Simon Says

iDroid

2010-06-24T20:13:25Z

As I write this, thousands of idiots across the country are standing in line, waiting to buy the newly-released iPhone 4. I think one of my friends put it best when he asked rhetorically: "Standing in line for two days to get the new iPhone? How about spending that time volunteering at a homeless shelter instead?" He makes a great point. After all, the same phone will still be available in a week or two when the lines are shorter and less time can be wasted. Trust me...no matter how early you get your phone, someone will beat you to it, and nobody will care about his/her timely purchase either.

The lack of time management exemplified by these iPhone zealots is overshadowed by their blind faith in Apple's brand. People who have donated thousands of dollars to Apple and AT&T during the past few years by upgrading their phone three times have only the preachings of their lord and savior Steve Jobs to drive them to the store. Until recently, almost all of the software upgrades available for the iPhone 3G and iPhone 3GS were also available for the iPhone 2G. The differences in hardware between the generations were few, and I could easily debate that spending hundreds of dollars per year for a crisper camera, an upgraded GPS or slightly faster networking is a questionable investment. Still, these early adopters are happy to elbow their way to the Apple Store once again to pay another $300 for a camera on the front of their phone. Seth Godin would be so proud of the "tribe" of unwavering followers that Apple has built.

At this point, my mobile phone ownership has reached a crossroad. When the original 2G iPhone was released, I owned a Blackberry Pearl (which I reluctantly upgraded after more than two years on a Treo 650). There was a significant leap between my incumbent phone and Apple's new release, so I was happy when my company bought me an iPhone. I am still using that original "silverback" version today. Since that purchase, I have considered other options, such as the 3G, 3GS and Android fleet, but I have not been swayed until now. At this point, my antiquated camera, slow networking, and discontinued software upgrade potential (version 4.0 of the iPhone firmware is not available for first generation phones) are causing me to start shopping.

So, as a current iPhone owner, will I simply upgrade to their fourth generation product without considering alternatives? As with any purchase, I think there are several factors to weigh, and each one is valued differently by each consumer. For me, the main difference between Droids and iPhones is the quality of the network. That's it, the rest is clever marketing (except, maybe, for Facetime, but since it only works on WiFi connections amongst iPhone 4 users, Droid will have ample time to catch up soon). Need a good camera, a plethora of apps, the ability to manage messages and an integrated MP3 player? Both products are within an arm's reach of each other in all of those areas, especially after Google Music is launched in September. However, it doesn't matter how cool your phone is if you can't get online, and the AT&T network in the San Francisco Bay Area has become so oversubscribed that it is now a deterrent from marrying oneself to the carrier for another two years. So, in my personal evaluation of the mobile phone market, the network is the most important differentiator, and Apple's inability to partner with more carriers might be the impetus for me to join the growing marketshare of Droid users.

Overall, my antiquated 2G iPhone is still serving most of my needs (albeit slowly and with spotty AT&T coverage), and I certainly don't feel additional urgency simply because a new version is now available. I'd rather spend some time volunteering this weekend than standing in line at the mall with the huddled masses of Steve Jobs worshippers.

Perspective

2010-06-19T22:36:00Z

I'm a big fan of the teachings of the late Jim Rohn, who talked about the "seasons" which we encounter in life and how we can anticipate and prepare for them. In his speeches, he exemplified the busy nature of ants during the Summer as they prepare for the upcoming Winter and he talked about the need that farmers have for shifting the balance of their lives during the Fall in order to maximize the short duration of the harvest. Simply put, he tried to help people understand that we shouldn't be surprised by the cyclical nature of the world and our priorities can be aligned with some of the environmental factors which we know we will face in the future. He also talked about balancing one's family life with their personal, professional, civic and other priorities, and how it is okay to borrow from a particular role if that shift is temporary and reparations are made later. For example, a focused entrepreneur might need to tell his/her children that he/she will be less available during the launch of his/her business, but he/she needs to let his/her family know when that time and care will be repaid afterward.

Throughout my life, I have encountered a lot of uber-focused people, whether they are business executives, civic leaders, athletes or students. I find that it is very easy for a driven, "Type A" person to immerse him/herself in one facet of his/her life without considering the opportunity cost that it plays in other areas. Obsessing over a particular set of goals will lead people to justify their oversight of their other responsibilities, and I have always been intrigued by the life balance that is struck by people who maintain a healthy perspective between the multiple hats that they wear. Someday, I'd love to write a book about exemplary parents who are CEO's, students who are athletes, or business executives who are dutifully involved with civic organizations. It is these types of people who I think serve as the best role models for others. Immersing oneself in one activity or another while sacrificing everything else is almost impossible for others to emulate (let alone respect, in many cases).

I think this lack of balance is very apparent in the world of triathlon. This is a group of people who devote a lot of time and resources to maintaining proficiency in not one, but three different sports. Although I enjoyed my journey to becoming an Ironman, part of the reason I did it at this point in life is because my career was temporarily less demanding and my wife and I have not yet started a family. I had the opportunity to "pour it on" for a number of months, so I did it while I could. I am surrounded by examples of people who do not have the same mindset. They devote an inordinate amount of money, time, energy, resources and stress toward an activity which is supposed to be a hobby. However, they continue to let these obsessions take over their lives without striking a healthy balance. Like anything in life, very, very few people are successful enough to reap many sustained rewards from triathlon. Sure, they might enjoy the sport and they might be locally competitive, but even the top professionals aren't earning many monetary rewards. Given the choice between an extra swim, ride or run or some quality time spent with family, honing a professional skill or serving their community, I often see people making the wrong choices. Sure, that extra two hours per week of training might help you gain a two minute advantage in your next race. Is it worth it, considering your other responsibilities?

