City July 24, 2012 9:45 AM

A Conversation with Venture Capitalist Fred Wilson on Buffalo's New Startup Scene

A Conversation with Venture Capitalist Fred Wilson on Buffalo’s New Startup Scene

By Kevin Purdy

Even if you don't know Fred Wilson as a thought leader among venture capitalists, your phone and your browser probably appreciate his investments in young, fun products. As a Buffalonian, you can also appreciate his enthusiasm and support for the newly launched Z80 Labs. Here's what Wilson has to say about kick-starting a startup scene in Buffalo.

Wilson co-founded Flatiron Partners in 1996, and the firm quickly became a standard bearer for the late-1990's tech boom. Flatiron had new-era media properties (TheStreet.com, Industry Standard, New York Times Digital), user-generated content (GeoCities, later sold to Yahoo!), and some flashy items that would stick out after the bubble popped (Kozmo.com). Flatiron shut down, but still manages what remains of its portfolio.

Wilson took time off to read, think, and, especially, write quite a bit about venture capital. In 2003, he co-founded Union Square Ventures, and now has pieces of many prominent web and mobile properties: Twitter, Tumblr, Etsy, Foursquare, Kickstarter, GetGlue, Meetup, SoundCloud, Turntable, and social gaming firm Zynga, to name just a few.

Before Flatiron and Union Square, in the early 1990s, Wilson was a board member at Upgrade Corporation of America, founded by Jordan Levy and Ron Schreiber, now the founding partners of Z80. Wilson, who will serve as an advisor to Z80, came to Buffalo for the startup incubator's launch, and offered to answer a few questions for Buffalo Rising.

Buffalo Rising: Your first investment was in Buffalo, with Ron (Schreiber) and Jordan (Levy). You posted about how it taught you to "roll up your sleeves.". Is that what separates a smaller incubator from the large?

Fred Wilson: I think the best incubators, and also accelerator programs ... they're obviously very different, but you can talk about them sometimes in the same breath ... things like Y Combinator and TechStars, which I call accelerator programs, whereas incubators ... having people who have done it before, around to provide mentorship, coaching, guidance, makes all the difference in the world. So if Ron & Jordan weren't involved with this, I would be less enthusiastic. They'll help these teams and say, "You might want to think about doing something a little differently," "We've tried that, it didn't work."

BR: It's hard to build a mentorship community for young startups where it didn't exist before, I imagine.

Wilson: But there are more people in this town than people probably realize, who have been successful in business, and can help provide guidance to young companies. Ron and Jordan are good people to catalyze that and make it happen.

BR: Z80 has at least one company now, and there's talk of having at least one or two companies make it to launch, with or without revenue models. What comes next after that?

Wilson: Well, Z80 should continue to live on, right? Companies should either fail and shut down, or succeed and move out.

wilson_at_z80.jpgBR: When you say move out, do you mean out of the lab, or out of Buffalo?

Wilson: No, not out of Buffalo--I hope not. The idea is, (companies) will have their first 10 employees here. Once you have your first 10 employees, it's not so easy to move your company. So I would think these companies would hopefully stay here.

I just met a company that Jordan and Ron have been mentoring for close to 10 years now, called Campus Labs--they make software for universities. I was in their offices, and they must have 50, 60 employees now. I think you can easily build a technology company here in Buffalo.

And the point you made earlier (before interview began), it doesn't cost as much to live in this town, right? So you might have some cross-advantages. Good software developers in this town might cost you $60,000 a year, whereas in New York it might cost you $100,000 a year. That's a big difference.

BR: I'm sure local developers are hoping that changes somewhat.

Wilson: I'm sure they hope it changes, but even so ... I wonder what gets you a better quality of life.

BR: Do you think Z80 and Buffalo itself can keep people in Buffalo, when it seems like there's a natural draw to Boston, Austin, San Francisco, New York, where there is, for example, Union Square Ventures, there are experienced founders ...

Wilson: I think you're not going to keep every company in Buffalo. But it used to be in New York, as recently as five, six years ago, that a lot of entrepreneurs felt they had to leave New York and head to Silicon Valley, because that's where the action was, that's where the money was ... That's changed, though. The reason it's changed is that there is now a critical mass of companies now in New York, and a critical mass of investors. It's not the same thing as it used to be.

