Here’s Why You’re Paying Too Much For Decent Research

By Aner Ravon, Co-Founder and Chief Insight Officer at Zirra

Have you ever seriously considered buying an expensive car even if you know you’re not going to drive it enough to justify the price? Take the Lamborghini Veneno as an example. It’s the most expensive model of a well-known brand and the second highest expensive model in 2016. Evidently, it makes Tesla look like a Toyota. It has a 6.5-liter V12 engine that gets to 60 mph in 2.9 seconds, it was built to celebrate the automaker’s 50th birthday, and it costs a whopping $4.5 million.

For a car, it may make sense if you can afford it. You’ve worked hard for that car – you earned it by making smart decisions, and you had a good deal of luck that helped to leverage your victories. Now, you deserve to indulge yourself in a futuristic machine and impress your friends, even if you know deep down that you’re not going to drive it to the office every day.

Now let’s change the subject to the research tool you’re using to make those smart investment decisions. You may not realize it immediately, but you’re probably already using the Lamborghini equivalent of a research company. If you seriously want to research companies or a market as a venture capitalist or an angel investor, your current choices are between a Lamborghini, Ferrari or Bugatti. And you didn’t even know you’re working with Lamborghini!

The Banks

A Financial Times story uncovered earlier this month the tense discussions between fund managers and banks over the price of analyst research, as the investment industry is facing the new European rules that will force fund firms to explain clearly to investors how much of their money is spent on research. Indeed, it’s difficult to explain to someone that you spent $30K on “access for a research platform” and up to $10M “to provide a fund manager access across the research company’s workforce.” It’s not hard to believe that fund managers are going to substantially reduce their spending on external research. Fund managers deserve a much scalable, faster, and cheaper service.

Search for a company

Gartner & Forrester

Take Gartner and Forrester, for example. Price and return are sometimes blurry. It’s hard to know how much you are going to pay and what you’ll get in return, especially if you’re a VC or a private investor. They are positioned as markets for everyone, offering multiple services with no specific focus. They serve CEOs, CIOs, CTOs, IT managers, SMBs, enterprises, startups, investment banks, hedge funds, and investors. They offer local and global services all around the world, giving all sorts of advice. As high-priced premium markets with a wide offering, they not only provide research but also extra services such as conference and workshop management, consulting, and publication rights.

The price for access to a basic database begins at $20K-$30K and rises to $40K-$55K for unlimited access to analysts by phone or email. In case you want to have a more tailored solution, the price can rise to about $85K, according to some clients, depending on the access to a vertical-specific analyst and marketing analyst you demand. Adding Gartner Invest service, an analysis service for investors, means adding tens of thousands to the final price. If you want to have a better price, be ready to haggle or pray.

How effective are services such as Gartner or Forrester for a seasoned VC investor seeking to analyze a new deal flow of young startups? The library of research is rich in volume but stays pretty generic. The research material marks new trends, creates comparisons between giants, and sometimes points to promising later stage startups worth looking at. Their analysts can share their predictions about next trends and they might know large corporations intimately or point at the major players in a market. But Gartner and Forrester are suffering from what most research companies are currently suffering from: They can’t get into details in order to support pinpointed business decisions.

CB Insights, Pitchbook, and VentureSource

The notion that market research companies can’t get too specific about companies also applies to market databases such as Pitchbook, CB Insights, Mattermark, VentureSource, Tracxn, DataFox, and Privco. They offer a huge database of millions of startups with basic information on each, mostly based on data from CrunchBase. Each adds some market analysis on the top – such as clustering companies together on a common basis, pointing at new trends, and tracks VCs according to their portfolio.

Similar to their older brothers in the market research market, they too charge expensive subscription plans (Mattermark charges $6,000 a year, Pitchbook takes up to $1,500 a month, Tracxn offer its services for $2000 a month, and CB Insights charges up to $12,000 a month), but none of them can support a startup investment decision. It all comes back to the same issue: Market research companies prefer the coziness of being a database and watching the market from above. Very few take the step to actually say something bold about the data they provide. They are the Lamborghini and Bugatti of the research world, but they stay in the garage most of the time and no one seems to be that impressed when you drive them.

In order to make the right investment decision, you need to do due diligence on a company, have the most up to date details, and get the right insights about them. You’ll need to figure out whether the founding team is as good as they claim to be, and if the product is original and innovative – not just another risky “me too.”