I also see a lot of misaligned financial choices in the athletic community, especially among cyclists. The shiny new bike widget that weighs four ounces less than its counterpart might be $200 more expensive. That meaningless triathlon in between the two races which you actually enjoy might be $150. That trendy dietary product might be $100 yet totally ineffective. The sum of these seemingly insignificant decisions tallies up to a sizable total. Jon Krakauer's Into Thin Air studies the commercialization of Mt. Everest and the fact that anybody with enough money can attempt to climb it these days (although many of them fail while doing so). I felt the same way about Ironman when I was preparing for it. Almost any decently athletic and healthy person who wants to shell out enough money can make a respectable attempt at besting the 17-hour time limit for a 140.6 mile triathlon. The question is: how many things did they bypass along the way to that goal?

I am really enjoying life after Ironman. I'm still swimming, cycling and running a decent amount (logging another 128 miles this week), but I'm only doing the workouts which I enjoy. No longer am I getting up at 4am three times a week to make it to the pool at the detriment of my attention span later in the day. No longer am I spending hours on long weekend bike rides while abandoning my wife at home. No longer am I stressing about every nuance of an upcoming race while neglecting my other hobbies and ambitions. I'm swimming, cycling, running and racing when I feel like it. I'm a former music major who is practicing the piano for the first time in years. I'm seeing my family, visiting my friends and volunteering more. Although there was a "season" when Ironman was a big focus, I'm happy to put that goal behind me in lieu of balancing my priorities differently.

Throughout my life, there have been seasons when my academic, musical, career, athletic or civic pursuits trumped their competitors at one point or another. I think that's perfectly acceptable, as long as it is a temporary shift. I just think it's important to eventually return to a healthy "homeostasis" with regard to the various hats we wear. If you're able to do that while succeeding in each area, you undoubtedly have my respect in doing so.

The Calorie Equation

2010-05-26T14:52:51Z

As an endurance athlete, I am often asked for nutrition advice. My knee-jerk reaction is to remind people that fitness awareness and dietary knowledge are two different things, and I am more of a novice on the latter subject than the former one. My sources of nutrition information would be the same as anyone else's, and I think we should leave the subject matter expertise in that field to the registered dietitians who earned the right to guide us. (One of my favorite quotes is from a friend who has a PhD in Nutritional Biochemistry who sarcastically says she is "so glad that there are so many chiropractors out there these days giving nutritional advice.") Still, although I am not an expert, I am someone who let his fitness spiral out of control (from a sub-5:00 miler weighing 140 lbs in high school to a tired-after-5-minutes walker who tipped the scales at 218 lbs by the time I was 21 years old) before learning to maintain a healthy lifestyle. I think my perspective on this subject places me in the minority, but I will try to explain my position.

There are two sides to the calorie equation: what you consume and what you burn. While 99% of Americans seem fixated on their intake, there is a small group of people who focus more on their fitness goals. It is no surprise that our country is split along those lines. The diet industry is worth billions of dollars to thousands of companies, and most consumers are under the impression that caloric reductions and magic shakes are an easier solution than catalyzing an exercise routine. In my experience of losing 50 pounds, it took a mixture of both strategies, with the fitness side of the equation trumping the nutrition side.

Let's do some simple math. Imagine your body composition, metabolism and activity level dictate that it would take 1,500 calories per day for you to maintain your current weight. Let's say that your goal is to lose one pound (3,500 calories) per week. In order to do that without increasing your activity level, you would have to find a way to reduce your caloric intake by 1/3 to 1,000 calories per day. Take a look at the labels and serving sizes on your favorite (or even your most despised and tasteless) foods. Do you really think it is feasible to maintain those numbers month after month? If you are replacing meals with shakes, your suppressed satiety will make it even more difficult to keep your food calories in the triple digits, especially if you have coworkers, friends or family members who invite you for lunch, dinner and cocktails. Leading a 1,000/day lifestyle might work for a few days, but it generally fizzles to a short-term "fad diet" rather than a lifelong path.

Now, let's look at the other side of the equation. I burn approximately 110 calories per mile when I run. In a light week of running, I log 20-25 miles and in a peak week, I put in 60-70 miles. Cycling, swimming and other aerobic activities also have high rates of caloric burn. Thus, in order for me to cut 3,500 calories per week from my equation without altering the way I eat, I would need to run 32 miles. At a pace of 7:30/mile, we're talking about a mere investment of four hours per week doing something that I already love to do. If I run more than that or supplement with other activities (or if I would rather not lose a pound a week), I can actually raise my caloric intake while maintaining my body weight. Those 32 miles per week would allow me to add 500 calories per day to my diet. As long as I am injury-free, I don't feel the same pressure of denial that I would with a reduced-calorie diet; I actually look forward to continuing my running every week. This lends itself to being more of a long-term lifestyle change than a short-term crash diet.

Thus, the missing ingredient for most people in the calorie equation is fun. Body weight = calories consumed - (calories burned + fun). While the enjoyment of the exercise doesn't have a number attached to it, if you remove it from the formula, the body weight tends to eventually increase. How do we increase the fun in our calorie equation? I'm a big believer in what I call "(s)miles" (or social miles). Working out with friends provides an encouraging social aspect to your routine while also inserting some latent accountability. Even if you simply start the workout with a friend and don't see or talk to each other until you are both finished, knowing that someone else is out there is often enough to keep your effort level where it needs to be. For me, joining a local race club provided the inspiration, friendships and training partners to prod me along from race to race. Even online fitness networks like DailyMile can provide an amateur athlete with the social component and accountability that they need to keep going.

Aside from (s)miles, the other way to ensure you have fun is to choose the right activity in the first place. If you don't enjoy running, why run? There are dozens of other activities that can help you balance your calorie equation. Pick one that you actually like! Keep in mind, though, that fitness becomes more fun as you improve. Even a runner like me hates the first 30-40 miles of every training cycle because I feel slow, lethargic and out of breath. That goes away as your fitness comes along. I used to absolutely hate swimming because I was horrible at it. Now, I look forward to heading down to the pool to log some yards, whether I have people to swim with or not. I actually enjoy swimming more than cycling these days, which is saying a lot, considering how much I have detested the water since I was a child.

