The new People of Walmart blog relies on user-submitted images of “outrageously bad / ugly / creepy / crazy shoppers” that grace the aisles of the world’s largest retailer.

Based on their About page, the guys who started the website seem pretty cool. I can’t quote my favorite bits here, but part of their philosophy reads:

There is no reason to send us pictures of people that are seriously and unfortunately handicapped so don’t be an asshole. We are trying to have some fun here and there is a difference between someone who is mentally challenged and a person who has a fu Manchu and is still rocking MC Hammer pants.

We would also like to stress that we are in no way liable if you get your ass beat by Bubba when he catches you taking his picture.

I’m really curious to know two things:

• how Walmart is going to react
• how the site owners are going to monetize the site

Image Credit: Brave New Films, Flickr

The Trunk Club is an Oregon-based startup that offers men a female personal shopper via Skype video. Shoppers consult with men online to determine their fashion requirements, then FedEx them a set of clothes for free. TechCrunch’s Erick Schonfeld describes the service:

Once a man (the service is only for men) gets his “trunk” of clothes, he tries them on via another Skype session (he is supposed to change off camera, but I am sure some perv customers will “forget”), gives his feedback to his personal shopper, and then decide which ones to keep. He can return any or all of the clothes at no expense to him. He only pays for what he keeps.

The Trunk Club was started by Joanna Van Vleck, a personal stylist who opened up a showroom for her clients in Bend, Oregon. She was planning to open up retail outlets across the country where men could come in for their personal shopping sessions, but her angel investor backed out after the economy tanked. By necessity, she turned to the Skype model and only needed $50,000 in angel capital to get going. She has been in private beta with about 600 customers for the past six months. She now has 21 shopping experts working on commission, and is adding 5 to 6 every month. The Trunk Club’s hybrid approach is both high touch and scalable at the same time. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see more retail concepts like this spring up in different categories, with real people helping you make a buying decision over Web video.

Read the whole article here (recommended).

Sounds like a boon for a select group of well-off single guys. It also helps that the women working for the service are all attractive.

I would like to see a similar service for women.

Key Bank has created a program to help women get critical access to capital to finance existing or fledgling businesses. Through the Key4Women program, they’ve shown a committment to helping women overcome the distinct challenges they face when it comes to accessing capital.  Data collected by the Center for Women’s Business Research indicates that, relative to their male counterparts, women business owners (WOBs) have a more difficult time raising business funds.

Maria Coyne, KeyBank EVP and Founder of Key4Women was kind enough to answer a few questions about the program and its purpose.

What was the motivation to start a special program just for women, Key4Women?  

MC: Women rely more heavily upon networking and find great strength and inspiration from engaging with and receiving advice from other women.  KeyBank had been lending concertedly to women for quite some time, but officially launched its Key4Women program in 2005, designing it to directly address WOB challenges, providing female entrepreneurs with access to capital, financial solutions, educational offerings, and networking opportunities.

Do women business owners face unique challenges in a down economy?  

MC:  We just learned from the Key4Women Confidence Index, which was done in conjunction with the Center for Women’s Business Research and surveyed women business owners around the country, that the current challenging economic climate has had a significant negative impact on their businesses.  More than half (56 percent) reported lower net earnings and 18 percent decreased employment in the first quarter of this year.  

However, 90 percent of the respondents thought the economy has at least hit bottom and will either remain the same or improve in the next six months.

Women business owners have been taking actions to bootstrap in this environment:  two-thirds of respondents said they are watching their cash flow much more carefully over the past six months, and 42 percent said they are collecting receivables more aggressively.  

The survey results were announced on May 27, 2009, and the full survey report can be accessed at www.cfwbr.org.  We’re interested in what women business owners think about the results and what their own experiences have been.  We encourage business owners to comment on the survey’s findings by posting a comment on the blog at www.mariaonmoney.com.

Are women at a disadvantage when it comes to raising larger sums of money – venture capital for example?  

MC:  Traditionally, women have received only a small fraction of venture capital funds and have historically not accessed bank financing as men do, but that is changing. In 2006, the Center for Women’s Business Research found that 70 percent of women business owners polled were satisfied in their efforts to get credit, compared with only 50 percent ten years earlier. Key is making sure women have access to capital, we have pledged to lend $3 billion to qualified women owned businesses by the 2012, which will also be important to our country’s economic recovery. This new commitment comes on top of lending more than $3 billion to women-owned businesses since 2005. 

What are some of the ‘key’ differences you perceive between men and women when it comes to financing their businesses?  

MC:  Through Key’s focus on developing trusted client relationships we know that women business owners also focus on relationships. While all business owners have the need for financial products that are right for their business, women place a higher priority on how their bank treats them. According to the Center for Women’s Business Research, more than two-thirds of women business owners choose financial products and services based on their relationship and experience with a lender.
 