Data Should Be Provided For Free

We think that data should be well packaged and provided for free, and that insights and productivity tools should be well built and provided for as a premium service. We believe that smart insights are a necessary addition to data analysis. Every requested startup has a dedicated report packed with in-depth insights. Each report is focused on a single company, giving you unbiased information on everything you need to know about it – the good and the bad.

We recently launched our free Spotlight Report feature which is a big milestone for us. Zirra’s Spotlight Reports are not just data sliced, diced and repackaged. They provide the essence of Pitchbook and CB Insights, for every company, immediately and for free. They include a unique NLP-based similarity mapping engine that, using hundreds of thousands of news articles, automatically identifies companies written about in a similar way. Other proprietary algorithms scan the media to spot meaningful events in the company’s history. The automatic report also includes web and mobile traffic analysis, HR open positions, general company information, key team members, their email and social links, and patent and trademark scanning. [Click here to try it]

Zirra’s insights are synthesized from metrics produced by our proprietary AI and machine learning algorithms and an expert network we use to calibrate the data system and to produce exclusive insights on companies and markets. The proprietary big data technology allows us to scale and evaluate startups metrics within seconds and our network of experts allows us to create qualitative and valuable insights that no other directory, including Gartner or Pitchbook, can create.

At Zirra, we don’t believe that you should have to pay for information that can be aggregated from the internet. We’re happy to give this information for free. Instead, we think our customers should only have to pay for analysis.

While the Spotlight Reports are free, our premium products will still be available: Company Analysis Reports for $99, Due Diligence Reports for $2,000-$5,000, and Expert Matching for $500-$2,000.

Search for a company

The “Adapt or Die” Era for Venture Capital is Nigh

Several weeks ago I called a good friend of mine, a senior partner at a leading VC firm. I noticed a flagship company, a potential unicorn in the making, is showing imminent signs of stagnation. It didn’t take a Zirra wizard to notice, by the way. Traffic to the company’s website had plateaued, as did their employee count. In addition, customer reviews have become increasingly critical and negative of the quality of the service, Google searches for their brand have started to decrease, and new competitors were showing much better growth signals. It was pretty obvious that the company was atrophying and that the investors should be concerned. So I called my friend and left the following message on his VM. “Hey, I saw a few things about your company”, I said, “I think it’s giving off some bad signals. Call me if you’re interested.”

He called me in less than 5 minutes. He was aware of some of the concerns, but what he was more worried about was what I plan to do with this information. To be honest, he was shocked I knew what I just told him. “How did you know? What do you plan to do with this? Is anybody else aware?” Well, to start with, I was not going to do anything with the information that could hurt anyone. That’s not why I called him or why we do what we do. The scary part was that this information is not very difficult to find if you only care to look, but for some reasons 9 out of 10 venture capitalists don’t bother to. I’m not going to disclose the company name, but rest assured, their visible shortcomings have not been noticed.

Search for a company

I decided to test my theory again and picked a company that was showing fantastic signs. This time I picked one whose traffic went up by 50% over the past year, that hired 100 new employees, whose Google presence showed nothing but positive signs and that – coincidentally – was hammered by the venture capital media for over a year for being in “the dying space of Ad-Tech.” I called one of their shareholders I happen to know very well and shared the good news with him. He was aware positive things were happening of course, but he sounded a bit gloomy. “Hey, why do you care about what people say when you see the truth right in front of you?” I asked, somewhat puzzled. “It kills me to know I may need to raise more money from these people” he said. “They simply don’t bother to check the facts.” End of quote.

I’m not saying venture capitalists are lazy, they are not. They’re not stupid either, that’s grated. As a matter of fact, they spend days and nights trying to make the best investments. The problem is that many of them, 9 out of 10 if I had to guess, are simply not looking at the right problem. Many VCs are spending their entire energy trying to find the new Facebook or Snapchat. The Tier-1 VCs are trying to find the original Facebooks. The Tier 2 onward are trying to find the Facebooks the Tier-1 VCs have missed. The simple reason that they cannot fine these companies is because a one-in-a-million company has a habit of finding you and not the other way around. Looking for the next LeBron is a killer, not just because one cannot find the next LeBron, but because it let’s you get away with having the lackluster roster of the Knicks in the meantime. It’s about your actual roster, it’s about what you are looking to find. And that’s a wrong approach to Venture Capital, and certainly when you can make such a great use of data driven insights and be very smart with a pool of millions of companies that are all looking for investors.