So, I'm not saying that I lost 50 pounds by eating everything in sight and simply working out more. I certainly had to balance every part of the equation to make a change. What I am saying is that more Americans should take a look at logging (s)miles instead of hopping from fad diet to fad diet. In a country where 67% of our citizens are overweight or obese, obviously something isn't working. Since the vast majority of them are mostly sedentary, it doesn't take much research to pinpoint the problem. If every American burned just 1,000 more calories per week, I bet our health care costs would plummet and Congress would be able to debate something less controversial.

My Twixperiment

2010-05-25T03:22:55Z

Over the years, I have been a public naysayer of the value of Twitter. It was approximately one year ago that I called the messaging platform "creepy" on this blog. I felt like Twitter needed more privacy and features, more loyal members to build a critical mass of usage, and less saturation of valueless content. Relative to social media vehicles like Facebook, LinkedIn and MySpace, I thought Twitter would be best used by major brands or celebrities to find an unfiltered alternative to the outdated and costly model of offering periodic newsletter subscriptions.

In December, I decided I would give Twitter another shot. I realized that my own personal use of the service was not very exemplary. On @simonmutlu, I muse about a variety of subjects and regretfully contribute to the online "noise" of self-centered content. I was using that handle for shouting into a vacuum rather than gathering an audience and facilitating discussions. Thus, I thought I should create a second Twitter account to experiment with best practices to see what would transpire. On December 5th, 2009 (as I was checking in for the Santa Barbara Marathon), @we_run was born. Here are some things that I have learned during the past six months:

Pick a short handle - Why did I call it @we_run? The idea was to pick a handle short enough to be retweeted easily. If your amazingly viral message takes up 115 out of the allotted 140 characters and your Twitter name is @NorthernCaliforniaWindsurfingExtraordinaire, trust me, you won't be credited in any retweets.

Stick to one subject - On my @simonmutlu account, I follow a lot of worst practices when it comes to this point. One day, I might talk about Salesforce.com and a customer relationship management consultant will start following me, hoping I will have something valuable to say about CRM in the future. The next day, I might talk about my power numbers on my bike and the following day, I'll repost a link to an eMarketer article that I found interesting. To be honest, I don't know why anybody follows @simonmutlu. I would have unsubscribed from myself a long time ago out of frustration or boredom!

Say something valuable - Whether you are on Twitter, writing a blog post or simply talking to your spouse, there is a big difference between conversing and emoting. Does the whole world need to know that you are tired, hungry, or wearing your favorite scarf? Surely, not even your friends truly care about those things, but strangers will divorce you altogether after a rogue post like that. Before you announce something to the twitterverse, first use the acronym HEART: Is your post going to be humorous, educational, affirmative, retweetable and/or timely? The majority of your followers want to be entertained or they are looking for advice, news and encouragement. Stop your tweets that are lacking HEART before they happen.

It's not a numbers game - I started my Twitter adventure with the notion that I had to amass as many followers as possible. I thought that numbers equated to influence or success, which is the same trap that many direct marketers fall into with their newspaper distribution or email subscribers. Followers are easy to count and they look good in marketing reports, but they are an indirect success metric. If you simply want numbers on Twitter, I have a magic formula for you: for every 100 potentially interested people you follow (for example, for @we_run, the potentially interested people are runners), 60 of them will follow you back. @we_run has 1,200 followers right now. If I wanted to build that number to 2,000, I'd simply need to go to @runnersworld's subscriber list (posted publicly) and follow another 1,300 of their readers. Why would I do that, though? If everybody blindly follows everybody else, it's like a bunch of ships rising with the tide. The boats are still at the same level relative to each other, but the additional water (in this analogy, content) simply creates "noise." You don't need 1,000,000 followers...you just need a manageable number of truly engaged ones.

Stop namedropping - There are a lot of people on Twitter who are name-droppers and hashtag whores. They think that adding a lot of high-follower account names and trending hashtags will help new people find them. They're probably right. However, how would you feel if, in casual conversation, your friends continually referred to a cousin's former roommate who was remotely famous ten years ago? I do believe that hashtags can be a great way for people to find each other (at a trade show, or following a particular topic, for example). It's just excessive or disingenuous use that turns me off.

Consolidation is a service - There is much more information on the Internet than any of us have time to read, and the summarization of headlines and truncation of content is always valuable. Twitter is no different. I am a happy follower of @retailretweets, an account that simply summarizes the top news in the retail sector. I also enjoy @runningtimes, where Rodale Press (parent company of Runner's World and Running Times, among other magazines) publishes unique headlines for serious runners. Along those lines, more than half of my tweets for @we_run are retweets of accounts that I follow. Why don't my followers simply subscribe to all of the sources from which I gather my information? The simple answer is that they don't want to. Having me consolidate, summarize and (in many cases) repair grammar errors makes it easier to follow @we_run than to befriend every runner on Twitter.

Still, have something original to say - You can retweet interesting headlines and posts, but you still need to offer a perspective and some expertise to your followers to keep them interested. As a runner and a running coach, it's easy for me to find topics and tips to deliver to my audience. It all goes back to the HEART acronym...if you are being humorous, educational, affirmative, retweetable and timely, your jokes, tips, encouragement and news will be well received.

Dialogs, not monologues - Sure, tweeting doesn't provide the same kind of instant feedback that speaking to a live person does. That doesn't mean that there aren't opportunities to interact. A couple of weeks ago, a friend was considering running skirts, a subject which I know nothing about. I asked my female followers for their reviews of different ones. The other day, a friend asked me about ultramarathons (running races between 31 miles and 100 miles long). Again, I was not an expert, but at least 50 of my followers are, so I asked them for guidance. Try to ask your audience questions, and be sure to respond when they talk to you. The same rules that applied in kindergarten are pertinent on Twitter: acknowledge people, be congenial, thank them and help them.