It's not going to happen overnight in Buffalo. It could take five or 10 years.

BR: That's not what we're used to hearing.

Wilson: I've watched the University of Pennsylvania do this. In five years, they've managed to create a pretty meaningful flow of startups every year. But it took them five years to really do that. I think if I was trying to figure out what metric Z80 was successful on or not, I would give them five years.

BR: How do universities play into an incubator?

Wilson: I think universities should have incubators too, for a lot of the technology that's coming out of their labs. But I also think, knowing about the other incubators that aren't university-focused, and how they're friends with each other, networking, and working together to bring capital into town, and executive talent, business talent ... I think (universities) should be very collaborative, and not competitive. And what's good is, Z80 is not going to be competing for life sciences companies (for example). They can all kind of have their own little things that they do.

BR: Do you think Canada plays a role at all here? Being close to Waterloo, Ontario, Toronto ...

Wilson: I have an investment in Waterloo (Kik), and we also have an investment in Toronto, which is WattPad. I think there's a little bit of a triangle, right? Toronto, Buffalo, Waterloo ... those are all about an hour and a half from each other, is that right?

BR: Toronto's maybe two hours, depending.

(Note: At this point, Wilson is told he's expected elsewhere.)

BR: One last question: Nexus 7 (Android) tablet. Still a fan?

Wilson: Oh, my God, I love it. I love it. I bought a second one.

BR: You use one as a home remote, right?

Wilson: One basically sits on the living room table. I use it as a Kindle, as a remote, and also for email and web browsing. The other one I bring with me in my briefcase ... Fits in your hand, right? On the plane up here, I spent basically the whole plane ride reading on it. I use an Android phone, and it's always a little weird for me going from the Android phone to the iPad, because it's a very different interface. But (the Nexus 7) feels like a bigger version of my phone.

View image

Comments

Leave a comment

While not mentioned in this article, I believe Synacor is playing a part in Z80. Synacor releases quarterly numbers after the bell tomorrow. The stock has been one of the wild rides the last few weeks (daily swings of 10 percent aren't uncommon). Synacor's role in the Olympics with it's TV anywhere is really pretty interesting.

Score: 3 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Indeed--I could scarcely fit in all the local firms contributing space, services, and other help to Z80.

replied to benfranklin
Score: -1 ( 1 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Wow!!

1) The biomedical corridor is advancing (... I mean the actual entrepreneur efforts not merely the aggregating of institutions - which is also good).

2) This incubator has come to fruition.

3) And the possibility of the center for excellence in advanced materials.

Could it be that the face of Buffalo is changing?

Score: 4 ( 10 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Very interesting and I'm glad to hear this! I have a couple questions about it though.

Is there truly enough money here in Buffalo for it to become a major incubator for start ups?

Also, an idea was talked about on this site that we should use $50 million of the $1 Billion Governor Cuomo promised Buffalo to help Buffalo become a major incubator. However this would obviously be public money so it may not be a popular idea. But would this actually truly help Buffalo to become a major incubator and not only keep young people in Buffalo but attract young people from around the world to come to Buffalo to get help with their start-up?

I guess I'm curious how big is the money gap between a Buffalo and a place like the Silicon Valley, or any of the other cities that are major incubators. Could Buffalo actually become a competitor with those places?

Score: 1 ( 1 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Thirteen states currently have a state funds that do exactly as we propose -- fund innovative startups. And most of those are red states including Texas, Oklahoma and Utah. The well managed ones are highly successful. The few that are more about politics are obviously not.

So it's actually a fairly popular idea. Even better -- this is a fund, which means that these are investments, not grants. When the fund cashes out at the company's exit, it gets all the investment back PLUS the added value.

So after several years, the fund should grow by at least 25% if properly managed. I should note that one of my business partners has personally managed such funds for the governments of Finland, Israel, Mexico, and Chile. We are currently exploring such a fund in China, Poland and several S. American countries. Why? Because it provides capital to all these startups, and returns a profit to the treasury. What's not to like about it?

Your question about whether there is enough money is a good one. And yes, absolutely, there is enough money in Buffalo! the question is whether that money where is that money spent? If we could harness 100 people or organizations to put up $500,000, we would have that fund. There are plenty of people in the area who can do that, but the question is whether they will.