What venture capitalists – any venture capitalist – can do is systematically build a good roster, or a set of portfolio of companies, such that they will end up winning more than losing. No matter who you are, how much money you have, who your limited partners are, as a venture capitalist there is a winning formula for you, one that you specifically can take advantage of. This can be done by anyone who’s not afraid of data driven insights. The rest is up to luck, or God, or whatever it is you believe in. Finding the new LeBron is not a work plan, its wishful thinking, and this wishful thinking is a very poor plan, especially if it ends up with you rejecting 10 companies that could have built a 30% yield on you portfolio if you were not so busy chasing the ghosts of Mark Zuckerberg and Elon Musk wannabes.

It’s very easy to get started. When you meet a company, take a real look at their performance metrics, use technology to scan their competitors, their employee DNA structure, their customer reviews, founder history. Find out the Google trends, the traffic trends, what bloggers and reporters really say. Don’t chase the founders that really impressed the shit out of you in a face to face meeting. These are exactly the LeBrons you should be careful with. Look the opposite direction. Find the founders and companies who would be rejected for an irrational reason, but whose metrics show a real promise for over performance. This should be the basis of your thinking. Do that right and the LeBrons will start chasing you. Jerry McGuire meets Moneyball and both are waiting for you.

I cannot count by now the number of panels I have witnessed or participated in. I love these get togethers, 5 senior partners and one friendly host all dealing with the future of our innovative universe. My favourite part is the closing session.

“So…what are your predictions for 2017? What are the technologies of the future?”

“Oh, I believe we’re going to witness a quantum leap in Artificial Intelligence!”

“Drones are going to become what cars were in the 1950s, everyone will own at least one”

“Behavioural technology will help our brain drift more and more into virtual reality”

Tons of faith, unlimited belief. I keep waiting for the first venture capitalist who would start their 2017 predictions with “I spent the last 3 days looking at data. What I learned was that Ad-Tech is actually blossoming, that self driving cars are not going to break out of Singapore or Silicon Valley before 2025 at the earliest, and that customer service technology represents they most significant immediate opportunity for venture capital.”

I keep waiting. Personally, I never witnessed that. If you’re an entrepreneur and you happen to witness that kind of opinion make sure you stick to the person who said it. Try to make them your investors, because unlike many others, they will help you navigate through reality and not through pied piper dreams.

There are many other reasons why Venture Capitalists stay away from data driven insights. The seniority hierarchy, for example, plays a big part in that pathology. The senior partners are vintage and they do things they way the know and that they have for 20 years, before data was available. The young and ambitious principals and partners are looking to impress the senior partners before they take over the firm, so they copy the same methods the older partners practice. Politics also plays a major role. Data Driven Insights can kill deals a certain partner was promoting by showing the real competitors, performance and market indicators. If there’s one thing faith cannot tolerate it is facts.

Never the less, Data Driven Insights are slowly becoming the leading practice for a few Venture Capital firms. Interestingly, these firms are more easily found at the two extremes of spectrum. Niche VCs who must use data driven insights to grow and super Tier-1 VCs who can employ an army of analysts. But these two represent maybe 10% of the Venture Capital spectrum. The rest will either adapt or die, sooner than they imagine.

Sometime ago we pitched Zirra to a venture capital firm that rejected us. They just couldn’t get what we were pitching and in retrospect I can imagine it had to do with the exact problem we are dealing with. The partner was very nice, though, and he concluded with the familiar Venture Capital Eff-you farewell – “We loved you, now go prove us wrong!”

Search for a company

I’ll conclude this post with my reply to that rejection. I think it summarises my view on the state of the industry in the best way:

“Thanks for your time and response. We’re not on a mission to prove anybody wrong. We think the markets and models around private companies are broken and obsolete and we are focused on building technology and processes that will fix some of it. It won’t happen overnight, there will be ups, downs and inaccuracies, but we will get there because we’re determined, making continuous progress and because the current situation simply doesn’t make sense any longer. Everyone in this eco system, from VCs to Management Consulting firms will either adapt or die over the next decade or so, and we’re all about adapting. “

Analyze a Company Like A Pro in 10 Steps With Zirra

Continue reading “The “Adapt or Die” Era for Venture Capital is Nigh”