Tweeps are people, too - Twitter is simply a platform by which people can converse in short phrases. The technology doesn't change the fact that they have families, careers, hobbies and homes. By tweeting about a particular subject, you will find a lot of people with whom you have something important in common, but ask them about their perspective on other topics as well. I have had the opportunity to meet a few followers in person, and they are exceptional people who happen to enjoy running, too. Many of them are also excellent writers, which makes their blogs, articles and books just as interesting as their tweets. This is one area where getting to know a few great people is better than building an army of disengaged followers.

So, do I still think Twitter is creepy? It certainly has its moments. However, after conducting a more thorough test, I will admit that it doesn't just have benefits for businesses, non-profits and celebrities. The average person who is passionate about a particular topic can certainly build a cohesive network by simply signing up for an account and following some of the aforementioned best practices which I have learned during the past six months.

Do I plan to continue tweeting on @we_run? I'll answer with a tentative "yes." I'll probably slow the frequency of my posts at some point, but I really do enjoy interacting with runners from around the world, many of which I hope to meet on the road or at a race in the near future.

IMSG by the Numbers

2010-05-19T12:43:00Z

People who are pure swimmers, cyclists or runners often affectionately refer to triathletes as "tri geeks." (Don't believe me? Check out this super-geeky race analytics website.) That term isn't far from the truth for any endurance athlete, because the analysis of data becomes a big part of one's training and racing strategy. (In that respect, my career in data-driven marketing is analogous to my endurance sport hobby.) If I asked you to go out and run at 4-minute-per-mile pace right now, you would likely be able to do it. The question is: how long could you keep that up? Thirty seconds? One minute? Two full miles, like an Olympian? There are tests and calculators that we can use to estimate the answers to those types of questions, and the complexity of those calculations will multiply as we add swimming, cycling and duration to the equation. Thus, it's important to measure our success in more ways than just our final finishing time.

I'm a big fan of the Endurance Nation training methodology. This triathlon program, created many years ago by two exceptional Ironman athletes and coaches (Rich Strauss and Patrick McCrann), is the world's most expansive study on long course triathlon training and results. Thousands of athletes have collected millions of data points to determine the best practices for training and racing. If you want to know how to become a more efficient swimmer, how hard you should go on the bike, how to get faster on the run or how many calories to consume, there are strong guidelines and, in some cases, definitive answers. So, aside from the information provided by the official race clock, here is how I would grade my performance at Ironman St. George based on the other metrics which should be monitored:

Training volume (C+) This is an area where I really did not excel. I can't share my training plan with you because it is a proprietary Endurance Nation document, but I can say that it looks nothing like my training log. There are a few logical explanations why I missed so many bike intervals, swim drills and tempo runs: My commute to/from the office took three hours from my day, I lost a lot of weekend days to my coaching responsibilities, and my need to learn to swim trumped some of my other workouts. Still, I definitely went into my race undertrained on the bike and the run, and my lack of brick workouts was very apparent.

T1 (A- ) My first transition was a deplorable 12 minutes, but with my hands being frozen from the swim, it would not have been easy to try to put on arm warmers, gloves, shoes, etc any faster. Either way, I'm sure I could practice and cut that time down by a couple of minutes. I do find it ironic that many triathletes will go to great lengths to cut 30 seconds from their transition time, but through incorrect pacing, they will lose 30 minutes later in the day.

T-Pace (A) This is the pace per hundred yards at which someone swims an all-out 1000 yard test. Mine was roughly 1:50/100 and, considering that I spent a full minute of my 1:17:02 swim split clinging to kayaks, I ended up slightly beating my anticipated swim time. I had never been in a triathlon, sighted buoys in open water, or dealt with crowds before, so I'm sure I did my share of zig-zagging along the way. Swimming, like golf, has a lot more to do with technique than might, and I think I can probably learn to shave off a few more minutes by continuing to work at it.

IF (B+) A person's Intensity Factor (IF) is the percentage of their Functional Threshold Power (FTP, or average wattage during an hour all-out effort) at which they ride. The Endurance Nation program encourages people to ride a full Ironman at 70% IF and a half Ironman at 80% IF in order to save their legs for the upcoming run segment. I use a device that measures wattage on each pedal stroke (called a PowerTap) and I was happy when I downloaded and analyzed my numbers after the race. My IF at Ironman St. George was 69.9%. I have to thank Coach Patrick, who analyzed one of my training rides a few weeks earlier which was done at 78% IF and he helped me learn to be more patient. However, I did fail at staying consistent throughout the ride. On the first 22 miles of the course, I was at 182 watts (or 72% IF). On the next 45 mile loop, I was at 185 watts (or 73% IF). On the last 45 mile loop, I was at 166 watts (65.7%). The drop-off in intensity shows that I was becoming fatigued as the bike portion transpired, which didn't bode well for my marathon.

VI (C+) The Variable Index (VI) shows the disparity between the highest wattage numbers and the lowest wattage numbers on a particular ride. The ideal scenario is to have a VI score of 1.0 (or close to it), showing that there were no peaks or valleys to the intensity throughout the ride. My VI score was 1.11, which is somewhat reflective of the hilly course, but I have training partners who rode at 1.07 VI. This means that I need to get smarter about backing off on the uphills and pedaling harder on the downhills. Being more disciplined about staying in my aero bars would also help.

FTP (C-) Due to my undertraining (mostly on the bike), my functional threshold power remained virtually unchanged between August of 2009 (255) and March of 2010 (252). Most members of my team were seeing gains of 10-15% power during the months preceding the race. I think, through a concerted effort, I should be able to improve upon that number by 10%, which will raise my watts/kilogram (the true test of a cyclist's strength).

Nutrition/Hydration (D+) I did a very poor job of hydrating and eating during the race. I had a bagel, a banana and some water before the race. I ate and drank nothing at T1. I spent almost seven hours on the bike and had only four bottles of water (the goal is a bottle per hour) and approximately 900 calories (the goal is 250 calories per hour). I spent almost five hours on the marathon and had one gel, a few snacks (orange slices, a cookie and a banana slice) and some drinks (probably the equivalent of two bottles). There is really no excuse for this error...it's an ongoing challenge for me in all of my races and it's something I need to work on. I don't know if my legs would have felt any better if I had doubled my nutrition and hydration, but I'm sure I would have had more energy and more grit.