Research indicates that, women owned business are still less likely than businesses with comparable revenue owned by men to use business credit or equity financing. Our message is: “It’s okay to borrow strategically,” and Key4Women is designed to make sure women business owners can get the financing they need. 

For women business owners reading this – what are your top three pieces of advice?

 1) Pay attention to all aspects of your business, seek ways to maximize efficiencies and eliminate wasted time and money. Look for ways to do more business operations online, eliminate redundancies, and be judicious about how you spend your own time.
 
2) Recession-proof your business by expanding into new markets or introducing new products that fill needs today. Seek ways to be innovative, take suggestions from employees and customers about how to improve value and contain costs.

3)  Manage the numbers:  Business owners who come to their bankers with realistic business plans, and who know how to quickly adjust the levers that drive their revenue and cash flow always have an advantage.  When making projections, talking to your banker before small concerns become big crises is always the best way to get their help.  

Thanks to Maria Coyne and KeyBank for the education. If you would like to find out more about Key4Women, check out Maria’s blog, www.mariaonmoney.com.

Thanks also to Marylee A. Gotch, Vice President, Public Affairs Manager, for arranging this interview.

Image Credit: JMRosenfeld, Flickr

This isn’t your grandfather’s business show. And guaranteed: No pleated pants.

With these words, David Siteman Garland introduces another episode of The Rise to the Top. The syndicated show is nearing its second season, and the 20-something Siteman Garland couldn’t be more enthusiastic.

“It’s a talk show on steroids,” he says of the entrepreneur-focused show, which airs both online and on ABC30 St. Louis. The show uses both traditional and new media to reach out to more than 50,000 viewers. Each multi-segment episode features tips, interviews, inspiration, advice, and other fodder for entrepreneurs. To boot, The Rise to the Top hosts community events, such as networking dinners and a summer-themed business event including Anna Kournikova in July.

Almost singlehandedly, Siteman Garland has built an exciting small-business community in St. Louis. Judging by his extraordinary levels of energy and commitment, the Midwest is just the beginning. Business Pundit interviewed Siteman Garland to find out more, so to speak, about how he runs the show.

BP: How’d you get into TV production?

DSG: The story is crazy. After I graduated from college at age 22, I started a professional in-line hockey league in St. Louis. It was like getting an MBA in two years.

I had a knack for doing sponsorships, so I ended up with a radio show talking about in-line hockey on 1380 St. Louis, a major station. While I was still doing that work, I sat down with a friend at a coffee shop and realized something. I said I felt like there was nothing on TV right now that would be designed for forward-thinking entrepreneurs, the young and the young-at-heart. I said, “I don’t know how I’m going to do it, but I’m going to do it. I think the show will catch on, and we can do good things for the community.”

I had no idea what to do when I started the show, so I found people who did know what was going on. I would ask anyone that would listen to me, I would say “look, I want to do a TV show. I don’t know what I’m doing. If you think it’s a bad idea, tell me now. If you think it’s good idea, and you think someone can help me out with this, I’d appreciate if you could nudge me in right direction.”

As a result, I got networked into some of the top people who could make this a reality, including one of the top media people in St. Louis. The original plan was just get on cable access and see what happens. Next thing you know, the head of this network station (my46 http://www.my46stl.com/) in St. Louis is nice enough to say “let’s give this a shot and see what happens.” It all happened through networking and relationship-building.

I poured everything I had, including all my savings, to get the show going. I made my own production studio, but that’s another story.

BP: What happened?

DSG: I hired a production company when we first started, but things didn’t go as planned. Costs escalated. Our price per episode was more than $8K, which was a huge amount when we were trying to get started. We had budgeted far less than that.

We were going bankrupt in a hurry. It got to the point where we either had to pack up shop, or try to get a loan or investors. We also didn’t have a lot of time, had 1.5 weeks to shoot the next episode.

I thought: “I just have to take action.” I decided to start a Craigslist competition for video editors (that’s the most important role). I put out an ad on Craigslist. Two days later, I had 98 resumes, from someone with 5 Emmies to some guy who just emailed “Yo, my name’s Jay, I do video.”

I weeded the candidates down to 50. Then, I interviewed 25 video editors in person in two days in 2 different coffee shops. By the end, we had narrowed it down to five decent editors.

I created a competition where I paid each candidate a small amount to edit an entire episode. I told them the best one would go on TV. Through the contest, I built great relationships with some of the editors. We got high quality content for less, and with the money saved, we were able to purchase our own equipment.

We had no place to shoot, so we transformed my condo into a studio. We created the most extensive studio in condo history! I’m actually looking at a couple set pieces as we speak. It’s sort of like living in a funhouse.

BP: How many employees do you have?

