ReadWriteWeb

Blurb - Doesn't Need VC Lectures

Written by Bernard Lunn / October 9, 2008 6:30 PM / 4 Comments

In our search for that rare beast - the profitable VC backed venture - I interviewed Eileen Gittins, the CEO of Blurb. Blurb does Print On Demand publishing for both consumer and professional markets. They compete with Lulu, which announced today that it is "laying off 24 workers at its North Carolina plant because of the slowing economy". That is 25% of their workforce and includes their President. Eileen and I both had the same reaction: "you mean you only just learned that hard times are coming?!".

Where Were The Alarm Bells When We Needed Them?

Seeing the Blogosphere afire with tales of crisis in start-up land, with emails going from the wise investors to their portfolio companies, makes me think: no duh! Driving with your eye only on the rear view mirror is not smart. I hate to say "I told you so" but some times I cannot help myself. We have been banging this drum for a year. Not that it took a genius to see that a downturn was coming, it was bleeding obvious! We followed up with perspective here and here. When the sky started to fall a few weeks ago we started to look on the positive side.

Of course companies should keep their costs as low as possible. That has been the obvious for centuries. So last week the advice was "spend like drunken sailors?". Seriously, this kind of boom one day, gloom the next reminds me of the crazy behavior that got us into this mess and which, if you want a good laugh, you can watch here or embedded below. By the way, that video was from a year ago!

Blurb Is Just An Old Fashioned Story

The key points that came from Eileen Gittins don't sound terribly interesting, except that in today's world they are so unusual:

1. A "seasoned" management team. Like somebody at the helm who has sailed through a storm before.

2. Aligned with their VC. Some VCs push the "shoot for the moon at all costs" approach. Blurb's backer, Canaan Partners, was aligned with the push to profitability before that was fashionable.

3. Willingness to make trade offs. Sure we all want profits asap. But in the real world there are decisions and trade-offs. These may involve deferring features, leaving a market until later, being more niche than generalist. It is almost always a growth vs profit trade-off ("revenues are vanity, profits are sanity"). The Blurb story is full of those. Now Blurb are in a position to do the things they delayed earlier, while their competition is retrenching.

4. Being contrarian to some degree. Blurb got funded in 2005. They had nothing to do with advertising and you would have to be a spinmeister to call Blurb "Web 2.0". Blurb uses Internet technology (er, who doesn't) to deliver a different value proposition to satisfy a demand that has not changed since Gutenberg. Canaan was clearly ready to be Real VC and back an unfashionable concept.

And, What About The Impact Of The Financial Crisis?

We ask that question to everybody. Eileen Gittins said "we watch the economy like a hawk, because that is what we have always done, it is in our DNA". But so far, so good, they grew in September and the last quarter looks very strong. At least they don't need to go to (more) VCs, who are spending all their time with their problem companies, to ask for more capital. With all the talk of revenue vs profits trade-offs, Blurb grew revenues this year around 3x - not shabby.

Comments

Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts

  1. I agree with you

    Posted by: px234.cn | October 9, 2008 7:25 PM



  2. We can certainly do without vc

    Posted by: px234 Author Profile Page | October 9, 2008 7:33 PM



  3. Ha, my previous startup pitched three times to Caanan. We had 32% operating margins on sales growth that had us profitable in 8 months, were an early entrant into a market ($4B back when that was a lot of money) with no clear leader.

    The idea "wasn't big enough" and "we'd gone too early for revenue rather than IP to prevent market entry."

    Hint: all VC's are the same. Or, at least, they're not much more different than diet Coke versus diet Pepsi.

    The Lulu stuff is the pocket change project of the Red Hat guy, which probably tells you all you need to know 'bout that.

    -OT

    Posted by: OliverTaco | October 9, 2008 8:15 PM



  4. I do NOT think all VC are the same. That is speaking from experience working with VC. I have had both very good and very bad experience with VC. Actually you also need to get below the VC brand. This is a people business. It is not that Brand X VC Fund is always better than Brand Y VC Fund. Sometimes the Partner in Brand Y (usually consider not in top tier) is way better than the partner in Brand X VC that everybody wants to work with.

    Clearly Blurb had/has a great experience with their VC. If a VC turns down your deal it does NOT necesarily mean they are not good VC, although all smart VC are painfully aware how many great deals they reject. Its just the nature of the business.

    My beef was with VC being late to the game of advising their portfolio companies that the economic cycle has turned bad. That was obvious a year ago. Two years ago it was probable. The VCs that I know knew that. Why the sudden flurry of advice after an obvious meltdown?

    Posted by: Bernard Lunn Author Profile Page | October 10, 2008 7:16 AM



RWW SPONSORS

Grab this swicki from eurekster.com




RECENT JOBS



TEXT LINK ADS



RWW READERS