VDOT (A-) In my run training, we use legendary coach Jack Daniels' velocity at VO2 Max (VDOT) method to determine pacing. My VDOT score leading up to the race was 56, which meant that I should be able to run a standalone marathon in just under three hours and an Ironman marathon in approximately three hours and forty minutes. In February, I ran my fastest 5K since high school and a couple of weeks before the race, I ran a 10-mile course within a minute of my personal record. So, although I was lacking tempo runs, mileage volume and brick runs, my run fitness was improving well.

Run pacing (B+) Given the hilly course and the fact that this was my first triathlon, I would have been happy with any time faster than four hours. In looking at my Garmin data, including my walks through the aid stations to force myself to hydrate, I was averaging roughly 8:30-9:00/mile. Thus, I don't think I made a tactical error on the run...I did exactly what I set out to do. I probably could have done more downhill training to prepare my muscles more for the pounding of the course, but I still think I picked the right pace.

Fun (B+) More important than any metrics or times is the fact that we do these things in our spare time, so we need to enjoy them. Overall, my experience in St. George was a very positive one. I signed up to challenge myself and I rose to the challenge. Being able to share the week with some good friends and training partners was icing on the cake.

All of this analysis has one common theme: there were a lot of places where some time could have been shaved off. A flatter course, a more efficient swim stroke, a higher FTP on the bike, more nutrition and hydration, better execution, etc would all have led to a better time. I mentioned in a previous post that I had no desire to do another full Ironman. I still want to focus on other life priorities right now, but I can't say I never, ever want to give it another shot. I'd love to go shave off a couple of hours someday, and I reserve the right to do so, regardless of my talk of retirement a couple of weeks ago = )

Hire Learning

2010-05-17T12:59:00Z

I have a friend who has been very successful in business, founding multiple companies and building one of them to multi-billion dollar annual revenues. He once taught me a simple three-pronged leadership lesson:

Hire the best people - The contributions of a great hire can be exponentially more than someone who is just "good."
Get out of their way - Nobody needs to be micromanaged, but talented people are particularly turned off by it.
Build in accountability mechanisms - Periodic reports can be inefficient, but perpetual transparency lends itself to higher quality and better teamwork.

Thus, the whole three-step process begins with making great hires. Given the economic status and unemployment rate of most countries these days, finding great talent would seem foolproof. However, I think a lot of companies don't have good processes for vetting candidates for open positions.

Over the years, I have been lucky to build some high performing teams. The single biggest lesson I have learned is to look for intangibles. Think about your best teammates over the years. What made them so great? Was it the big project or strategic sale they closed ten years ago? Was it that college degree and Cisco certification they earned fifteen years ago? Or was it their untiring self-discipline, their disarming communication style with customers, their team-building and peer mentoring skills, their ability to quickly understand new concepts, or the contagious positive attitude they spread around the office? I suspect that their intangible traits were the most valuable for your organization, but how do we detect them during the interview process? Here are some things I have learned:

No method is foolproof - Calm down. There is no way to ensure, without a doubt, that you are choosing the right person. You won't know how effective someone is until after they join your team. However, by the time you open up a requisition, your company already needs someone in that role. So, make a speedy decision. Hemming and hawing for weeks and months will hurt your team in immeasurable ways.
Signs of perseverance - I might not be able to tell how resilient you are in your professional life, but I will know if you have that same mindset by looking for clues in your personal life. For example, I once hired a sales engineer who completed an Ironman triathlon. There is nothing that I would require of him that would be tougher than swimming, cycling and running 140.6 miles. His grit proved true in his loyalty to the company when the economy slowed and his responsibilities grew.
Ability to learn - A couple of years ago, I was looking for a marketing intern and one candidate was light on experience but graduated Magna Cum Laude while playing Division One volleyball at an academically challenging university. That set her apart. Someone like that, if a good cultural fit and genuinely interested in marketing, will easily be able to learn the necessary skills to outperform someone with more experience and less of an ability to learn. She certainly met and exceeded our expectations since then.
Teamwork skills - Joining a company is all about working with a team, and it's very difficult to know what kind of teammate someone is by simply reading a resume and talking to them a few times. I once had the opportunity to hire a stellar guy who played collegiate soccer, became a leadership consultant, performed well in his sales career and obtained master's degrees in ethics and business administration. All of those cohort-related ingredients were the perfect recipe for a great team player, and he has now been provided with the opportunity to be the leader of his own team.
Philanthropic inclinations - I have found that people who are active in the community often bring those same good intentions to their professional life. The same people who serve the people and organizations in their personal life are usually rock stars in their career as well. Those qualities and priorities make for great employees who your team can work with and respect.
Family life - If you want to know more about a person's values and they volunteer information about being a parent, ask them about their children. Some of the most responsible, ethical, influential people I have worked with have had outstanding families.
Raison d'etre - It's important to understand someone's longterm career goals to determine whether your available position would be a good mutual fit. We have all taken the wrong job at one point, and it's important for us to ensure that we are not aiding someone in making a similar mistake. Generally, if the person seeks your company (rather than simply responding to a posted description), there is a higher propensity for their interest to be sincere. It's also important to understand someone's motivations. My best salespeople are often those who are not driven by financial goals, but are more inclined toward healthy competition, pride in one's work or sharing a company vision which resonates with their interests.
Okay to be overqualified - There have been multiple times when I have had the chance to bring on someone who has decided to take a step back from management or otherwise seems much more experienced than the position requires. I once hired a marketing intern who had already co-founded a couple of successful ecommerce companies. Why are these people interested in positions that might seem junior for them? It goes back to the previous point. They enjoy your company, your industry and your role. If their reasons are on-point, bring them aboard and then worry about exactly which role they will play. Intuition is okay, but suspicion can be unhealthy.

