (sounds like the Foundry story). They’ve made incredible progress over the summer at TechStars.

The company announced today a $1.5M seed financing led by Foundry and RRE (there’s a great write-up on TechCrunch here). This money will help the company further build out the functionality of the SideTour platform and begin expansion to markets beyond its launch market of New York City.

It’s great to have the chance to work with them!

I recently waked into a pitch meeting for a social networking related business and was surprised by what I saw. I had interacted with the entrepreneur over email – taking a look at the initial business plan and setting up the meeting – but we hadn’t met in person before. In front of me were three guys in suits, each in their late 40′s or early 50′s, with an older Dell laptop and a paper print-out of some product ideas. And as I sat there listening to their pitch I couldn’t help but think about how differently I might have reacted if this team was in their 20′s or 30′s, dressed in full tech/nerd hipster outfits (or at least jeans and sneakers), and whether there is a negative age bias in venture capital. Here were three guys with 20-30 years of business experience, but I was having trouble getting past my expectation of what they were going to look and act like, versus what was in front of me.

An LP of ours once asked a question that dealt with a similar subject (ironically, although we were in our Boulder office and the LP in question was in jeans, my partners and I were all in sport coats, as we always are when presenting to our investors). I can’t remember exactly how he phrased it but it was something like: “When do you guys get to be too old to do this? To relate to the younger entrepreneurs who are starting companies in the investment areas in which you guys focus.” To be quite frank, this question had never actually occurred to me before. Likely because I still think of my self as young and hip (although I am neither). And because I figured that as long as we are passionate about what we’re doing, we’ll relate to entrepreneurs who have that similar passion (some variant of that is how we answered our investor at the time).

But actually it’s true. Certainly there is some amount of age bias in venture. Early stage tech is considered somewhat of a young person’s game. And while I’ve worked with many very experienced entrepreneurs who were and are fantastic, I wonder if the initial pangs of question I felt on entering a room with 3 middle aged guys in suits pitching me their business plan is something that is deeper than a momentary hesitation.

I’d love your thoughts on this.

This morning Federated Media announced that it has acquired Lijit Networks in a private stock deal.

I’m incredibly proud of what the Lijit team has accomplished in the almost 4 years we’ve been investors in the business – charting a course that wasn’t exactly always a straight line, but one that has always placed publishers first. As a result of this never wavering focus on web publishers, Lijit has built a large and ultimately very valuable company.

I’ve always thought that Federated was the natural acquirer for Lijit (and we’ve been partners with Federated for some time now). Federated shares Lijit’s focus on publishers (“the best of the independent web”), but unlike Lijit, who helps publishers generate revenue through better monitizing their non-premium inventory, Federated sells unique, high value premium inventory across their federated group of publishers. For a time, Lijit pursued a similar model and having bumped into Federated in many a sales process we can attest to the strength of the Federated sales team. Ultimately Lijit chose a different path – integrating with over 30 buying channels and standing up their own RTB exchange. All the while, Lijit has been rapidly growing the list of publishers they work with by providing not only an advertising channel, but search, analytics and insight tools to help Lijit publishers better understand and engage with their audience.

The fit is a natural one. Federated brings to the combined entity a large and established sales force and the ability for Lijit publishers to access premium content relationships and advertising. Lijit brings a strong technology background, a rapidly scaling publisher base and the ability of both Federated and Lijit publishers to place their inventory to auction through the Lijit exchange.

As part of the acquisition I’ll be joining the Federated Media board of directors (along with Federated founder, John Battelle, FM’s CEO Deanna Brown, FM’s early investor from Panorama Capital Chris Albinson and Fred Harmon of Oak Investment Partners, who led the large Federated financing in 2008). I’m thrilled to be working with such an accomplished group and to continue my close relationship with Lijit through my continued role at Federated Media.

I’d also note that, while the financial details of this transaction haven’t been released, this is a significant win not only for Lijit and its investors, but also a nice outcome for Boulder (Lijit’s offices are in the heart of downtown – just upstairs from the Foundry office, in fact). While ultimately the exit will be measured by the outcome of the combined Lijit/Federated business, based just on this deal’s value alone this ranks as one of the larger transactions for a Denver or Boulder based business in the last decade.