DSG: We have a team of fewer than ten people. I’m the principal owner of the company. I’ve created a Dream Team of entrepreneurs, independent contractors, and college interns. We have people in internet marketing, graphic design, web development, media planning/buying, video production, and logistics. Our tasks include signing sponsorships; shooting the show; producing, creating, and editing the show; events, and more.

My hands are in a lot of different buckets right now. It can get a little overwhelming in terms of doing everything at once.

BP: Who’s your demographic?

DSG: 62% of viewers meet our target demographic, which covers ages of 25-49. 29% of our demographic is in the 50+ age range, which I didn’t see coming. They’re attracted to our forward-thinking attitude. We’re getting some high-end people who want to know what the “kids” are up to. 9% of viewers are 18-24 years old.

BP: What has your experience with advertisers been?

DSG: We try to offer a different level of engagement than many advertisers. We like to create an experience where advertisers come to events. We try to keep it different.

We also use social media more. For example, the Sub Zero Vodka Bar in St. Louis spends $0 on advertising every year. We created an off-the-menu sponsored drink called The Rise to the Top. It’s a vodka mojito with 3 secret ingredients. The only way you find out about the drinks is through our show, events, Twitter feed, and other show-related media. It creates a sort of “cool factor.” People feel like they have a secret code when they go to the bar and get the drink. It’s been trackable and highly successful.

The idea was to get brand awareness so that we get people through the door. The key for working with any sponsorship or advertiser is to listen, to pay attention to exactly what the advertiser looking for.

You have to have the ability to say no, to tell them “I think you’re money is better spent elsewhere.” It comes back to you tenfold in the long run, because people know that you’re the person who is paying attention to users. You get a reputation for knowing what kinds of products, etc. users are interested in.

BP: What keeps you going?

DSG: My strongest personal assets are energy and taking action. I have a ridiculous amount of energy all the time. It scares people. I’m always bringing energy into everything, and I just don’t stop.

Taking action is also a major thing. Being able to pick an idea and being able to do something about it is key. I’m not a super planner, but being able to take action is the number one thing.

Part of this process is that you really have to be able to hustle and get it done in the beginning. The rewards are in the long run.

See David Siteman Garland in action at The Rise to the Top. The second season starts in September 2009, on ABC30 St. Louis and on the Rise to the Top website.

Ener1’s newly opened production facility near Indianapolis could employ 3,000 workers. Like other renewable energy companies popping up in the Midwest, people are hoping Ener1 can replace some of the fast-disappearing auto and other manufacturing jobs.

If Ford or General Motors are going to buy batteries for an electric car, they need confidence the company they’re buying from can deliver. The lack of experience may be one reason why GM decided to go with LG when choosing a battery supplier for its much-hyped Volt.

As the automobile industry prepares to shift from gas to electric power, grant-hungry battery manufacturers are lining up to gather $2.4 billion worth of loans and grants from the Department of Energy. The WSJ has more:

At the (application) deadline last week, the department said it had received 165 (grant and loan) applications. Companies vying for the federal money include General Motors Corp., Dow Chemical Co., Johnson Controls Inc. and A123 Systems, a closely held battery maker backed by General Electric Co. and others. States including Michigan, Kentucky and Massachusetts are also weighing in with applications, usually in alliance with their favored battery makers.

When the winners are decided, as soon as the end of July, the Energy Department may anoint Livonia, Mich., or Indianapolis or Glendale, Ky., as the future U.S. hub of car batteries. A 2008 study by researchers at Alliance Bernstein forecast the current $9 billion-a-year auto-battery market, based on lead-acid batteries, could reach more than $150 billion by 2030.

The Obama administration is trying to position the United States to become the world’s foremost manufacturer of lithium ion batteries. If the plan works, Ener1’s domestic first-mover advantages could poise it to control the global LI battery industry. “Ener1 estimates it could win 5-12% of a million-vehicle battery market, creating $2.1B in annual revenue with 15% margins,” according to Seeking Alpha. As it stands, nobody knows yet whether the DOE will give it the necessary grant.

There’s an interesting twist to this potentially All-American story. Seeking Alpha reports that…

…66% of Ener1 Group is held by a company whose ‘indirect beneficial owner’ is Boris Zingarevich, a Russian businessman with close ties to Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. Foreign control theoretically shouldn’t matter to the Department of Energy, but it is looking to foster an American advanced-battery industry, not a Russian-controlled one. This is especially true since advanced batteries are likely to have military uses in addition to civilian ones.

For now, Ener1 remains optimistic. And the lithium ion battery story is just beginning.

JetAmerica Airlines, a new low-cost carrier, is offering limited $9 fares between select East Coast and Midwest cities starting July 13. The St. Petersburg Times reports:

The tiny carrier will connect only small and mid-sized cities to the New York metro area and Minneapolis. This venture follows the no-frills, pay-as-you-go model of Irish powerhouse Ryanair and U.S. discounters Spirit Airlines and Allegiant Air. Fares will start at $9 each way for the first nine to 19 seats and top out at $199 one way.

