I just finished listening to this podcast about venture capital and consumer products. One of the underlying questions is whether we are currently in a “consumer downturn.” Rebecca Kaden of Union Square Ventures (USV) talks about the importance of “platform shifts” for venture returns. These are moments where a new technology hits the marketplace and there’s a corresponding mass consumer adoption. When and where will that next shift occur? Maybe it’ll be in real estate.

I like the discussions at 10:00 and 13:50. The first deals with the importance of non-paid customer acquisition strategies for consumer products. Rather than relying on bought attention, you really need organic growth strategies, which is often an indication that people are passionate about your product. This is arguably more important when you’re fundamentally reliant on massive growth/scale, but whether we’re talking about software or a home, I still believe it’s paramount. Create things people love.

The second point is about commerce, Amazon, and how USV avoids investing in companies that are unlikely to ever win against Bezos. Kaden’s position is that Amazon’s advantage is and has been more executional than structural. They are simply really good at doing things better. But Amazon wins at logistics, speed, and value. They are not as focused on experience, entertainment, and discovery. And people still want that.

I’ll stop there. If you can’t see the podcast below, click here.

[soundcloud url="https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/507691569" params="color=#ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&show_teaser=true&visual=true" width="100%" height="300" iframe="true" /]

Forbes recently pegged social media influencer Kylie Jenner’s net worth at somewhere around $900 million. That makes her the youngest (she’s 20) person on Forbes’ annual ranking of “America’s Richest Self-Made Women.” 

And if the trend line continues, she’ll be the youngest self-made billionaire, ever. Mark Zuckerberg apparently holds that title right now. But he was a classic underachiever and only became a billionaire at age 23.

Most of Kylie’s net worth is derived from Kylie Cosmetics, which launched less than 3 years ago, but did an estimated $330 million in revenue last year. Forbes values the company at almost $800 million. And Kylie owns every bit of it. 

The reason I am mentioning this today is because I was fascinated by the above Forbes article. It’s such a powerful example of social media leverage. Forbes put it differently: “Social media has weaponized fame.” 

Kylie has 111 million followers on Instagram (plus many more on her other social channels) and that’s really the most important part of this equation. She has the distribution and reach to acquire boat loads of customers. It doesn’t matter what you’re selling if nobody knows you’re selling it.

The rest of her business is pretty much outsourced. Seed Beauty (out of Oxnard, California and Nanjing, China) handles the manufacturing, packaging, and shipping fulfillment. Shopify (headquartered in Ottawa) is her e-commerce platform.

We could of course have a debate about whether a celebrity-fueled business is really all that sustainable. And perhaps there’s risk in relying so heavily on social for customer acquisition. But youngest billionaire is youngest billionaire.

Image: Forbes

One of the reasons I decided to start blogging was because I saw how open the tech community had become – with respect to sharing their ideas and experiences – and I thought that the same thing could and should be done in real estate, as well as in city building more broadly.

But in many ways, the real estate industry is the antithesis of the tech industry. We are slow moving and secretive of our ideas. Now, some of this is driven by fundamental differences in terms of how these two sectors operate. It’s a lot easier to test and iterate on your ideas in tech than it is with actual bricks-and-mortar. But I still think about ways in which we, in real estate, could be pushing the envelope.

As one example of what I’m talking about, take Union Square Ventures in New York. They call themselves a “thesis-driven venture capital firm”, which means they come up with a framework and core set of ideas, and then use those to drive their investment decisions.

You would think that these frameworks and ideas would be pretty sensitive. I mean, they are the core drivers of their business. But their entire website is actually set up around sharing and collaborating – with the public – on these ideas. Here’s a screenshot:

Each topic is something they are “thinking about” and something they want to make an investment in (or already have). Fascinating.

Many of you, I’m sure, would argue that there are risks to doing this. But there are also benefits, some of which are driven by collective intelligence. By sharing their ideas and hypotheses with the public, it helps to evolve their thinking. After all, their investment thesis is not a static thing. It grows over time.

But in addition to this, it also makes it abundantly clear to their customers (entrepreneurs) what they believe in and what they look for. And I am sure this helps them with deal flow. More and more customers aren’t just “buying” a product, they are also “buying” a philosophical underpinning and belief system.

Can you imagine a real estate firm doing something like this? I can. But it’s not happening yet, as far as I know.

