Picture
So HootSuite just raised a $165 million Series B (led by Insight Venture Partners, with participation from Accel Partners and existing investor, OMERS Ventures). To put it in context, $165m is an IPO-sized financing (Marketo raised $80m in theirs; Tableau $254m). 

This is huge validation not only for HootSuite, but also for marketing technologies as a wholeThe space has been hot for quite some time, starting with a spate of acquisitions in the social listening / widget / ads space --Buddy Media (Salesforce), Radian6 (Salesforce), Context Optional (Adobe)--and continuing with recent activity in marketing automation and analytics: Eloqua (Oracle), ExactTarget/Pardot (Salesforce), Marketo (IPO), Tableau (IPO), EdgeSpring (Salesforce) and Neolane (Adobe)So HootSuite's continued growth and success must also be understood in light of the continued Marketing Cloud Wars between Salesforce, Oracle and Adobe

So what's going on here? Simply put, customer-facing technologies are changing rapidly (the Internet, mobile and social), which is causing buying behavior to change, enabling and necessitating the need for a new marketing technology stack. HootSuite -- if it continues to dominate its space -- might well be a kingmaker in the battle to consolidate this stack. (From personal observation, it seems the majority of CMOs we've talked to at BrightFunnel are using HootSuite; there is tremendous value in this #1 market share rank). 

What's mind-boggling about HootSuite's meteoric rise is that it only just celebrated its 4th birthday. As an entrepreneur, it's certainly an inspiring and humbling success story. It appears that next, they've got their eyes set on world domination: 

“This capital gives us additional resources to expand quickly and strategically into new markets, innovate rapidly, and deliver on our vision around the world” 
- Ryan Holmes, CEO of HootSuite

 
Picture
Too often, it's said that B2B marketers aren't good at being creative. That we can't be funny and effective at the same time. To those critics, I say: boo! And I want to present a brilliant counterpoint. No, not my alma mater Salesforce. Sure, Marc Benioff is a genius enterprise marketer  -- unlike, say, his sporting-event management-challenged mentor -- but that example is tired. 

I wanted to give the example of an emerging technology company, BlueJeans (aka Blue Jeans Network) that's made 3 exemplary moves for an enterprise tech company. This is a great case study for any emerging enterprise company:
(1) "Roominator" video - TechCrunch ran an interesting story profiling their latest marketing campaign. You have to watch the video to understand. I LOL'd (at the Blue Rhino moment, to be precise). I almost cried (at the baby). I was afraid for  the protagonist (choosing between The Wife and The Boss). Why is it brilliant? Because it hits the technology buyer with EMOTION. Instead of talking about boring video conferencing technology, it gets at the universal trade-off between Work and Life we all face. It's memorable. It's funny. Just watch it. I'm not saying every CMO should go hire professional actors and writers to create a similarly slick video. But learn from its smart messaging. (Sell whiter teeth, not peroxide-laced toothpaste. Don't make your premium sushi sound like dead fish).
(2) Work From Home Positioning (and subsequent Yahoo trend-surfing) - BlueJeans Network has positioned themselves as a Work From Home solution, which everyone can relate to (and is a secular, growing trend); vs. another player in a crowded-sounding space like "video-conferencing." Not only that, they effectively and tastefully trend-surfed the minor scandal at Yahoo related to Marissa Mayer's comments on WFH.
(3) Company name - The company name itself is a smart play on the value of the product. It's not "RemoteVid" networks. It's BlueJeans. Love it or hate it as a name, you know what it stands for. What this suggests is that even the technical founders of the company were savvy about marketing and positioning from inception.

Any emerging enterprise technology or SaaS company can learn from their example. Great example of creative and effective B2B marketing. Let's celebrate it. 


 
Picture
Begun, the Marketing Cloud wars have.
Today, Salesforce.com announced the acquisition of ExactTarget for $2.5 billion.  