The four initial cities — Toledo, Ohio, South Bend, Ind., Lansing, Mich., and Melbourne on Florida’s east coast — are subsidizing JetAmerica by waiving airport fees and helping with marketing and advertising.

Weikle is tenacious. Skybus, which failed last year, also had a similar business model to Ryanair’s. Skybus, like JetAmerica, served small- to medium-sized cities. Skybus sold ten seats on each flight for $10–just like, you guessed it, JetAmerica. And Skybus’ Columbus, OH hub subsidized the airline to the tune of $57 million.

Remember that Einstein quote, “the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results?” JetAmerica has an almost identical business model to Skybus. Skybus folded after 10 months, stricken to rising fuel costs and a slow economy. What will stop Jet America from failing, too?

I found one possible difference mentioned in a USA Today article. Skybus owned its fleet, while JetAmerica will rent:

Weikle said in the statement that despite a deep recession and a double-digit drop in passenger traffic, now “is actually a good time for a start-up because airlines are cutting flights.”

The company has contracted with Miami-based charter carrier Miami Air International to provide and operate the aircraft. Though flights will be scheduled, the JetAmerica operation will be classified as a public charter, not as a scheduled airline.

I question whether the new plan will work.

The list below celebrates not the failure of these companies, but presents us with a conservative reminder of a not-so-distant past and the lessons we can learn from it.

Save This Page

1. GovWorks

GovWorks may be the only startup failure compelling enough to have a movie made about it. The film “Startup.com” tells the tale of GovWorks’ tantalizing brush with mega-success as a website where everyday citizens could interact with their local governments. It had all the elements of a tear-jerking fall from grace: company is started by childhood friends (one of them a rainmaker, the other a technical wizard). Friends build multi-million dollar net worths only to lose it all to clashing egos and expectations. Throw in the obligatory theft of company technology and the departure of a crucial partner, and you’ve got all the ingredients for a storybook startup failure. GovWorks ultimately filed for bankruptcy in 2001.

2. Flooz.com

Flooz is a textbook example of a startup was pretty much doomed from the start. The idea was to create an alternative online-only currency (Flooz) that people would use instead of their credit cards. Once you acquired a hoard of Flooz, you were then free to use it at any number of retailers who had agreed, in advance, to accept it. There was only one problem. No one bothered to ask why someone would use a totally new and unproven currency instead of credit cards or gift cards, which were backed by trusted merchants. No one asking didn’t stop customers from answering, however, as lack of demand for Flooz plunged the company into bankruptcy in 2001. Apparently, dazzling TV commercials featuring Whoopi Goldberg couldn’t stop an astounding $35 million in venture money from being squandered.

3. Beenz

Beenz was a direct competitor to Flooze who was also forced to close up shop. Amazingly, Beenz raised $80 million over four rounds of venture funding, more than double what Flooz raised for the same, no-demand idea. Unlike Flooz, however, Beenz had the good sense to pull the plug before going under. Once Flooz announced that they were cutting their losses, Beenz followed suit by giving its customers a “spend your Beenz in 10 days or lose ‘em” ultimatum. It is believed that the twin failures of Flooz and Beenz spelled the end of the nascent e-currency market. As C/Net writes, the “collapse of a high-profile trailblazer such as Beenz shows that the Old Economy credit card companies have probably won the online shopping battle.”

4. WebVan

The online grocery shopping website didn’t fail for lack of a good idea. Rather, it was premature growth that dragged this company under the bus. WebVan’s deadly mistake was, as one Harvard professor wrote, “managing the company from the fiftieth floor when you only have a one-story building.” By creating a mammoth, $1 billion infrastructure of high-tech warehouses across the U.S., WebVan squandered the $375 million it raised at IPO on growth that its revenue simply could not justify. The other major problem facing WebVan was the already thin profit margins of the grocery business. All of this combined to deliver a decisive knock-out punch in the form of a 2001 bankruptcy filing that put over 2,000 people out of a job.

5. eToys

eToys.com committed what has come to be known as a Cardinal Sin of 90’s-era dot coms: spending tons of money on advertising, regardless of whether there is a market for your product or service. Nevertheless, the mere idea of an online toy retailer was enough to propel the company to a $166 million IPO in May of 1999. All went well early on, with eToys’ stock trading at highs of $84 per share in October of that same year. But by February 2001 the company’s outrageous spending in spite of revenues had caught up to it, sending its stock to an appalling low of 9 cents per share. Their assets were later acquired by KayBee Toys and is currently reincarnated, although not nearly as successfully as first hoped.