The total amount of money available for all VC and angel investing in the US was $100 billion 5 years ago. Today it is less than $20 billion. Half of all VC firms are out of business. There simply is far less money available for startups than any time in the past 20 years. (Source: Kaufmann Foundation).

We have no shortage of really good companies that are going somewhere. We find them all the time across the US and Canada. We don't need anymore actually. What we need is funding for the ones that exist.

This is why if Buffalo actually wanted to do something splashy, it should NOT do yet another incubator. (And at a paltry $4 million! What the hell is that going to accomplish? A single biotech company might ask for three times that amount, or more.) It should create a fund.

If that $4 million were instead used to fund companies, it could have put $200,000 into 20 companies. That would do more to jumpstart Buffalo innovation ecosystem than 100 more incubators. It could have found those 5 to 10 companies in Buffalo that will go somewhere, and funded them, and that would in turn pull money from national angel investors and VCs. Then with the rest, it could have found 10 other companies outside of Buffalo, ten companies willing to move to Buffalo immediately for that investment.

With that sort of investment, you would have created several hundred jobs, and those are jobs of tomorrow, paying a good salary. And those are the people who know how to create good companies. Overnight, you have created an innovation ecosystem where none now exists.

Moreover, if just one of those 20 companies makes it to IPO, that will gain national attention, and more money and expertise will flow into Buffalo. The gains keep going upward.

Instead, this incubator will at best take in 20 companies, and most will fail. Once they exit the incubator, most of those will fail. So at best, over the period of five years, you will have just a few companies that will somehow succeed. None will become billion dollar global companies. why do I say that? Because I know of no billion dollar global company that began at an incubator. That's not to say it won't ever happen, but the fact remains that if you need all that free real estate to stay in business, then it isn't a business in the first place.

BTW, the Baird Incubator is one of the few that actually is a success, and it's one of the better ones in the country. They have some top notch leadership there that really understands how this all works.

replied to Tom
Score: 2 ( 4 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Very interesting thanks for the response. I wonder why the people you talked to were not interested.. it definitely seems like something Buffalo should do if the politicians are serious about creating jobs in Buffalo, keeping young people in Buffalo, and attracting other people to Buffalo for jobs. I would think that is their main priority....

replied to Rand503
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Probably the same people who voted thumbs down on the comment that proposes a fund.

replied to Tom
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

"Because I know of no billion dollar global company that began at an incubator."

Well, here's the names of two: AirBnB and Dropbox.

replied to Rand503
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Fred Wilson makes a lot of good points, and he is correct on almost all of them. However, there are a few issues that he isn't addressing.

First, almost all incubators are a total failure. They were done in the 90s, and most didn't survive. There are still quite a lot of them out there, but almost every one requires huge amounts of public funding to keep them alive, and they will usually take just about anyone, just to justify the public expense.

Usually the companies that flow out are insufficiently capitalized and fail once they leave the incubator. They successful ones succeed by getting contracts from the local government. Why? Because if the state and local govt's are going to put so many resources into an incubator, they want results! And the best and easiest way to get results is to promise contracts to the emerging companies. The fact that many of these companies would fail except for those sweetheart deals means that they really cant' survive in the marketplace. But everyone counts them as a success.

Obviously, we should all hope that this incubator doesn't fall into that trap, as it really does no one good, except that it makes a few people rich at public expense.

II'm glad that he mentions Techstars, as they one of the few places that actually succeeds. Why does it succeed where others fail? They realized that it takes more than just free real estate and "can do" attitude to make a successful incubator. It takes real mentoring.

This, unfortunately, is where Buffalo is quite weak. The only really good mentors are serial entrepreneurs who have successfully launched at least three tech or innovative companies. (Launching restaurants, real estate, hair salons and so on don't count -- the field of innovation is a whole different animal). What you really want, though, are serial entrepreneurs who have launched at least five companies.

Why? Mark Zuckerberg is a billionnaire, but does he know how to launch a start up? Maybe yes, maybe no -- maybe he just got lucky. It's less likely that you just got lucky at two startups. At three, though, it is no longer luck but real experience. By the time you have launched your fifth company, you didn't do it by luck at all -- just about any pitfall that exists has probably come your way. what's more, you know the market and the industry niche than just about anyone.

