just pre-ordered one. I love the gal holding the phone 3 inches from her face. I see people doing that all the time and wonder how that's any more legal than just holding the phone against your face.
We're primarily focused on the US & Canada right now, though we do have customers elsewhere.
One distinction to make is that we're not like the "incumbents" you mention. We're more like property management software (or "property marketing" might be closer). We're not trying to build a destination site and attract renters to it. Our goal is to make it easier for an owner to market across these types of places.
Tactically speaking, we go out and vertically integrate anywhere meaningful to vacation rental marketing, and allow an owner to upload their home info once and then simply click to opt into whatever channels they want. They get to manage it all in one place and everything stays in sync (no more juggling multiple calendars, rate tables, etc).
So, think of us like the DSP's that emerged to help advertisers deal with all the various ad networks that popped up. It's a pain in the ass to go integrate with all of them. For now, we're launching with the major listing sites (similar to the incumbents you mention) in the US. We also provide the other several other helpful marketing tools - their own website, their own Facebook Page (a great 'CRM' tool, if you will), auto-responders, Craigslist ad poster, etc...
I think that's quite different than what the incumbents are doing... They're a vertical. We'll never aim to be a vertical.
Most of the incumbents I know of in Europe are effectively paid-for directory businesses that in essence provide listings (and then booking, and all of the dull contractual stuff).
My question would be: How will you be able to get your listings inserted into their databases if the barrier to being in their database is a payment?
Is your aim to become a re-seller for the existing sites? So you'd be a one-stop-shop for getting your holiday home listed in the places most likely to convert.
Or more that you hope to encourage the incumbents to take your feed through other enticements (such as being able to take a commission on properties that would normally have been listed elsewhere)?
"Is your aim to become a re-seller for the existing sites? So you'd be a one-stop-shop for getting your holiday home listed in the places most likely to convert."
Yep, that's it exactly.
The selling point to them is that we bring them new customers. We're seeing that owners aren't marketing as they should because everything they do is incremental work and upkeep. If we can make launching into a new channel (or listing site) as easy as a click, and centralize the management of it all, we believe owners will increase their marketing. It helps that we can also bring large quantities to the listing sites, so that we can also get discounts for our owners (a further incentive to increase their marketing).
Particularly if you can break the annual or 2-yearly contracts and allow owners to experiment with different listing sites for short periods of time (monthly listings).
This is even more compelling if you are the ones centrally managing the visibility of availability across the listing sites (so if a booking is made via site A the unavailability is reflected on site B).
The fear in making a bad marketing decision for a small holiday home owner is real. Their margins being small they can only afford 1 listing usually, 2 at a push. But just as with Open Table and restaurants, the home owner isn't really sure whether it works, or if it does whether it works better than other alternatives. Giving them the ability to see this stuff would solve a real pain point for them and truly make them happier.
Unfortunately, for some of the smaller listing sites they're likely to go out of business. In somewhere like the Lake District in the North West of England, there are about 5 or 6 listing sites but only 1 or 2 that really work... as soon as home owners have visibility of this the smaller ones are likely to sink very quickly.
Of course, this is to the advantage of home owners, but I wonder whether the smaller listings sites will see the big picture and realise that your solution is good for everyone but them. Not that they deserve to survive when all they sell is fear and very little real marketing power.
The 'raise a lot of money and swing big' is very much a silicon valley way of thinking. It's not necessarily wrong, but it's definitely not the only way, and not the right path for every entrepreneur / business.
I had a lot of smart people tell me early on that my last company was a waste of my time because the opportunity wasn't large enough. Large enough for whom though? Hearing all that feedback was incredibly discouraging when I was starting, but I passionately believed that I was right about the opportunity and the value we could create, even if it may never be a billion dollar business. So, I hired a co-founder, recruited a very small core team, worked 24x7 for 18 months, and we were acquired. At the time we sold, we actually had pretty reasonable Series A terms sheets on the table, but we decided selling was the right path, for a number of reasons.
Many (definitely not all) silicon valley investment types would probably look at that and the amount we sold for and assume the company was a failure. I had a lot of people question not going the VC route at the end and trying to blow it out (many of these doubters were the ones who doubted going after it at all initially). I would have done it if I thought it was right for the business, but it was not. And I now own a home in Marin (and one in Sonoma), my kids are in private school, and I just don't worry about the shit I worried about 10 years ago. My life is radically different and better. AND I had an incredible experience creating a real business, learned a ton, and am a far better entrepreneur now than I was when I started.
Now I'm back at it, and swinging much bigger this time, but with that experience (and added confidence) under my belt. We actually just did YC (it was awesome), raised money, and are going after a massive opportunity. But I think it's right this time, for this founding team, for this opportunity.
The best professional advice I ever received was from Chris Moore at Redpoint Ventures. He told me a few years before my first startup to think about my career as a process, and not to be so focused on just jumping to the end point. For me, this was the right advice at the right time. I wouldn't be where I am today had I not accumulated a number of experiences along the way which helped me to succeed later. Everyone's different. Explore your passions, but also be true to yourself. Know who you are and what you want. And surround yourself with smart people to bounce things off - but just be sure to treat it only as input. No one can tell you what you should do.
Also, there's just no shame in creating something that's 'smaller'. You are right to not give a shit what other people think (and it probably helps that you're in Philly in that regard). There are a ton more buyers of companies at $10MM or $20MM than there are at $250MM or $500M. Hell, even an exit for a couple million can really change your life (with the right cap table). If you raise a shit ton of money because "that's how things are done", you are most likely shutting off any early exit (at least, in a way that will be meaningful for you). So, just be sure it's the right thing for you and your business, and don't focus too much on what other people think is the right path.