SALESFORCE EXACTTARGET ACQUISITION FAQ:
Why is Salesforce.com buying ExactTarget?
Marc Benioff has publicly stated that the marketing cloud is a big priority for him. Just over 90 days ago, he said: “We need to buy more marketing companies. We want to be the company you turn to for sales, service, marketing and the platform.”  Well for once, you can't blame him for talking too far into his roadmap.
 
Why Does Salesforce.com Care About Marketing?

Marketing matters to Salesforce because they want to get the massive dollars that brands and retailers spend on marketing. There is simply a much larger addressable market if you solve the needs of marketers versus merely focusing on sales people. As we know, the CMO IT stack is a mess, and Salesforce intends to help sort it all out (and make a buck or two in the process).

Salesforce is specifically focusing on B2C marketing, because that's where they are weak -- Salesforce CRM is not used by brands. In fact, Salesforce established Retail as a target segment a few years ago. And it's no secret that it wants to go after brand marketers -- it acquired Radian6 and subsequently bought BuddyMedia for that exact purpose.

Who is Salesforce at War With?
The answer that question always starts with Oracle. Besides Salesforce, Oracle is a prominent proponent of their own Marketing Cloud. They acquired Eloqua in December 2012, of course. Additionally, Adobe is the third horse in the race. Arguably, they have the most fleshed-out marketing cloud -- thanks to acquisitions such as Omniture and Efficient Frontier -- but paradoxically they're the most quiet about their aspirations.

But You Said Salesforce Would Buy Marketo?!
I was wrong. The nice thing for Salesforce in this acquisition is that ExactTarget has already bought Pardot, a Marketo and Eloqua competitor. So they are getting a two-for-one deal.

Author: Nadim Hossain is CEO of BrightFunnel, and formerly the chief marketing officer of PowerReviews (acquired by Bazaarvoice). 

 
Picture
I ran across an interesting post on the rise of inside sales teams in startups, by Scott Irwin, a General Partner at SaaS and enterprise-savvy VC Rembrandt Venture Partners. He notes that "inside sales jobs are growing at 15X the rate of outside sales roles." That's an eye-opening data point, and if you like at job openings in the software industry, seems to pass reality check. 

In a nutshell, inside sales is high-velocity sales: no travel, shorter sales cycles (<90 days), and lower price points (<$100k/year). Inside sales has given rise to successful companies Salesforce.com and Webex, and new challengers such as Box and even the aptly named InsideSales.com

But What Does Inside Sales Mean for Marketing? 
A common mistake is to draw a parallel between inside sales and inbound marketing. It's not that simple. Inbound marketing -- by itself -- is poor man's marketing. Pure inbound marketing is a great concept for a corner florist or neighborhood butcher. If you've come to this blog, that's not you. For marketing professionals growing high value (i.e. high multiple of sales) enterprises, time is money. Waiting patiently for leads to trickle in isn't -- by itself -- a smart approach, especially if you're a venture-backed company. What's needed, instead, is what I call High Velocity Marketing (HVM), which is expressed, simply as follows:

HVM = Inbound Marketing + Outbound Demand Generation

Thinking of marketing as high-velocity, rather than inbound, is a lot healthier -- and effective -- approach to marketing for inside sales-driven companies.

In other words, rather than creating a high quality webinar, with a name brand customer advocate, let's say, and waiting for people to find it through search and word of mouth alone, what a high-velocity marketer needs to do is to quickly get that content promoted to the right people.

Ironically, this is a consumer marketing problem -- "how do I get a person to see my media?" B2C companies, of course, are generally all high-velocity in nature (unless you're buying a Gulfstream, but that's high velocity of an entirely different kind). For a B2B marketer, the idea isn't to engage someone and serve an ad to them, but instead, it's to get them to take a high-value action, such as a meeting with an inside sales rep.

Purely inbound marketing is an awful way to to solve that problem. It would be like throwing a party and only relying on people to stumble upon it, without making the effort to promote it through emailed invitations. Likewise, promoting B2B marketing content through paid channels is critical to High-Velocity Marketing. The distinction is as follows:

Inbound Marketing = blog posts, downloadable assets, etc.
Outbound Demand Gen = distribution via newsletters, display ads, etc. 