So if a kid comes to a serial entrepreneur of that type, he can be told immediately whether his idea is a good one or not, and what the next steps are. If the company has legs, then the mentor can help steer the guy to find the right management team, find him funding, and get revenues generated as quickly as possible.

Such a serial entrepreneur is by definition someone who knows the global market better than anyone and knows all the players. That's who you want.

We have very few of those people in Buffalo, if any. We have many successful businessmen, but as I said, that alone doesn't help much at all.

With just $4 million in funding, that's a paltry amount of money, and it wont' be enough to establish an innovation ecosystem in Buffalo. If we do have great companies graduation from this incubator, where will they find money? The typical ask is around $3 million for a single company -- no way can this incubator help with that. Without funding, all these companies will simply die on the vine. Without connections to the VC and angel community around the US, there is no funding period. I don't see any plan here to address that, and that's a major failing.

The last point that I would like to address is the notion that Buffalo must "grow" it's own companies. Every region in the world that I've been to thinks the same way, except for the successful ones such as Silicon Valley, Boston, NYC or a handful of other places that have a true innovation ecosystem.

The fact is that you don't need to grow them -- you need to ATTRACT them. Big difference not understood here. But that's a whole 'nother topic.

Score: 1 ( 3 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I agree with most of your comment, but, about this sentence . . .

"The only really good mentors are serial entrepreneurs who have successfully launched at least three tech or innovative companies."

Do you know how many people in the world have "successfully launched at least three tech or innovative companies" (assuming successful means the company became profitable and/or was acquired)? It's a very, very small number. And then you go on to say the "really" good mentors have launched 5 successful tech companies. There might be, like, 3 people in the world with that kind of track record.

Also, Fred Wilson would be a pretty good mentor and guess how many successful companies he launched?

replied to Rand503
Score: 1 ( 1 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I know. There are very few of those types of people, which makes them very valuable. And sure, it's better to have a person who has only launched two companies than none. But the fact remains, if you want the very best advice, those are the people who can give it.

It will take quite some time for Buffalo to develop a small group that reach that status, and when that happens, things will really pop. As he says, it doesn't happen over night and will take several years. But that's what it takes if you want to play in the big leagues.

replied to Cardiff Giant
Score: 0 ( 0 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

all great points. I tried to make the point that Buffalo needs more money to truly compete and attract businesses. Your insight is very interesting and I think your $50 million from Governor Cuomo idea is a great one and hopefully somehow comes to fruition.

replied to Rand503
Score: -1 ( 1 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

We need a Buffalo Fund. Without it, Buffalo will forever be hobbled in trying to get an innovation platform going. I've tried reaching out to people, including those who supposedly have pull with the Cuomo, but sadly no one is interested.

And it isn't enough to just create a $50 million fund. You need serious experts who can pick companies that are going somewhere. The fact of the matter is that at least 95% of all the new innovative companies in the WNY are junk. They aren't going anywhere. In this entire region, there are about 10 max. So we have to find those companies and fund them, and then tie to them to the serial entrepreneurs, where ever they might reside. So that means you still will have about $40 million left.

What to do with that? You invest in companies outside of the Buffalo area. Why would you do that? Because once you are a major investor, then you can call the shots. You might be able to get them to relocate to Buffalo, especially if there is a strategic reason to do so (and increasingly, there is). Or to move their R&D here. Or open an office here. Or have their marketing department HQ'd here. There are many ways to skin the cat, but with funding in such short supply, any fund is in a great position to dictate the terms of the funding, and a Buffalo Fund can dictate how a Texas company will operate in the Buffalo area, assuming it still makes good business sense to do so.

So no, I disagree with some comments here -- you do NOT have to grow your own businesses in the Buffalo area. Instead, you attract them, and tax credits, IDAs grants, and such are NOT the way to attract them. Isn't it easier to cherry pick the best companies from around the US and bring them to Buffalo than continue to pour resources into the 95% that aren't going anywhere?

