I bootstrapped a $10 million company and need serious help
We are just a group of friends who got in over our heads. We have no network and are having trouble scaling. We are looking for a CTO or solid lead web engineer, someone with solid marketing experience, and maybe even a new CEO. We want to grow this thing huge, are ready to make bold moves, and we want to have the right experience on the team so we can do things right. Craigslist recruiting is not cutting it.
This is our cry for help. If you want to come work with us to build and grow the company 10-100x in the next couple years... Whether you are an engineer, designer, marketeer, or know someone who is... please get in touch. Now is the time, we have some amazing opportunities and really want to push amazing work.
please get in touch directly: Ben@socialprintstudio.com @benjaminlotan on twitter
ps. we are in San Francisco.
88 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 143 ms ] threadTry working with an executive coach - I work with Bryan Franklin. It's easier for you to develop leadership and management skills than it is for an outsider to really grok your business and share your vision.
Regarding the marketing role, be sure to get the right kind of marketer: https://medium.com/on-startups/1308a8f17137
Most of all: go slow on executive hires. There are a lot of "good talkers" out there. An empty seat is better than the wrong person.
I don't have a company myself, but some people I know who do have had a lot of success linking up with the local university's Business programs (MBAs, or in my case a Master's in Management of Technology)... many professors have consultancy businesses on the side, and you can also draw on the students' abilities - for example, as a student, I got assigned to a 2M/year company, they gave us insider access and, with the teachers' guidance, we gave them a free consultancy.
I also recommend a Master's in Management (MOT or an MBA), running a company yourself you'll get a lot of value out of it. I see many California universities offer one (MOT or similar), maybe there's a graduate here on Hacker News who can recommend one.
After you've filled in the blanks, you'll feel much more comfortable, and at that point make some hires to deal with those specific business areas, while still maintaining overall control. As others have said, you guys are doing something right or you wouldn't be in this position in the first place.
If I was over in SF, I'd love to help you out, but I'm based in Sydney.
Anyway, best of luck to you.
Traditional "interview and put in place" hiring strategies are built around the needs of traditional large organisations with massive amounts of existing organisational momentum and plenty of time to recover from mistakes or retrain duff hires.
Small fast-moving companies don't have those advantages, and shouldn't hire that way. You're obviously innovative - don't forget to apply that creativity to your business processes.
This is great advice that can apply to much in life.
This. So very, very much this.
A bad hire at the executive level won't merely slow you down. You might lose ground, or possibly even crash and burn. I've seen it happen, and I'm sure I'm not the only person here who can say that.
Perhaps at the executive level, but I'm not sure I agree with this as a general hiring strategy. This mentality might go pretty far to explain why there are so many companies that claim they can't seem to find enough talent, while un(der)employment is still high.
Companies interview and interview, but are petrified of hiring "the wrong person" so they just keep on interviewing fruitlessly.
For instance, hiring a bad dev can be very costly. There is all of the time/work required to find, onboard and provide knowledge transfer, the real expense associated with the employee (i.e. compensation), and the fact that it generally takes time to determine it's not working. In that time the product hasn't moved forward as it could have and the company is out of a lot of time and money. And, frequently, it is the principals who are taking time away from building and running the company in order to try to hire/train. So, it's an even bigger disruption to the company.
For, say, a bootstraped company that has a small dev team (or the founders are the only dev) and not a LOT of money, this can be really painful or game ending. There is a real choice to be made between rolling the dice that you'll find good talent, or pushing forward at a slower pace, but without the disruption of hiring/training and without the additional expense.
They can do shoddy work that negatively impacts the ability of other employees to do work, they can cause reputational damage to the company if they're public-facing, they can create a toxic work culture that disincentives other employees.
In fact, if you're going to bring anyone in, bring in someone who tells you he needs time to get to know your business and work with you closely before he tries to start making any big changes. The guy who wants to jump into action on Day 1 is often someone who's going to have you quit dancing with the date who brought you to the dance to start chasing after bright shiny objects - many of which end up only being fool's gold - instead.
He is. Zero to $10mm is no small feat. He needs to hire a COO, not step down as CEO. The founder is almost always the best person to run the company.
> There are a lot of "good talkers" out there.
Beware the articulate incompetent ;-)
from what we've seen and what we've heard, basically starting at $1 million/year in revenues, you will hit a serious new set of problems (some call these inflection points) at every doubling thereafter (i.e., 2M, 4M, 8M, 16M)
obviously there are exceptions (some businesses are simply born to be able to handle massive amounts of revenue in a flat manner) but basically, every time a business doubles, the problems change. this doesn't mean you're incompetent, or that you lack skills.
just be careful when you talk to private equity, investment banking and growth capital folks and do not give up ownership of your business easily, if at all.
if they haven't hit you up yet, they certainly will after your posting this. like moths to a flame, they will appear. or maybe wolves to a kill. or vultures.
be especially suspicious of companies that wish to incorporate your firm before you're ready.
also beware of competitors or "consulting firms" calling you up to find out more about your firm for the purposes of a "purchase or partnership" who really just want to squeeze out as much info about you as they can before never calling back.
either way make sure you have good legal representation.
