Category: Business

• Grinding it out over the long-term

  Fred Wilson’s latest blog post about “grinding” tells the story of how Twitter solved the infamous “fail whale” problem that plagued its platform in the early days. I remember that whale, as I’m sure many of you do as well. It was a problem and, according to Fred, it was a real threat to the business. The solution wasn’t all that sexy; though sexy solutions were attempted. The team just rebuilt everything, piece by piece. And eventually the fail whale problem went away.

  The lessons here go well beyond just this Twitter example (or at least, it triggers something for me). Here’s how Fred ends his post:

  If given a choice between a flashy operator or a grinder, I will take a grinder every time. It is a much higher percentage bet. It requires faith and patience and the results are sometimes hard to see. But if you look at the results from grinding it out over a long enough time frame, you can see the power of that approach.

  This kind of long-term patient thinking can be difficult, especially in an increasingly instantaneous world. We are all drawn to magic solutions, hot stock tips, and new condos that are destined to double in value over the next year. I suppose that’s partially why so many people enjoy playing the lottery, even though the odds of winning big can be as low as 1 in a million.

  Being a grinder is largely a higher percentage bet because you’re taking a longer, more disciplined, view. Warren Buffet has, admittedly, no idea how stocks will behave over the next week or year, just as I have no idea how condo prices in Toronto will behave over the next week or year. Instead, Warren chooses to bet on “The American Tailwind” and I choose to bet on the role of Toronto as a global city.

  Warren first invested in an American business in 1942. He was 11. Over the next 77 years, the S&P 500 would go on to return an average of 11.8% annually. Had he invested in a no-fee index fund and reinvested all dividends, his gain would have been 5,288 for 1. In other words, a $1 million investment would have grown to $5.3 billion on a pre-tax basis. (See: The compound effect.)

  77 years is, of course, a long time. But I am sure you get the point: faith. patience, and tenacity — even when, sometimes, the results can be hard to see. Real estate development is very much that kind of business.

  2019.12.01

• A theory of genius

  I thoroughly enjoy the way that Paul Graham reasons through arguments. There’s something hyper rational about it. And even if you happen to disagree with his position(s), you still end up appreciating the way he has taken you through his logic. I guess that’s what you get when you combine a computer scientist with someone who clearly likes to write.

  His latest essay is about how to do great work. Conventional wisdom, he explains, has it that you really need two things: ability and determination. That’s how you win. And that’s how you create new things. But Paul makes the case for a third ingredient — one that is arguably even more telling than the first two. Here’s an excerpt:

  If I had to put the recipe for genius into one sentence, that might be it: to have a disinterested obsession with something that matters.

  Aren’t I forgetting about the other two ingredients? Less than you might think. An obsessive interest in a topic is both a proxy for ability and a substitute for determination. Unless you have sufficient mathematical aptitude, you won’t find series interesting. And when you’re obsessively interested in something, you don’t need as much determination: you don’t need to push yourself as hard when curiosity is pulling you.

  He refers to this as his “Bus Ticket Theory of Genius,” because bus ticket collectors are an example, in his view, of a group with a “disinterested obsession.” They’re not collecting bus tickets for any particular reason, other than because of interest. And when you have this kind of obsession with things that (ultimately) matter, it can lead to important discoveries.

  Think Darwin and his obsession with natural history.

  But the other reason this topic resonates with me is because it makes the case for passion projects, side hustles, creative pursuits, and all other irresponsible things that seem to get harder to fit in the older we all get. I am believer in this. There’s tremendous value in indulging in the things that stoke our curiosity, even if they might seem to silly to others.

  And so I will leave you all with this final thought/excerpt:

  It might be at least as useful to ask yourself: if you could take a year off to work on something that probably wouldn’t be important but would be really interesting, what would it be?

  2019.11.26

• Google exhibit demonstrates commitment to STEAM

  As part of this year’s DESIGNART festival in Tokyo, Google Hardware’s Design Studio (led by Ivy Ross) partnered up with Li Edelkoort to create an exhibition that placed Google’s latest hardware products alongside contemporary design objects. Objects that you might find around a home, such as ceramics and furniture. The exhibit is/was called COMMA (it closes this weekend).

  Here is a photo from the exhibition (there’s a Google Pixel 4 XL in this arrangement):

  

  The point of the exhibition was to make you pause (hence the “comma” part) and consider the ongoing conflation of design and tech. It’s about humanizing technology, but also showing you how this is now integral to the way in which Google develops products. All of this is noteworthy because, as many of you know, I am firm believer in the value of art and design.

