Posts Tagged ‘powerful language’

Peak Performance

Tuesday, October 3rd, 2017

We are 10 years into a bull market run and a UBS Investment analyst at a London event with a global bank’s resources this morning suggests investors in a late cycle phase continue to be “pro risk assets (equities, credit, real estate) with a defensive stance.” Short-hand for “I have no conviction”?! As prudent entrepreneurs, executives and investors, we don’t have the luxury with our own money and endeavours. We must commit to a strategic direction and have convinced ourselves.

Why Should They Care?

Thursday, January 19th, 2017

I hate being “pitched” ideas, it immediately feels like my interests (building a trusting relationship) are being subordinated to advance your interests (line your pockets). Yet we all need to attract ideal customers or investors with a memorable description of our impressive value. How else can they recall when they need your product, service or proposed investment? You need a clear crisp 1 or 2 sentence statement. It needs to embrace:

  • Legitimate immediate value
  • Impressive results from its’ application and use
  • Improved performance, not problem solving
  • Your target audience’s aspirations
  • It needs to be specific, not too general

It is not about your approach, technology or ideas. Nor is it a sales tag line.

“We have created a platform to resolve the shortcomings of wealth managers, who put their interests before their customers” is interesting but it tells me little about what is really in it for me.

Contrast this with “We dramatically improve HNW investors’ performance, security and peace of mind in complex and ambiguous situations”, which begs the immediate question “great, tell me what would you suggest in this situation?” You have given the other party a reason to care about you (their self-interest), to immediately delve into a pragmatic not conceptual discussion and to recommend you to others.

© James Berkeley 2017. All Rights Reserved.

 

Losing The Potential Investor

Monday, November 7th, 2016

do-not-enter-traffic-control-sign-in-san-francisco-picjumbo-com

 

Why do so many executives and entrepreneurs lose control of discussions with potential investors at an early stage in the capital raising process? Most don’t have a route map. A set of small steps that starts from the first approach direct or by their adviser and takes them through and beyond committed capital into the value creation phase. Since they have no way of knowing where they are, they don’t know when they are lost.

Here is three common mistakes, and quick ways to avoid the landmines:

  1. A Failure to Identify the “Economic Investor”. Definition: The individual within the investment firm with the ability to approve the investment, the ability to sign off on the terms sheet, whose fund  will support the investment into your business, who will be held accountable for success or failure and so forth. In large firms, private offices and funds, of course, there may well be multiple “economic investors”. Obstacle: Too much time is spent with non-investors or worse, you are caste as a peer of the junior folks, never welcome in the inner sanctum. Next Step: It is your job and that of your adviser BEFORE you enter the conversation ideally to know, who the economic investors are specifically and to work out the ideal conditions (warm referral) in which they will respond favourably to your request to meet. Thereafter, the goal is to build a comfort level and sufficient trust that an informal or informal relationship can ensue.
  2. Hiccup or Fatal Diversions. Having broken the ice with the “economic investor” in a first call or meeting, he or she asks that you meet with some of his junior analysts to qualify the investment opportunity, as he is currently “travelling / busy this week / unable to respond quickly” (code: you are not my priority). You have two options: say, “No, quite frankly, we are both first, making a strategic decision on whether to invest in a potential relationship, unless I am wrong we don’t need others to decide that for us. If not now, when can we meet or talk next?” or “Yes, we will happily agree to talk to them but we must have a definitive time and date for us to speak again. Specifically, to compare notes on what we hear and more importantly, to agree the nature and direction of our relationship.” The mistake many entrepreneurs make is once they meet the junior folks with a propensity to please them, they start engaging in a more detailed conversation (sharing follow-up information with them, agreeing to their next steps). They are now a “plaything” of the junior people, which is great for them but potentially deadly for you. The economic investor watching from the sidelines is quite happy to allow this to happen because it is one less priority for them, creates distance (another layer of protection) and the unpleasantness of rejecting your proposal. You have now descended from the executive floor to the second floor, not only had a conversation when the elevator doors open, you are now following them through the corridors on the second floor, at their speed and direction, getting further away from the executive’s office. I find that entrepreneurs of an amiable disposition or those that somehow feel fortunate to be in the building are most susceptible. There is also a cadre of restless entrepreneurs, who won’t take heed of their adviser’s warnings. Bye bye!
  3. Talking About Valuation Before Defining The Investor’s Objectives – I see this so often it is almost laughable. Unlike a game of monopoly or snakes and ladders, this isn’t bad luck, this is self-inflicted pain. You know the question is coming your way, you either choose to neatly sidestep it, by re-framing the conversation in the investor’s self-interest or you allow yourself to tread on it at your peril. Think about this way. How many times does the investor respond, “Wow, you are massively undervaluing your business” or “That is an eminently sensible valuation”? Perhaps, 1 in a 100. I’d say, 30% respond “that’s way too rich for us” (immediate termination), 40% respond “we are struggling with those kind of valuations”  (highly probable termination) and the final 29% “tell me where did you get that valuation from” (needs a lot of convincing). You are left constantly defending rather than explaining your approach to making your investors money. If it comes up early on, you are wise to say, “it would be unfair to throw a valuation at you without first explaining how we intend to accomplish your objectives and secondly,  determining whether a relationship is in both of our best interests. If you are willing to listen, we’ll happily address it at the appropriate moment.” (Note, if they won’t listen, they almost certainly see you as a commodity. Do you need that kind of investor relationship?).

© James Berkeley 2016. All Rights Reserved.