It’s amazing how coincidences pile up around us. I’m going into the Alternative Energy Investing webinar with Bill Paul wondering what I should ask him about, and I happen to be looking at yesterday’s Wall Street Journal with its huge and utterly glowing report on shale gas. This got me thinking:
I wonder how objective these people are? Am I just cynical, or do I perceive that there is a reason behind virtually every word in that paper? All I really learn from articles like this is that someone wants me to believe shale gas is a huge game-charger in the energy industry. Perhaps I’m being unfair. Let’s ask Bill and get his opinions.
But aren’t these extraction techniques fantastically unsound ecologically? And does shale gas impact anyone outside the US?
Here’s another post on the EV adoption curve that I put on Renewable Energy World in which I claim that range anxiety will have a smaller-than-predicted effect on EV sales.
I’m headed for New York later today for a series of meetings — some with people frequently mentioned here. I’ll be having dinner Monday night on the Upper West Side with Rona Fried, whose SustainableBusiness.com has formed a vibrant partnership with 2GreenEnergy to promote and deliver consulting services. From there, it’s across the Hudson for Tuesday’s webinar with financial analyst Bill Paul. Finally, it’s a drive to Boston for a day packed with talks with heavy-hitters in solar.
Finland reportedly is undertaking a project that will link people’s smart meters with their smart phones. People will be able to save energy and money just by touching their phone screens, which will signal their home meters to, for example, raise or lower the thermostat. People also will be able to share the green power they generate onsite with their neighbors. Just imagine how much faster the world will embrace clean energy if and when young people use their smart phones to encourage their friends to go green.
Bill Paul, with his unique economic perspective on the renewable energy industry, will be featured on a live and totally free webinar, this Tuesday, May 11th at 1 PM EDT (10 AM PDT). Sign up here.
Though my core strenth is not investment banking, I like to think that I’ve learned something through my many discussions with Bill — and I highly recommend your participation — if you’re thinking about taking a serious financial risk in “new energy” (as Bill likes to call it).
Tuesday’s webinar will focus on mergers and acquisitions – in particular, the most likely take-over targets through the remainder of 2010. As Bill explained it to me, “Big M&A means big transfers of wealth. The price of a few dozen publicly-traded equities will go through the roof as their deals are contemplated and ultimately consummated. Others are just about to hit the skids. Huge fortunes will be are made — or lost.”
I hope I’ve made it clear that his webinar is not for everyone. In particular, I happen to know that a large percentage of the 2GreenEnergy audience has invested most of its net worth in entrepreneurial ventures, and is not sitting around with serious cash to put into speculative ventures right now (like today’s stock market). Thus, I’ll understand if only a few people attend – but I somehow know that they’ll be the right people. Again, here’s that link.
Green technologies are adopted first by those who aspire to protect the environment. But who are these people, exactly? What segments are most appropriate for the product or service you’re contemplating? And most importantly, what are your potential customers’ unmet needs – the things to which they aspire for which there is no current solution?
In the 26 years I have known Terry Ribb, she’s impressed me many dozens of times, largely with her innovative approach to developing a profound understanding of customers’ lifestyles. “It’s not about us,” she likes to say. “It’s about them.” In other words, we need to communicate clearly how we can make a real and practical difference in the individual’s workstyle and playstyle.
Contact us to learn more about how we can help you identify early-adopter segments, and design marketing strategies to attract and retain target customers.
As I mentioned the other day, I’m trying to “get out more” and blog on other sites. Earlier today, I wrote on EnergyBlogs.com that I foresee a world in which those with a reasonable case for EVs simply buy them, charge them in at night, and enjoy eco-friendly, low-cost daily driving—commuting to work, running errands, etc. Only 22% of Americans drive more than 40 miles per day. The market for EVs in the US is huge — but I see no reason to believe that the EV adoption curve will be so steep as to disrupt service, or require ubiquitous charging solutions.
I’m predicting that the technology at stake here at all levels: batteries — as well as the grid is improving at a rate sufficient to make the advent of mass-produced EVs a non-event.
Readers here generally know that 2GreenEnergy acts as an advocate for companies in renewables, electric transportation, and sustainability more generally – and that our associates help clients through the business issues that may be impeding success: raising investment capital, PR, etc. I’ve spoken with so many people on these subjects during this past year that I thought I’d summarize the top five impediments that I see companies facing. In other words, here are the five most common issues that prevent companies in this space from going forward in a meaningful way.