  A few years ago I wrote about a movement being championed by the Rhode Island School of Design (as well as many others) to transform STEM into STEAM. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math subjects have long been the focus of education agendas. What the STEAM movement aims to do is insert the arts and humanities into this focus.

  What you are seeing above — from one of the largest companies in the world — is recognition that, yes, there’s tremendous value in that one additional letter.

  Photo: Hiroto Miura via Google

  2019.10.26

• What you do is who you are

  I very much enjoyed Ben Horowitz’s last book called, The Hard Thing About Hard Things. In fact, five years later, I still find myself going back to it in my mind, particularly the bits about high quality decision making.

  So I am looking forward to his latest book about how to create and sustain the kind of business culture that you want. It’s called, What You Do Is Who You Are, and that should give you a sense of where this is going.

  Here’s an excerpt from Ben:

  Because your culture is how your company makes decisions when you’re not there. It’s the set of assumptions your employees use to resolve the problems they face every day.

  It’s how they behave when no one is looking. If you don’t methodically set your culture, then two-thirds of it will end up being accidental and the rest will be a mistake.

  Your culture is who you are. Who you are is not the values you list on the wall. It’s not what you say at an all-hands. It’s not your marketing campaign. It’s not even what you believe.

  It’s what you do. What you do is who you are. My new book aims to help you do the things you need to do so you can be who you want to be.

  If you’d like to pre-order a copy, you can do that here. 100% of the proceeds will go to anti-recidivism and to Haiti.

  2019.10.11

• A taxonomy of moats

  Jerry Neumann’s recent blog post on the “taxonomy of moats” is a great summary of the ways in which companies — and perhaps even cities — can protect themselves against competition.

  Here’s an excerpt from his introduction:

  Value is created through innovation, but how much of that value accrues to the innovator depends partly on how quickly their competitors imitate the innovation. Innovators must deter competition to get some of the value they created. These ways of deterring competition are called, in various contexts, barriers to entry, sustainable competitive advantages, or, colloquially, moats. There are many different moats but they have at their root only a few different principles. This post is an attempt at categorizing the best-known moats by those principles in order to evaluate them systematically in the context of starting a company.

  And here is his taxonomy of moats. He identifies four main sources:

  

  As a sidebar, consider how this might also apply to cities.

  Scale, for example, matters a great deal. We know that as cities get bigger, people tend to walk faster, have broader social connections (the relationship is super-linear), and be far more productive and innovative.

  If you’d like to read Jerry’s full post, click here. And if you’re interested in this space, I recommend you also check out Fred Wilson’s recent post on, “The Great Public Market Reckoning.”

  2019.09.30

• The new decentralized workforce

  

  A few weeks ago the WSJ published an article about Toronto’s growing tech talent pool, arguing that its base now rivals the top US cities, but that it may not be an entirely good thing for the city’s ecosystem. I wrote about it here.

  This morning venture capitalist Fred Wilson published a post on his blog talking about the necessity of scaling tech companies in lower cost locations. It’s a good follow-up to the above article/post.

  Here’s an excerpt from Fred:

  Last week I heard some shocking numbers about salary levels for certain kinds of engineers in the bay area. I checked them out with a few of our bay area portfolio companies and they were more or less corroborated.

  The tight technical labor markets in the bay area, NYC, and a number of other regions in the US are making it hard to scale software businesses without burning massive amounts of cash.

  He goes on to argue that (startup) companies now need to think about scaling in other/remote locations sooner than they ever have before — basically as soon as the company hits about 50 engineers (or 100-200 employees).

  Many companies are now working with a distributed workforce. Supposedly 2/3 of the global workforce now spends at least one day of the week working remotely. I almost never work from home, but I do get how this is possible.

  So what is happening is that engineering talent is spilling over into secondary markets out of necessity. There’s an economic imperative to colonize. But I would imagine that, at least initially, most of the economic benefits accrue to the colonizer.