You can read the FM release here (or on their home page, which they’ve completely taken over with the deal announcement), Lijit’s founder and CEO Todd Vernon’s thoughts here and FM’s founder and chairman John Battelle’s post on the deal here.

Congratulations to both the Lijit and Federated teams! This is big!

Like you, I’m a pretty busy guy. I’ve always been high energy and (I hope) high velocity. My job requires me to be in many places at one time (and at any one time have a few dozen different things spinning around in my head). It’s tiring and doesn’t always leave time for the kind of balance I look for in my life. There’s always someone else to talk with, some other conference or “it” even to attend; another great idea to look at investing in. But in the last 6 months or so I’ve really hit a different stride that’s allowed me to both feel more productive and more balanced. Given that every one I know struggles with this I thought it would be worth putting a few ideas down on paper in hopes that others will pile in with what’s worked for them.

Gmail: Gmail is simply fantastic. Sitting here it’s hard to even contemplate the number of years I spent in the purgatory known as Outlook/Exchange. It was a strange purgatory – I didn’t really know I was in it, but at the same time always had an uneasy feeling about it. You’re probably already on Gmail (what hipster tech person isn’t?), but just in case – it’s at the top of my list of things I’ve done in the past year that have really impacted my time. Plus Gmail enables a bunch of other productivity enhancing apps (see immediately below for a few of them).

Unsubscribe.com: If you don’t have Unsubscribe.com run, don’t walk, to get the plug-in. It’s free now, which makes the bar to install it even lower (although as I posted previously, I’d gladly pay for this functionality). The key here is to actually use it. And use it often. I’m absolutely relentless about my use of Unsubscribe. I’ve had the same email address for at least a decade and over the years the newsletters and lists have piled up. At some point I tried to unsubscribe myself from them, but it was impossible to stay on top of. Now with a click of the Unsubcribe.com button they’re gone. I’m not joking when I say that I’ve cut back my email traffic by 150 emails A DAY by my relentless (and continued) use of this tool.

SaneBox: Here’s one you may not of heard of. I understand that messing with people’s email is a recipe for disaster. And everyone has their thing in terms of how they like to have their email sorted. For me that wasn’t any of the other email productivity tools I tried and it definitely wasn’t Priority Inbox from Google. SaneBox uses information in my social graph, contacts, calendar and past email behavior to separate out my email into important (in my inbox), deal with later (send to *another folder* to deal with later, possible spam (anything that’s not caught by Postini) and blog comments (there are some other options as well if you want to mess around with it). What I like most about it is that non-important emails never get into my line of sight. And since I have no email self control this turns out to be pretty important for keeping me from getting distracted. I have one inbox for stuff that I need to deal with right away and another (that I can train by the way) for everything else that I can batch process a few times a day. Slick.

Just say no: Not to be a jerk about it but I say “no” more than ever now. It’s too easy to end up with a full schedule and running from meeting to meeting can make for a very unproductive day (and despite this increase in “no’s” I still have plenty of days where I’m doing just that). But I’m ruthless about saying no to scheduled meetings. Instead, I’m pushing people to Community Hours, which is a great, rapid fire way to meet new people; or I’m calling people; or I’m saying “no”. Meeting time is generally reserved for companies in the Foundry portfolio, companies in which we’re thinking of making an investment and little else. It’s really helped me prioritize what’s most important (which is to say companies in the Foundry portfolio and companies in which we’re thinking of making an investment).

Few scheduled calls: See above for step one of this process. Step two is that I try to stay away from scheduled calls. The more on my set schedule, the less flexibility I have to either work in solid blocks of time or to respond to things that come up during the day. I posted a while ago about my need for a call list app. I found one (CallList), which is a bit kluge but generally does the trick (it’s sole purpose is to manage – both online and in an iPhone app – a list of people that I need to call along with some basic notes and information to give me context). I use this app to effectively manage these call backs. This opens up time on my schedule and also allows me to better make use of down time (for example on my drive to the airport, which if you’ve been to DIA you know is a long one from anywhere one actually might want to live in Colorado).

Batch email: All the research suggests that humans do better when they concentrate on one task for a period of time, rather than jumping from task to task. I’m trying to move my behavior from an interrupt driven mode where I am constantly stopping what I am doing to check in on email, to one where I’m batch processing instead. So I work in blocks of time and try to keep my email in the background except when I’m actually working on email (which is still plenty of my day given how much of my job is done over email).