I just finished listening to this podcast about venture capital and consumer products. One of the underlying questions is whether we are currently in a “consumer downturn.” Rebecca Kaden of Union Square Ventures (USV) talks about the importance of “platform shifts” for venture returns. These are moments where a new technology hits the marketplace and there’s a corresponding mass consumer adoption. When and where will that next shift occur? Maybe it’ll be in real estate.

I like the discussions at 10:00 and 13:50. The first deals with the importance of non-paid customer acquisition strategies for consumer products. Rather than relying on bought attention, you really need organic growth strategies, which is often an indication that people are passionate about your product. This is arguably more important when you’re fundamentally reliant on massive growth/scale, but whether we’re talking about software or a home, I still believe it’s paramount. Create things people love.

The second point is about commerce, Amazon, and how USV avoids investing in companies that are unlikely to ever win against Bezos. Kaden’s position is that Amazon’s advantage is and has been more executional than structural. They are simply really good at doing things better. But Amazon wins at logistics, speed, and value. They are not as focused on experience, entertainment, and discovery. And people still want that.

I’ll stop there. If you can’t see the podcast below, click here.

[soundcloud url="https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/507691569" params="color=#ff5500&auto_play=false&hide_related=false&show_comments=true&show_user=true&show_reposts=false&show_teaser=true&visual=true" width="100%" height="300" iframe="true" /]

Forbes recently pegged social media influencer Kylie Jenner’s net worth at somewhere around $900 million. That makes her the youngest (she’s 20) person on Forbes’ annual ranking of “America’s Richest Self-Made Women.” 

And if the trend line continues, she’ll be the youngest self-made billionaire, ever. Mark Zuckerberg apparently holds that title right now. But he was a classic underachiever and only became a billionaire at age 23.

Most of Kylie’s net worth is derived from Kylie Cosmetics, which launched less than 3 years ago, but did an estimated $330 million in revenue last year. Forbes values the company at almost $800 million. And Kylie owns every bit of it. 

The reason I am mentioning this today is because I was fascinated by the above Forbes article. It’s such a powerful example of social media leverage. Forbes put it differently: “Social media has weaponized fame.” 

Kylie has 111 million followers on Instagram (plus many more on her other social channels) and that’s really the most important part of this equation. She has the distribution and reach to acquire boat loads of customers. It doesn’t matter what you’re selling if nobody knows you’re selling it.

The rest of her business is pretty much outsourced. Seed Beauty (out of Oxnard, California and Nanjing, China) handles the manufacturing, packaging, and shipping fulfillment. Shopify (headquartered in Ottawa) is her e-commerce platform.

We could of course have a debate about whether a celebrity-fueled business is really all that sustainable. And perhaps there’s risk in relying so heavily on social for customer acquisition. But youngest billionaire is youngest billionaire.

Image: Forbes

One of the reasons I decided to start blogging was because I saw how open the tech community had become – with respect to sharing their ideas and experiences – and I thought that the same thing could and should be done in real estate, as well as in city building more broadly.

But in many ways, the real estate industry is the antithesis of the tech industry. We are slow moving and secretive of our ideas. Now, some of this is driven by fundamental differences in terms of how these two sectors operate. It’s a lot easier to test and iterate on your ideas in tech than it is with actual bricks-and-mortar. But I still think about ways in which we, in real estate, could be pushing the envelope.

As one example of what I’m talking about, take Union Square Ventures in New York. They call themselves a “thesis-driven venture capital firm”, which means they come up with a framework and core set of ideas, and then use those to drive their investment decisions.

You would think that these frameworks and ideas would be pretty sensitive. I mean, they are the core drivers of their business. But their entire website is actually set up around sharing and collaborating – with the public – on these ideas. Here’s a screenshot:

Each topic is something they are “thinking about” and something they want to make an investment in (or already have). Fascinating.

Many of you, I’m sure, would argue that there are risks to doing this. But there are also benefits, some of which are driven by collective intelligence. By sharing their ideas and hypotheses with the public, it helps to evolve their thinking. After all, their investment thesis is not a static thing. It grows over time.

But in addition to this, it also makes it abundantly clear to their customers (entrepreneurs) what they believe in and what they look for. And I am sure this helps them with deal flow. More and more customers aren’t just “buying” a product, they are also “buying” a philosophical underpinning and belief system.

Can you imagine a real estate firm doing something like this? I can. But it’s not happening yet, as far as I know.