Overall, I think that leadership and recruiting are closely intertwined. When the right people are on a team, a leader can look like a genius. There are certainly Super Bowl, World Series and Stanley Cup champion teams who were led by lower caliber coaches than some of their competitors, but almost no world champion team consists of sub-par athletes. By evaluating the intangible traits of our candidates to attract the right ones to join our organization, we can allow employees to flourish. After all, a great company is simply a great collection of people aligned toward a compelling vision, and their leader is just helping them get there.

I'm Finally an Ironman

2010-05-02T13:58:00Z

This week, I had the opportunity to take some time to pursue a longterm goal of mine: to complete an Ironman triathlon. The process of training to swim 2.4 miles followed by a 112 mile bike ride followed by a 26.2 mile marathon takes several months. Thus, amidst the nerves that arrive on race day is the feeling of relief that there is only another 140.6 miles to go.

I drove to St. George, Utah with some friends who have been mentors for me ever since I took up endurance sports. We arrived on Monday and had the chance to spend the week swimming, riding and running on the course which we would be tackling on Saturday. We wanted to believe that the bike course and run course were not as challenging as people reported, but we were proven wrong. The bike course is the toughest Ironman route in North America (I believe Ironman Nice, with its journey through the French Alps is the only one that is more aggressive) and the run course is the toughest Ironman route in the world. Combined with the frightening winds (we had gusts up to 55mph this week), chip-seal roads (which make for a very bumpy ride) and temperature ranges (the lake where we would be swimming could be as cold as 54 degrees while the air temperature on the run could be as warm as 90 degrees), we were dreading the arrival of this race.

Ironman provides an incredible experience for athletes, though. The check-in process was smooth, their gift shop was buzzing with thousands of people looking for apparel symbolizing this inaugural race, their pre-race banquet featured Dave Orlowski (one of the original 12 Ironmen from 1978), and the logistics of setting up transitions at various locations were perfectly smooth. The company thinks of everything when it comes to putting on an event, from proactive body marking days before the race to assigning a "catcher" who is responsible for your well-being at the finish line. Although there are many 140.6-mile triathlons that people can enter, there is something about the Ironman brand which provides a unique experience for participants.

My race day alarm buzzed at 3:00am in order to allow me to leave at 4:00am to catch the shuttle to the swim-to-bike transition area (T1). The weather was unseasonably cool, with a projected high temperature of less than 70 degrees, which was perfect for me. I was lucky to have more than a dozen friends from my race club also registered for Ironman St. George, almost all of which have done many long course triathlons before (three of which were here for their 10th, 13th and 21st Ironman races). They did a great job of taking me under their wing to show me how to train and how to prepare for the event. We jumped on the shuttle and I realized that I was still holding on to both of my concentrated solution water bottles (one of which I was supposed to leave in a "special needs bag" in order to pick it up at Mile #52 of the bike segment). I decided to improvise and pour the contents of one of those bottles in my aero bottle while putting the other one in the bottle cage on my bike. This meant that I would be starting off my day with more calories and electrolytes than originally planned, but I figured I could refill it with water after the first hour or two and it wouldn't affect me very much. As for nutrition, I had some Cliff bars that I broke up into little pieces in my bento box and I had some GUs in my jersey pocket (as well as Carbo Pro in my concentrated bottle). My plan was to try to take in 200+ calories per hour on the bike and I failed miserably. However, I did eat and drink much more than I usually do on my training rides.

T1 was an amazing sight, with almost 2,000 bikes, people and transition bags set up. The air temperature was in the low 40's, and people were putting on their wetsuits a full hour before the 7:00am start time in an attempt to stay warm. Finally, at 6:40am, we made our way over to the boat ramp. Reports on the water temperature varied quite a bit...we swam at Sand Hollow on Wednesday when it was 57 degrees and the high winds churned the colder water up, cooling off the warmer layer on top. Still, some people were reporting a 58-59 degree temperature. When we jumped in, we certainly didn't believe it. For me, anything 59 or above is somewhat tolerable, while temperatures under 57 will take my breath away for a few minutes until I become numb. We later learned that the temperatures were closer to 54 degrees, as one of our friends was pulled out of the water 400 yards from shore due to hypothermia symptoms. I certainly couldn't breathe when I jumped in and submerged my face. I was anxious to get started in an attempt to burn enough calories to be able to move.

This was my first mass swim start and I was very nervous. Anybody who has ever been in a triathlon knows that the swim can be a huge underwater wrestling match, as people are constantly running into each other, allowing their swim stroke to push other people around (or down into the water) and their feet to kick people in the face (therefore knocking goggles loose). As soon as the cannon fired, I was pummeled by dozens of people trying to sprint ahead to find some open water. I was completely scared. Six months ago, I couldn't swim 25 yards across a pool, and here I was trying not to drown while people were knocking me around and pulling me down. I immediately made a beeline for a nearby support kayak and clung on to its edge for a moment while I gathered my thoughts. I spotted another kayak 100 yards away and I told myself I'd make it there and reassess the situation. As I hung on to the second kayak, I decided I had no choice but to jump into the crowd and try to find a spot where I could swim. Luckily, I did. I planned to try to swing to the far right side of each buoy in order to avoid some of the congestion, but learned that my swim stroke is a bit lopsided and kept veering to the left where the competition was tougher. The plus side is that there is more of a draft on that side, so it is possible for people to swim faster if they are aggressive about getting around (or over) people who swim more slowly. I calmed myself by making a game of it, seeing how many people I could pass, and I kept telling myself that I was swimming really well. In all honesty, I had no idea how fast or slow I was going...the clock could have said 1:05 or 1:45 when I got out and I wouldn't have been surprised either way. Thankfully, it said 1:17:02, which was three minutes faster than my expectation.