Get out of the office: I wrote an entire chapter on this in Do More Faster and I’m trying to take my own advice to heart. Maybe it’s Boulder. Or maybe I can get away with it more because I’m a VC. Whatever it its, I’m trying to take more walks, hikes and bike rides in lieu of lunch meetings, “coffee” and meetings where I sit in a conference room. I’m not talking every meeting, but a few times a week where instead of sitting around talking, I’m walking and talking. Not only are the meetings more fun, but I find that I stay much sharper for the rest of the day when I get both some time outside and some basic exercise. Obviously these are to be avoided if you need to whiteboard something out or if you need to dial someone else in, but if you think about it you’ll realize that you have plenty of meetings each week that can happen outside of the four walls of your conference room or office.

Don’t worry about Inbox Zero. I was never a great Inbox Zero guy – I use my inbox to keep emails to deal with later too much to get down to fewer than about 5-10 emails at one time. But it used to stress me out that I always had a few things left to do. No longer. I try to get back to people who email me in a reasonable period of time. And I try to respond to most emails (I’ve given up on “all” emails in that last sentence in the last 6 months as well – some emails just don’t deserve to be responded to…). But I’m a lot less stressed about it and as a result I’m a lot more efficient at getting back to people.

Don’t panic! In this world of social media and always being connected, there’s somehow always the sense that you’re missing out on something. And you know what – that’s right. At this very second you’re missing out on something. It’s probably fun too. And there are lots of other cool people involved. But not you. So don’t worry about it and pay attention to what you’re doing now, vs. what you’re not doing. This goes for missing something in your Facebook feed, letting something pass you by on Twitter, etc. If it’s that important someone will repost or retweet it and you’ll see it. Or maybe not. And the world will go on.

This is one of those topics that could go on forever. These are just a few ideas that have worked for me to lessen the load at “work” and make more time for “life.” I’d love your thoughts as well. (and here I’ve focused on the work side of the equation – there’s another entire post that one could write on the life side)

Yesterday we released a video written, produced and directed by my partner Jason, that attempts to capture “the human struggle of four venture capitalists trying to make the world a better place.” From the response on Twitter, Facebook and elsewhere on the web it seems to have hit a chord with people; and I hope has been taken for what it was intended – a parody of lives as VCs (certainly no one can accuse the four of us of taking ourselves too seriously!).

It was for me a unique experience, not just creating the video but also recording in Jason’s studio and watching the editing and finishing process. For 5:56 of video (including outtakes) we spend hours recording and filming (not to mention all the time Jason spent mixing, re-recording and editing). It was a blast. Especially the day we spent running around Boulder in full costume(s) filming. We turned quite a few heads and at a couple of points had a full audience watching us perform. I learned a few important things that I thought I’d share:

I can’t sing. Like most people I think I have a pretty good singing voice. I sing in the car, sing along to my iPod, occasionally sing in the shower. And I thought I really had it. So when I got to the studio I belted it out like I was feeling it (and I was). And then Jason played it back for me and it turns out that I suck at singing. It’s disappointing to admit, but it’s true. Alas, I better stick to my day job.

Brad sings even worse than I do. If I can take any solice in the fact that I can’t really sing, it’s that Brad can’t sing either. And he’s even worse than I am. So at least there’s that.

Go big or go home. There was no question for the four of us that if we were going to do this, we were going to go all out. For me that was the beard (thanks to my wife Greeley for shaving it down to JT perfection the night before the shoot!). And for all of us (thanks to the internets) the costumes. If it’s worth doing, it’s worth doing as embarrassingly as possible!

Impromptu can work (sort of). Most of our shoots were meticulously planned out by Jason in advance of the crew arriving, but the scene we shot in the shower (which I’m a bit mixed on, actually) was completely impromptu. Like “hey – do you think we could all fit in the shower?!” kind of impromptu. Sometimes you just need to go with it!

I love my partners and the fact that Jason conceived of this project and more importantly that we actually went ahead and did it is a testament to why I like working with them so much. Here’s to having a good time. And to not taking yourself too seriously!

Photo credit, Brian Sweeney (who did yomans work the entire day of filing by both being in charge of still photography but also carried around the music, carted equipment and generally did anything/everything that needed doing. His wife Megan Sweeney was the lead videographer and editor, btw.