Note that unlike penny wise, pound foolish inbound marketing approaches, the distinction isn't about paid vs. unpaid. Ultimately, you pay for your inbound marketing (whether it's done by an employee or an outside professional), same as you do for outbound marketing (whether you rent a list, or spend time/money building one over the course of years). 

I, for one, welcome the new era of High-Velocity Marketing. It makes B2B marketers more of a revenue function, and therefore more critical to the organization. And it's also more fun. 

 
I recently came across the Marketing Technology Landscape infographic below. Like the LUMAscapes that undoubtedly inspired it, it is meant to shock the viewer with the sheer volume of logos included. 

Naturally, my first reaction was that there must be some grade inflation going on here -- perhaps a few categories had been invented, or perhaps the definition of "marketing technology" stretched to include more companies than reality would warrant. What I found, instead, surprised me: the mass of vendors included appeared to be quite legitimate. 

So my skepticism turned to nerdy joy -- finally here was visual proof for what I've known at a gut level, as well as through sometimes painful experiences: we are being crushed under the weight of so many marketing tools. Yes, many of these tools are amazing advances, and they are supposed to enable and inspire us, but at the end of the day, they are making decisions harder, not easier, and are not helping CMOs and their direct reports gain truly actionable insights. 

And they're not helping disparate marketing teams -- the quants and the artists -- collaborate or gain a common view of the customer. And they're certainly not doing enough to help CEOs and Boards of Directors with the timely insights needed to instill confidence in the right actions, plans and budgets. That task will have to be taken on by the next wave of marketing technology innovators.
 
Picture
Source: Moviedraft.com
"We need to buy more marketing companies." 
-Marc Benioff, 02.28.13

"Marketo announced today that it plans to conduct a registered I.P.O. of its common stock"  
-Marketo Press Release, 02.26.13

It's like that awkward moment in a romantic comedy, when everyone knows that two characters should get together, except for the protagonists themselves. It's come to that with Salesforce.com and Marketo. As a proud alum of Salesforce.com, and satisfied former client and friend of Marketo, it's especially frustrating for me to watch this obvious love match between best-of-breed Software-as-a-Service companies take so long to happen.

Of course, the would-be couple only has themselves to blame. Salesforce initially looked to build its Marketing Cloud with sexy social enterprise acquisitions -- namely Radian6 and Buddy Media -- which were targeted to consumer brands more than its bread and butter B2B enterprises. At the time, this seemed to be a bold -- and perhaps even brilliant -- move by Salesforce, as it instantly gave it credibility not only with consumer brands such as Burberry, but with CMOs of all stripes. But as is often the case with M&A, the company hit some road bumps along the way.

Marketo, for its part, also looked to sprinkle on itself the magic dust of social, with an acquisition of Crowd Factory -- a B2B social application vendor -- in April 2012. 

But the time has come for each to put its youthful dalliances with social enterprise apps in the rearview mirror. Marketo finds itself now competing with Oracle, as a result of Oracle's $871 million acquisition of Eloqua. If there is one rule of survival for mature enterprise software technologies, it is this: do not mess with Larry Ellison. Oracle, of course, is Salesforce.com's nemesis. One analyst, Rick Sherlund of Nomura, even praised the Eloqua deal because it "should allow Oracle to better compete with Salesforce.com." 

But the synergy between these two companies goes beyond merely having a common enemy. For all the sizzle surrounding Salesforce.com's re-positioning itself over the years as a Cloud Computing leader, Social Enterprise vendor, and now champion of Customer Companies (though evidently an enemy of English teachers everywhere), at its core it is a SaaS CRM vendor for B2B companies. And these companies are embracing marketing automation technologies at a rapid pace. So it's only fitting that the company's next acquisition will be Marketo. I just hope for both that they don't wait too long, as there is an unglamorous but reliable German suitor waiting in the wings.