And think about it -- why do companies move to Silicon Valley? Because that's where all the money and expertise is. And why is there so much money and expertise there? Because the best companies move there. Silicon Valley is a magnet for the best in every part of the innovation ecosystem. Housing prices are extremely high, yet it remains a magnet. Which should teach us that low housing prices in Buffalo are NOT a magnet. So let's get over all this crap about how we have so many advantages over other places. If those advantages amounted to anything at all, we would be the biggest magnet of all. So obviously, location is not a factor in the slightest.

replied to Tom
Score: 0 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

I think it's helpful to draw a distinction between those tech startups that need a tremendous amount of funding, and those that are doing less innovative work (still unique projects) that create good jobs.

Trying to become the next social media site, is quite a bit different than putting up a more mundane site that acquires paying subscribers and sells a product world wide (and is able to fund it's own growth).

I've been a part of a number of successful software projects, and now websites (C#, .net, mysql, php, etc.). I also own commercial space in Allentown that I'm able to offer for reduced, or no rent, for similar development projects where having the companies together would increase the likelihood of success for those involved.

replied to Rand503
Score: 1 ( 1 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Those companies are "lifestyle companies." No serious angel investor or VC is interested in those as you can't make much money from them. Furthermore, they are designed to be just local companies. There is a need for them, of course, but they are not the focus of what this incubator claims to be aiming for, and they don't play a role in creating the innovation ecosystem that we need.

replied to benfranklin
Score: -1 ( 1 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Fred Wilson makes a lot of good points, and he is correct on almost all of them. However, there are a few issues that he isn't addressing.

First, almost all incubators are a total failure. They were done in the 90s, and most didn't survive. There are still quite a lot of them out there, but almost every one requires huge amounts of public funding to keep them alive, and they will usually take just about anyone, just to justify the public expense.

Usually the companies that flow out are insufficiently capitalized and fail once they leave the incubator. They successful ones succeed by getting contracts from the local government. Why? Because if the state and local govt's are going to put so many resources into an incubator, they want results! And the best and easiest way to get results is to promise contracts to the emerging companies. The fact that many of these companies would fail except for those sweetheart deals means that they really cant' survive in the marketplace. But everyone counts them as a success.

Obviously, we should all hope that this incubator doesn't fall into that trap, as it really does no one good, except that it makes a few people rich at public expense.

II'm glad that he mentions Techstars, as they one of the few places that actually succeeds. Why does it succeed where others fail? They realized that it takes more than just free real estate and "can do" attitude to make a successful incubator. It takes real mentoring.

This, unfortunately, is where Buffalo is quite weak. The only really good mentors are serial entrepreneurs who have successfully launched at least three tech or innovative companies. (Launching restaurants, real estate, hair salons and so on don't count -- the field of innovation is a whole different animal). What you really want, though, are serial entrepreneurs who have launched at least five companies.

Why? Mark Zuckerberg is a billionnaire, but does he know how to launch a start up? Maybe yes, maybe no -- maybe he just got lucky. It's less likely that you just got lucky at two startups. At three, though, it is no longer luck but real experience. By the time you have launched your fifth company, you didn't do it by luck at all -- just about any pitfall that exists has probably come your way. what's more, you know the market and the industry niche than just about anyone.

So if a kid comes to a serial entrepreneur of that type, he can be told immediately whether his idea is a good one or not, and what the next steps are. If the company has legs, then the mentor can help steer the guy to find the right management team, find him funding, and get revenues generated as quickly as possible.

Such a serial entrepreneur is by definition someone who knows the global market better than anyone and knows all the players. That's who you want.

We have very few of those people in Buffalo, if any. We have many successful businessmen, but as I said, that alone doesn't help much at all.

With just $4 million in funding, that's a paltry amount of money, and it wont' be enough to establish an innovation ecosystem in Buffalo. If we do have great companies graduation from this incubator, where will they find money? The typical ask is around $3 million for a single company -- no way can this incubator help with that. Without funding, all these companies will simply die on the vine. Without connections to the VC and angel community around the US, there is no funding period. I don't see any plan here to address that, and that's a major failing.

The last point that I would like to address is the notion that Buffalo must "grow" it's own companies. Every region in the world that I've been to thinks the same way, except for the successful ones such as Silicon Valley, Boston, NYC or a handful of other places that have a true innovation ecosystem.

The fact is that you don't need to grow them -- you need to ATTRACT them. Big difference not understood here. But that's a whole 'nother topic.

Score: 0 ( 2 votes ) Vote up Vote down Report this comment

Leave a comment