1/ 🧵Everyone who thinks VCs are cold-blooded has never met an activist public markets investor. I worked on “activism defense” for tech companies during my tenure at Goldman. #StarboardValue took stakes in $WIX, $SPLK & $CRM this week - quick take below:
2/ They see an opportunity to buy strong growth at less premium, as well as reap the cash flow benefits of increased focus on profitability
3/ Their thesis on all 3 companies: they trade at below-market multiples due to below-peer margin performance (fat)
4/ And that each company can execute to improved profitability in line with peers (or in Salesforce’s case, higher than peers as it is growing relatively slower)
5/ There’s barely a mention of product, strategy. Just a simple assertion: you can do better with less cost. In tech companies, cost = people.
Lesson for the startup people: the public markets are the final arbiter for any company, and they see companies as financial statements.
6/ It’s much easier to improve the quality of a business that is small and private (funded by investors that you choose) than one undergoing a financial dissection every quarter by every onlooker, with valuation (and stock based comp) changing every hour.
7/ The very smartest companies didn’t allow capital availability to create bad habits, and were capital efficient even during the easy times - they created internal discipline. They tried to build better (profitable, efficient) companies, not just bigger ones.
8/ Medium-smart companies will use this macro to dramatically change the way they operate. For many who have a big war chest even today, this still requires the leadership team to generate internal urgency/discipline.
9/ The companies in denial will let their remaining 2, 3, 4 years of runway guide them, refusing to make hard performance and focus decisions before they are forced to, hoping the environment improves.
10/ A friend of mine recently said about layoffs at his very loved and respected large ecommerce software employer, “lovely people, but 80% don’t do anything crucial for the business. people just don’t do performance management if they have no incentive.”
11/11 Uncle Starboard won’t accept that anymore. He and his friends will ask two very interesting questions about every software company: how many people do you really need to run this place? And do you really need to spend that much money to grow? Better to get ahead of him.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1/4 No soundcloud, but: if you are a founder or investor and want to shape the future of AI, please reach out! We are growing our team and always on the hunt for people starting enduring companies. sarah at conviction (dot) com
2/4 We also welcome interested people to apply for our programs: Communities (our event series - first one is full but you'll get auto-waitlisted for the future):
1/ Right now, founders are despairing that they can't possibly change their business *enough* within the 2+ year runway they have. But this is based on the (skewed) high-cash, high-valuation but slow-action norms of the 2015-2021 startup environment.
2/ I just got back from dinner with @dugsong (and a bunch of other people I admire - thanks @ericwu01) who only ever spent $14M to build @duosec to $100M+ in ARR before its sale to @Cisco.
3/ I have seen companies dramatically change the quality of their business (gross margin, growth profile, strategy) very quickly. Companies have had upside-down, unit-economic negative economics and come out the other end to become enduring. This agility is the magic of startups.
1/ PSA 🚨 from your local cybersecurity and safety nerd!
Have been experiencing a pretty sophisticated social engineering attempt recently. Thread on what to watch out for:
2/ Step one: Someone attempts to reset my @Apple password from a new device in Sacramento (I’m not there)
3/ Step two: They call from a spoofed phone number pretending to be “Jose, a technical specialist from Apple support that has detected suspicious activity on my account and wants to validate the password resets.”
1/ The assumption of some growth investors that they’re going to permanently get paid billions for just identifying companies that are somewhere along a “triple, triple, double, double, double” ARR trajectory seems sus
2/ Markets are not that inefficient. If all you do is look at two numbers like ”3X ARR” and 110%+ NRR” you don’t have a differentiated strategy
3/ If an investing strategy is a moneymaker but not tough to execute, dollars will flow into it, and prices will rise until the returns are gone
1/ I was today years old when I was advised for the 2nd time in my career to “be less stylish” because l might “intimidate engineers” I am working with. 🤯
2/ Five years ago I suppressed my feelings and nodded blankly when told this, but this time I just blew up. What the hell. Reinforcing Silicon Valley brotopia is not helpful.
3/ I have the privilege to work with a lot of truly great engineers in the past decade, both women and men — of whom are far more stylish and far less than me. Somehow, we seem to be able to talk software development and business.
1/ 🧵Discussion from this AM: Good early stage SaaS startup engineering today is a game of intelligently walking the tightrope of shipping speed and scalability/quality. Most fall off on the wrong side (the latter).
2/ Teams need to A) stand up end-to-end systems in order to learn from users as quickly as possible and B) rapidly rebuild, rearchitect, deepen parts of the product as they learn about requirements. Who is responsible for those two opposing forces in your company?
3/ We’re collectively making better software because this iteration loop is so much less costly than it was 5 years ago — due to cloud scalability, web distribution, early adopter startup customers, and microservices architectures.