My transition time was an incredibly slow 12 minutes, mostly because my hands were too cold to move. I put on arm warmers, two jerseys, gloves, socks, shoes and a helmet and found my bike in the racks. The air temperature was still in the mid 40's (and we expected it to be in the low 40's at the top of the climb), so I was shivering quite a bit. I told the team I coach that I was expecting to spend 6 hours and 45 minutes on the bike. Normally, that would be a very slow bike split for me, but considering the rigor of the course and the fact that I was trying to ride at 70% of my functional threshold (the amount of power which I can produce in one hour of all-out cycling), I thought it was a reasonable expectation. I started at the same exact time as a good friend and training partner and I was passed by another teammate at Mile #6. We rode 22 miles to St. George and then started two 45-mile loops through the hills climbing up to Gunlock and Veyo. The course was congested with cyclists, and it was hard to abide by the drafting, blocking and passing rules that Ironman sets forth, but I did my best to ride an honest race without getting in anyone's draft. I was having some stomach issues, so I stopped at a port-a-potty to try to resolve them, but that didn't work. I was disappointed to lose the 5-6 minutes to no avail, but my back was happy to be able to stretch a little. During the climb up the "Veyo Wall," I heard a familiar voice yell my name...it was my good friend coming up behind me and absolutely crushing her bike time (she finished 4th in her age group). At the 56-mile mark, I looked at my clock and I was astonished to see how slowly I was riding. I was on pace for a 7-hour bike split...I'm pretty sure I can do a 5:30 on a flat course, so I was really disheartened. However, the descent into St. George was pretty fast...at one point I was doing 39mph in my aero bars and having a ton of fun. At Mile #67, I saw some spectators I knew and at Mile #70 I saw my friend and training partner who was doing Ironman St. George for his 40th birthday. He and I rode near each other for 15 miles before I proceeded toward the bike-to-run transition (T2) on my own. There was a second port-a-potty break during that loop which was also unhelpful, and I was accruing a lot of pain (left calf was seizing up, right foot was extremely sore where it was pressing against the pedal, lower back and neck were killing me), so I was wondering how I was going to run a marathon. However, seeing some friends running as I rode into T2 got me excited about joining them out there. The friend whom I rode with got into transition a couple of minutes after me, so I waited up for him and we headed out on the run together.

I was really doubting my run strength during Mile #1, but my calf and foot numbed a bit and I was able to start moving. I was trying to feel for my heart rate and determined that I could comfortably run 8:30/mi pace without bonking or getting sore. I was wrong. The course was very hilly and, although I maintained that pace for the first 14-15 miles, I eventually moved to a walk/jog and then a walk at Mile #17. I was very disappointed to be 9 miles from the finish line and totally unable to run anymore, but my legs and joints simply couldn't support my body weight anymore. I did my best to pace myself, but my inexperience showed. So, I decided to make the most of it and start walking to the best of my capability. I saw quite a few friends on the run course, five of which finished in less than 12 hours (two of them qualified for the Ironman World Championships in Kona, Hawaii) and a couple of which were walking about as fast as I was. At Mile #20, I was so fatigued that I actually went into a port-a-potty just to be able to sit down for a minute. By Mile #24, I was wondering if I could walk the next two miles. I was feeling faint and trying to take in calories and hydration, but the fear of fainting a couple of miles short of becoming an Ironman was welling up inside of me. At Mile #25, I looked at my watch and realized I was going to "run" a marathon slower than 5 hours if I didn't start moving. I threw caution to the wind and figured if I fainted, it would be better to do it while fighting than while walking. Somehow, my adrenaline allowed me to run a mile to the finish line without falling. I stopped a foot short, dropped to the ground and did a Blazeman Roll in honor of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis victim Jon Blais, who has been a big inspiration to me. As I rose, I was greeted by Bob and Mary Ann Blais, Jon's parents, and being congratulated by them was the best feeling I had all day.

So, although I don't really feel any different and I'm a bit embarrassed about my super-slow marathon, I woke up today an Ironman. I have absolutely no desire to do another 140.6 mile triathlon; for me, it was just a "bucket list" goal to accomplish someday. I'm sure there will come a day when I want to find a flatter course to try to do what I think is possible for me (sub-11 hours), but I will have the memories of my painful 13:31 day to sober me from that inclination. Regardless of my retirement from that distance, I am eternally thankful for the friends who encouraged me to ride a bike, taught me how to swim, and guided me to this goal. Now, it's time to work on the next item on my bucket list, which I will blog about soon.

The Rarity of Hedgehogs

2010-03-15T16:48:01Z

I have found most business books to contain some good theories and a few employable practices, but they require a healthy dose of reality checking on the part of the reader. In my experience, Jim Collins' Good to Great has been the anomaly. I have been able to apply virtually every concept in that book to almost any organization in my professional life and my civic life. After all, it would be hard to try to refute the universal need for authentic leadership, great people and a focused strategic plan, right?

The one lesson that I see technology companies continually struggle with is the Hedgehog Concept. Simply put, this is the concept that businesses who emulate a hedgehog (an animal that focuses on one activity rather than many, like a fox) have a greater chance of success.How do you figure out your business' "one direction?" Use the Venn Diagram below to determine the overlap between your company's deepest passions, the activities which drive your economic engine, and the offering(s) in which you are the best in the world.

Over the years, I have watched many technology companies place their passions as their highest priority. Naturally, technology startups are passionate about innovation, which often leads them in the direction of the fox. They start projects without analyzing the market to determine if their new invention will drive their economic engine. Then, they release half-coded products/features/services and move on to the next thing without ensuring quality and competitive protection.

I have worked for companies that have this mentality, and it becomes very difficult to market or sell their offerings. Prospective customers don't usually have the budget or the interest in selecting more than one vendor. They simply want to figure out which partner is the best fit for their needs, and they will enter into a contract with that provider. Thus, it is the duty of the sales and marketing organization to find businesses that have those specific needs and to establish the credibility that their products and services are truly the best in the world for those businesses. All too often, I see technology companies that wonder why their sales team isn't more successful. Certainly, it could be a question of ineffective marketing, time management, sales cycle management, partner management, or dozens of other factors. However, how many executive teams earnestly consider the fact that they just might not be the best option for their target market? It doesn't take a lot of cold calls or lost opportunities for the sales team to figure it out. Is it a question of pride or is there a lack of analytics that allow many management teams to overlook their competitive weaknesses?