Impediment #1: Expecting Seed Capital for New, Unproven Ideas and Teams from People Who Don’t Know You. There are exceptions to this rule, but the rule itself is worth stating: take a second mortgage on your house, or hit up family and friends for the capital necessary to develop a working model of new technology. And do not expect the fact that you have a patent to convince investors that your idea is workable. I do not claim to know exactly how the patent process works, but I know enough to see that it is completely dysfunctional; I’ve seen patents for things that couldn’t possibly work in the real world.
Impediment #2: A Business Concept that Screams, “Me Too!” An investment banking firm that I work with locally here in California decided against one of the deals I brought them the other day, purely on the basis of “barrier to entry.” They liked the team, the business concept, the projected growth of the sector, the power-purchase agreement methodically signed into place – and several other things. But they refused to go forward when they realized that there was nothing proprietary or unique about the company’s approach to the market – and that my client could face competition from many different sources.
Impediment #3: A Business Plan that Is Too Short, Too Long, Confusing, Amateurish, or Just Not Compelling. The document that represents your idea needs to be fully professional, and tell your story in a concise yet complete way.
Impediment #4: Lack of Marketing Focus. I leafed through a 70-page business plan for an electric boat manufacturing company the other day. I thought they did a reasonably good job at educating the reader on the market, the imperative to replace noisy, smelly gasoline engines, etc. But I was amazed to find essentially zero discussion of what I consider to be the single most important aspect of any plan: sales and marketing. Who’s going to buy this? Why? How will they learn of the product and pursue that interest to completion? Business plans based on the mistaken notion that “if I build it they will come,” are non-starters.
Impediment #5. Ignoring the Power of Online Marketing. Unless you’re operating in a stealth mode for some reason, it is vital that you explore social media, blogging, and other ways of developing and promoting content that positions you as a thought-leader in your industry. I hesitate to say this, as it could be construed as bragging, but the average number weekly visitors at 2GreenEnergy doubled over the past three months – and that figure represented a doubling of the figure three months earlier. Do you know how much we’ve spent doing this? Virtually nothing. It happens automatically, as a natural consequence of a good SEO strategy and taking an advocacy position for something important, offering content that people find useful.
I just had an interesting experience that I thought I’d share. I’ve mentioned that I’m a partner in a company that imports and sells electric vehicles into island nations – starting with Bermuda. And what’s not to like about that? You’ll work hard to find a better set of factors militating toward EVs anywhere in the world: expensive gas, huge tax incentives, low speed limits, short drives, wealthy people, etc.
But here’s an interesting wrinkle: What to sell? Sure, the big OEMs are near to their proposed launch dates for cars like the Nissan LEAF and the Chevy Volt – and dozens of others are right behind them. But here’s an opportunity to sell something right now – if we can find the right car. Of course, there are several Chinese EVs rolling off the assembly lines, so why not consider them? In a word: quality.
I just got off the phone with a friend who has a relationship with Chinese manufacturer that’s been cranking these out for years. In fact, we bought one a year ago for a test in the real-world conditions in Bermuda. After about 14 months in that salty environment, it has rust holes the size of baseballs.
“Oh, I think what we have now is far better,” he told me. “You think?” I asked. “Sure, he replied. Why don’t you inspect the new model for yourselves.” Dude: we’re not metallurgists; we’re car dealers.
“Well, you can have some tests done,” he offered. But since when did it become the responsibility of the dealer to test the quality of the cars he sells? Isn’t that what manufacturers do? I know there are issues with China generally, but give me a break. Can he seriously expect us to distribute a product whose quality issues are completely unknown? How many Honda dealers would there be if Honda shifted the responsibility of QC to its dealers? Our job is to sell high-quality, high-value cars. His job is to make damn sure that the cars he’s selling us meets those criteria — regardless of what it takes to do that.
I’m unwilling to paint an entire nation and all of its product with the same brush, but we really do have a quality issue here. Any suggestions?
In a recent post, Bill Paul points out that the reaction to the oil spill in the Gulf should be algae-generated biofuels. But why not liquid ammonia, as Peak Oil pundit Matt Simmons would suggest? As Matt old me when I interviewed him for my book on renewables (and then reminded me in a phone call the other day) anhydrous ammonia is an ultra-clean, energy-dense alternative liquid fuel, for which an enormous delivery infrastructure is already in place. With the exception of hydrogen (for there is virtually no delivery infrastructure) ammonia is the only fuel that produces no greenhouse gases (GHG) on combustion. Ammonia will power diesel and spark-ignited internal combustion engines, and can be manufactured from simply water and air using clean renewable energy.