I have bad news: Nobody has been there before.
Perhaps they have managed $10M rev companies before, but they haven't managed your $10M company. No matter what, the prescription is going to be the same:
1. Make serious, solid decisions,
2. Get some of the right
3. Get some of them wrong
4. Course-correct the wrong ones.
I'm taking a wild guess here, but is there any chance the real problem is that you are a bunch of friends? ie, that there is no one with final authority? If so, that will not be solved with a hire.
Anyway, good luck. We should all have such high-quality problems. (btw, currently bootstrapped to 1/10th your number. Prior company founded was an $80M VC-funded company.)
> and possibly being disingenuous to your audience here
honestly i don't believe this awe-shucks bullshit for a second, especially from someone who built a $10 million company in 2 years.
Have you guys (talking to the OP here) thought about reaching out to 37signals for mentoring/advice? They seem to know or at least think a lot about avoiding VC and bootstrapping. They also seem very plugged in.
Part of what you guys are feeling might be the lack of support/advice/mentoring from investors. For that matter, you might consider looking at a relationship with a VC you think you can trust that doesn't involve financial investment (at least not yet). They may be willing to get involved just for mentoring without any financial obligation on the chance that when and if you do need funding they will be first in line at a shot. Maybe.
Or lying.
That said, you totally have a point. Maybe they're not the best for consulting with for rapid, head over heals growth.
There is a case to be made here that social print studio should take investment at this point. They have product fit, and now they want a sold or dominant market position. It's a good moment for them and they could probably get pretty favorable terms. Further, they might not be able to achieve a sustainable market position without investment. That's probably the real question.
Disclaimers: 1. I work for Vistaprint, so possibly a competitor though we shuttered our photo printing business years ago as not profitable and without a clear path to profit. 2. Your site is constantly crashing Safari on an iPad original. (not complaining, just explaining why I don't know what you actually do) 3. All content and opinion in this post is mine. I don't speak for my employer.
If you make a public announcement that you have vast amounts of money or cashflow and that you are looking for help because you are out of your depth then you will find that this will attract besides a few possibly capable people a (probably larger) number of people that will just focus on relieving you of your cash, your company or both.
Personally I would never approach someone making such a call for help for any kind of compensation at all because I (1) don't want to be associated with the sharks (think of it as an easy way to differentiate) and (2) feel that they are better off to go out and do the approaching themselves.
Given that I have in the past approached people in situations like this, and have helped them out as much as possible without compensation (and in some cases spending some of my own money) should hopefully be enough to convince you that there are indeed standards here and that I try to hold others to the same standard as I hold myself to.
pat yourself on the back and get yourself some local angels on board. they get to wet their beacon and you reap the rewards of a business coach.
Concerning your scaling pains, lots of people probably already do some form of what you're trying to do; you may do better to assimilate/enfranchise them rather than competing.
Why not continue to innovate your successful bootstrapped business?
The most important thing for you to consider is whether or not you actually want to compete with the major players in the field. It sounds like you are doing well managing your boutique operation, and frankly, based on what you've provided it sounds like you are killing it. Boutique operations often destroy their larger competitors, and are far more nimble to have the next best thing that becomes popular and doesn't require "funding" to generate revenue.
Yes, you could hire a new CEO to help track down funding and manage all the acquisition inquiries that you've received. But, if you have a successful bootstrapped business that is generating profits, why would you want to deviate from your current course?
Good luck!
PS - The sharks will all want to be CEO and talk about comp before they've tried out your service...they're easy to flush out.
(I suspect there's also still room for negotiation, even if YC isn't advertising that fact any more. Three guys and an idea? 6% More than $10MM in revenue? Let's talk.)
First, I can completely appreciate your mentality. When the software company I founded was at about $650,000 in annual revenue, I was convinced that it was time to bring in a seasoned leader who knew how to take the business to the next level because I, as a first-time entrepreneur, had certainly not done it before.
In retrospect, that mentality was a mistake. The truth is that you understand the business better than anyone else and there is no magical skill or talent that someone else can bring to the table that will so fundamentally improve things.
Do not make the mistake of thinking that if you transfer responsibility to "better" executive that they can do a better job. That person will bring their own strengths/weaknesses to the table. They will need to rely on a team to make up for their handicaps just as you are looking to do.
In this situation, I recommend the following:
- First, clearly identify exactly what issues are vexing you. If it seems like "everything" or "things are just overwhelming" then make a list of just the most important issues.