 
Picture
I recently sat down with Dave Hersh, former CEO of Jive Software (NASDAQ: JIVE). Dave grew the company from its inception as a small open source project with no revenue to a $55M, pre-IPO company (and a $1.1B market cap as of today).

NH: What lessons can we take away from Jive's success?
DH: With Jive, it wasn't until 5 years into the company (2006) that things started taking off. We hit the sweetspot - with the product, with sales, with Facebook emerging. We thought: "this is a new category that's emerging, and we're not going to lose it." That's the benefit of bootstrapping. You can be patient for the right opportunity.  

"That's the cool part about B2B  -  there's lots of room for serendipity"
NH: What advice do you have for b2b/SaaS entrepreneurs?
DH: Find your hook -- what's your hook of value? Something that's unique to your product. For example, Demandbase's hook was "target specific companies" (vs. people). You have to have a unique hook to succeed -- it's noisy out there. The other thing to ask yourself is: "is it a platform?" It's always an issue: can it be useful out of the gate for enough people?

NH: Should startups be worried about competition during the early days?
DH: A lot of it comes down to solid execution. It really doesn't matter if two companies are starting in the same space at the same time.

NH: What can you tell us about Crushpath, which you co-founded after Jive?
DH: I co-founded Crushpath with Jive's former CMO, and currently serve on the board. Crushpath is doing really well, and offers an interesting lesson. The entire original premise of the company was wrong. Customers said they wanted one thing, but after we built the initial product, they didn't use it. But they really liked this one feature, which became the whole company. That's the cool part about B2B -- there's lots of room for serendipity and you can keep trying, keep trying, keep trying. And eventually, find the right fit. But if you raise too much money, you might not be able to do that.
 
Picture
I recently sat down with Sean Jacobsohn of Emergence Capital Partners. For those not familiar with the firm, they are the LinkedIn of VCs: quietly producing big results, including early investments in Salesforce.com, Yammer and SuccessFactors. Sean joined Emergence last summer, after an impressive career as a SaaS executive at YouSendIt and Cornerstone OnDemand

"Don't take [seed] money from a later stage VC. If they don't follow on, it sends a bad signal."
NH: What is Emergence Capital's investment focus?
SJ: We focus on companies between $500K - $5M ARR, which we we think will get to $100M ARR within 4-5 years.  We partner with our portfolio companies on go-to-market and team building.

NH: How many investments does Emergence Capital make per year?
SJ: We make about 5-6 investments a year, which allows us time to be a value-added partner.  Out of our new $250M fund, we expect to make a total of 20 investments.  
We have quite a ways to go since we've only done 3 investments in this fund. 

NH: What fundraising advice do you have for earlier stage SaaS companies?
SJ: Focus on stage-specific firms.  A few exclusively focused on SaaS include Cervin, Illuminate and Rincon. To start, you may also want to draw upon friends and family. If you're just starting out, get a Minimum Viable Product created and get a couple of paying customers. Investors almost expect that, because it's so easy to do.

NH: What mistakes do SaaS companies make in raising VC funds?
SJ: Don't focus too much on the valuation for the first round of funding. If you raise $1M, it's unlikely to be the last capital you put into the business. If you're successful, you'll need more capital, and if you're unsuccessful you'll need more capital. You have to consider the challenges of getting a follow-on round. 

NH: What about raising seed capital from a later-stage VC?
SJ: I highly recommend that you don't take money from a later stage VC at a seed round. If they don't follow on, it sends a bad signal. We see it all the time -- where a company with VCs provided seed capital, but choose not to lead the later round. There's more than enough early stage money out there. And the early stage guys will be more focused and give the necessary support.  In the rare case the later stage firm wants to lead your next round they likely will want an insider's discount.  

NH: How many firms should a company approach?
SJ: My advice is, be focused. People talk. If word gets out that you've been fundraising for awhile, you might appear stale. Also keep in mind that when you have a meeting, you probably only have one shot.  Only a small percentage of firms will get a second look.