  Photo by NASA on Unsplash

  2019.09.01

• Risk, uncertainty, and opportunity

  

  For two reasons, I really like Fred Wilson’s recent blog post on hypothetical value to real value. Firstly, it is structured in the way that I think good blog posts are structured. He starts with a personal story (about this son) and then uses that to take a position and impart some knowledge about the venture capital industry. It makes for a more engaging read. Secondly, I like how he describes the journey and spread between hypothetical value and real value:

  Venture capitalists and seed funds and angel investors make or lose money on the journey from hypothetical value to real value. And when the spread between the two narrows, the money we make is less. When the spread increases, the money we make is more. It is easier to drink your own Kool Aid in the world of hypothetical values. You handicap the odds of winning more aggressively. You trade ownership for capital at work. You accept the new normal. Real value doesn’t move so fast. Because it is right in front of you. You can see it. So it is not prone to flights of fancy. I try to keep this framework front and center in my brain as we meet with founders and work to find transactions that work for everyone. I find it to be a stabilizing force in an unstable market.

  All of this is related to the notion that you make real money when you’re right about something that most people think is wrong. Because that would be hypothetical value. If it were real value, then everyone would simply believe it. It would be “right in front of you.” And this is pretty much true of all competitive marketplaces, including the real estate industry. Risk and uncertainty create opportunity.

  Photo by James Sullivan on Unsplash

  2019.08.25

• Slate announces minority investment from Goldman Sachs

  On Monday, Slate Asset Management announced a minority investment from Goldman Sachs Asset Management’s Petershill Program. This is great news, so here’s a copy of the full press release that went out.

  ---

  Toronto, August 19, 2019 – Slate Asset Management L.P. (Slate), a leading alternative asset management platform with a focus on real estate and real assets, today announced a passive, non-voting minority equity investment from Goldman Sachs Asset Management’s Petershill program, creating a strategic relationship with one of the world’s leading investment managers and positioning Slate for future success. The transaction will have no impact on the control or decision making of Slate. The day-to-day operations and management of Slate will remain unchanged.

  The investment provides capital that Slate will use to enhance its platform and increase its GP investments in current and future businesses and investment vehicles, further strengthening the firm’s alignment with its clients and investing partners.

  The investment accelerates Slate’s goal to build the leading independent alternative investment platform in real estate and real assets. As part of the transaction, Slate Founders Blair and Brady Welch have made a long-term commitment to the business.

  To date Slate has completed over $11 billion of transactions across Canada, the U.S. and Europe, through multiple vehicles spanning co-investments with global institutional partners, private equity funds and publicly-traded Real Estate Investment Trusts.

  “This investment in our platform is an endorsement of our people, our strategy and our future,” said Brady Welch, co-founder of Slate. “For our investors and our team, this is excellent news; our strategy and model remain the same, and we can now benefit from our new relationship with Goldman.”

  Blair Welch, co-founder of Slate, added that: “Since we started Slate nearly 15 years ago, we have showed that we can build tremendous value by providing our investors with a unique perspective, focusing on the fundamentals of the assets we acquire and delivering hands-on management that is innovative and creative. With our new relationship with Goldman Sachs, Brady and I are enthusiastic about what all of us at Slate can accomplish together over the next decade and beyond.”

  “Slate Asset Management is an incredibly innovative, dynamic real-estate focused alternative asset management platform,” said Robert Hamilton Kelly, Managing Director, Goldman Sachs Asset Management Petershill program. “We are big believers in the strategy, the team and the model. We are excited to partner with Slate as they work to capture the opportunities before them.”

  About Slate Asset Management

  Slate Asset Management L.P. is a leading real-estate focused alternative investment platform with over $6 billion in assets under management. Slate is a value-oriented manager and a significant sponsor of all of its private and publicly-traded investment vehicles, which are tailored to the unique goals and objectives of its investors. The firm’s careful and selective investment approach creates long-term value with an emphasis on capital preservation and outsized returns. Slate is supported by exceptional people, flexible capital and a demonstrated ability to originate and execute on a wide range of compelling investment opportunities. Visit slateam.com to learn more.

  About Goldman Sachs Asset Management’s (GSAM) Petershill Program

  The Petershill program is managed by GSAM’s Alternative Investments & Manager Selection (AIMS) Group, which provides investors with investment and advisory solutions across leading private equity funds, hedge fund managers, real estate managers, public equity strategies and fixed income strategies. With investments in over 20 asset management firms, the Petershill program provides strategic capital to mid-sized asset management firms and has raised over $5 billion of commitments since inception. GSAM is one of the world’s leading investment managers with more than $1 trillion in assets under supervision globally as of June 30, 2019.

  For more information:

  Slate Asset Management
  Katie Fasken
  416-583-1785

  Goldman Sachs
  Patrick Scanlan
  212-902-5400

  2019.08.19