- Then pick 1 or 2 or 3 that you can actually focus on solving. You can't do more than that at once, but imagine how much impact fixing your top 3 issues will make on the business! In fact, you should try to quantify how much money you are losing or missing out on by not resolving these issues to give yourself a sense of what you should budget to solve them
- Then block out or delegate everything else, and focus 100% of your creative energies on how you can resolve these issues. Use any and all resources available to you, including friends, consultants, or even Hacker News ;-) If you don't even know where to begin on an issue, then find an expert for THAT ISSUE (which is different than finding a new CEO).
- Then keep at it, keep refining your ideas, listen to your intuition, and push through until you make progress.
I made the mistake of thinking other businesspeople were "better" than me or more talented than I am. The truth is you just need to know what your strengths/weaknesses are. Then lean on the team around you or new people to help you fill in the weaknesses.
Hope this helps,
Josh
In addition to some executive coaches, who will help you grow personally, it seems you need some good advisors who can help you with the problems that you're facing. Some of these could have experience with technical issues you're facing, while others could have managerial and supply chain experience. It wasn't clear from your website if you have any advisory board or not.
NOTE: there is a very big difference between board of directors and advisory board, what you need at the moment is advisory board, don't give out board of director seats unnecessarily unless you raise a VC round of funding or go IPO :).
By getting a good set of advisors you will be able to fill the immediate gap in your skills/experience that you're facing and may even decide if any of those (or their referrals) need to be hired, if at all, for executive positions.
Now how you find advisors is non-trivial so I will advise you to look for people with experience in your industry and domain, and contact them. Even if their companies seem to be mildly competing at times, you'll be surprised how many people will meet with you over coffee and might have recommendations. If you decide to have a person come on as an advisor, don't give them any compensation till they start providing value. If someone comes on very strongly and will only help if compensated, then perhaps that is not the right person.
Good Luck!!!
Your bound to get some great advice and gain some valuable insight.
Basic takeaway is not to add structure until it's painfully obvious that you need it. If you hire a VP or CxO from a large firm, he's going to staff you up like a large firm, and you can't afford that yet.
I'm going to write you a longer email tonight. My wife and I run Cheergram (http://cheergram.com) and we've always admired what you've done at SPS. We had pretty good success with Instagram cards last holiday season and now we're looking into other kinds of cards, invitations, artwork and prints. We're also doing some wedding-focused stuff (think hashtag + prints/books).
Maybe there's a way we can share ideas, work together, or even join forces. I do all our development and it sounds like we have a similar tech stack. I also have some connections in the print industry.
No matter what, keep it up and I agree with most of the commenters here.
PS: I went to http://cheergram.com/ can I saw the footer twice ("Copyright 2013...")
Perhaps you need some mentors, or just folks you are comfortable talking to -- perhaps other founders?
As an angel investor I have found that the one of the things I am called on the most to do is just let people talk stuff out. I don't feel like it is very useful but people really like it.
If Intel, GE, or Mircosoft hired a consultant to advise them on the right move, the vast majority of people on HN would scream bloody-murder and speak about it as a perfect example of big-business and its stupidity. What hypocrisy!
Ben, the reality is that you clearly have moved past Steve Blank's description of a start-up; you have found a working business model. Now, the challenge is to find out if that business model is something that can last for 5 years or 50. No one on this board has run a successful company for 50 years. Thus, everyone, definitely including myself, is well out of their league.
However, since entering the old school world of finance, I have realized that there are many men and women who are twice our age who would be able to give you great advice. You need adult supervision and that is OK. You don't know how to hire an executive (i.e. adult supervision). Thus, you should first find someone who can help you find adult supervision. A great place to start is in the 'boring' industries: finance and manufacturing. Find a wise advisor who can help you find an executive to lead.
You are no longer a start-up. Running a post-start-up company like a start-up will kill it as quickly as running a start-up like a Fortune 500.
It is theoretically possible to hire someone like what you describe, but it seems vanishingly unlikely and much more likely to cause damage.
As many others have pointed out, each business is unique, and the fact that the OP has reached the level of success they've reached is proof that they have a fairly solid management team already. Most likely, they are falling prey to impostor's syndrome - "one of these days someone will discover I'm a fraud and don't deserve all this success".
The cure for that is not to give in to the impostor's syndrome, but to reject it by observing the simple evidence that someone who builds a $10m business in 2 years is clearly very talented and skilled.
Ultimately, if the OP doesn't want to run this business anymore, they could just sell it. But if they want to keep running it, there's no way to abdicate to some "adult supervision" that will magically make all the problems go away. It will just replace the problems with a different set of problems, specific to the new hire.
A better approach if the OP wants to keep running this company is to build some good relationships with mentors who can help the OP grow into the role.
I'm in the "the OP needs a mentor" camp. His team is clearly doing a lot right and a mentor can give them the confidence to do the rest of it right.