The good news is that your business does not need to be the best in the world at everything. You just need to excel at something. Not just according to your website and your marketing collateral. Really, truly the best at some aspect of your industry. If you carve out your niche and dominate it, your customers will be the first to evangelize it for you. In this age of information availability, a customer testimonial in a well-measured case study is worth 1,000 claims by your sales and marketing messaging.

So, in which area of your industry are you the best? When I was in the web analytics industry, we watched a little-known company with almost no marketing prowess called Visual Sciences make a name for itself in complex modeling with large data sets. We saw Coremetrics gain market share with their focus on sophisticated retailers. Neither company was as big as WebTrends or Omniture, but they were the best at something. In the email marketing world, CheetahMail was known for the impenetrable relationship its Account Managers had with their customers and Strongmail made a name for itself in the email infrastructure appliance market while ExactTarget tried to be the easiest solution to use. In such a crowded industry, there was no clear favorite, but it wasn't impossible to be the #1 choice for a subgroup of decision makers. Notice that I didn't mention price in my examples. If your strategy is to be #2 or #3 at everything but to offer a lower price, I would urge you to reconsider that notion. You're better off charging enough to be able to offer a higher quality solution than skimping and attracting the fickle bargain hunting crowd.

If you work for a service provider and you can't truthfully explain why your company is the best at the world at something, it is time for an emergency meeting. Don't let your marketing and sales organization fight with plastic spoons...give them something compelling to say. Stop trying to be something to everyone and be the best in the world for someone. Your customers will be more loyal, your support team will be more happy and your sales team will be more successful.

Napa Valley Marathon

2010-03-15T01:21:00Z

Last Sunday marked the two-year anniversary of my first full marathon. Without much knowledge of training, nutrition, equipment or strategy, I haphazardly signed up for the 2008 Napa Valley Marathon. A friend from Colorado and I had a phone conversation about running and we both decided we would do our first marathon together in Big Sur at the end of April. For some reason, I thought I’d try running Napa a few weeks beforehand to see if I could do it. At that point, with only one half-marathon under my belt, registering for two marathons in a seven week span seemed totally logical to a novice like me.

I did most of my training on the treadmill on my garage, including a 15-miler, 16-miler, 18-miler and 20-miler. I think I might have brought some nutrition down there for the 20-miler, but otherwise, I would place one Gatorade bottle in the cup holder and I’d do 7:08 miles while holding a PlayStation controller and playing Tiger Woods Golf or NCAA Football (it was a funny sight, to say the least). Every mile was an adventure on which I had not yet embarked, and every long run was a new personal record which I was achieving for the first time. When race day came, I headed up to Napa with a little trepidation, but surely had no idea what I was getting into. That day, there were some elite women on the starting line looking to qualify for the 2008 Olympic Marathon Trials at Boston the following month, and they must have wondered who the weird guy was doing wind sprints on the Silverado Trail to warm up for a marathon.

My first marathon story was the classic tale of elation and agony, with a speedy first 18-19 miles and a lot of walking toward the end. Did I have a good time? That depends on how you look at it. The clock showed three hours and 27 minutes from start to finish, which is still my worst finish in a marathon (except for one where I paced a friend). However, my sentiment is certainly with Napa. It was a memorable experience which I will always cherish, and the gorgeous scenery, perfect weather and uniquely amazing race. At other marathons, you get a plastic throwaway bag for your sweats. At Napa, you get a large, high quality duffel bag (I still use mine regularly). At other marathons, only the elites get a special needs drop-off at a latter mile marker. At Napa, every participant is granted that option. At other marathons, you might end up running through industrial neighborhoods over ridiculous hills sandwiched between tens of thousands of people. At Napa, a capped list of 2800 runners traverse the gorgeous Silverado Trail while checking out some of the world’s most popular wineries.

It is my affinity for the Napa Valley Marathon that had led me to make my pilgrimage back there every year. Last year, I ran in their associated 5K and then hurried to the marathon course to cheer on a few friends. This year, I had the opportunity to join a talented friend who was making Napa her first marathon, just as I had done two years earlier. Of course, she was much smarter about her training and pacing and her finishing time of 3 hours and 10 minutes are certain proof.

I don’t know how long I’ll carry on the tradition of making the trip up to Napa every year, but I hope to make it again in 2011. If you are considering a marathon around that time of year, I would highly recommend joining us here in Northern California.

Marathon #7

2009-12-08T11:48:00Z

In April and in August, I blogged about my experiences with the Boston Marathon and the Vineman Marathon. On Sunday, I had the opportunity to run in the inaugural Santa Barbara International Marathon from Goleta to Santa Barbara, California. Generally, there is a perennial gravitation amongst members of my race club to register for the California International Marathon in the Sacramento area, but after a cold and dreary experience with that race last year, I didn't feel like returning to that particular one. A friend and training partner posted the link to SBIM on my Facebook wall, and within a couple of days we had a group of more than twenty people signed up to make the road trip to Santa Barbara. Our gamble paid off, as there was a significant temperature and wind chill difference between the two locations on race day.

There once was a Santa Barbara Marathon during the 1970's and 80's but, during the past couple of years, a board member of the Santa Barbara Athletic Association named Rusty Snow worked to create a new race. The course was certainly scenic, with very mild rolling hills during the first 16 miles and a couple of significant ones later on (including a fairly challenging grade during Mile #24). It was smoothly organized, except for a half hour delay to the start time which was blamed on a traffic accident, but skeptics who saw the long bathroom lines thought that was a convenient excuse. Either way, all was forgotten by 7:00am.

Had you asked me four weeks ago about my expectations for this race, I would have predicted a personal record. After a lackluster training season interrupted by a career change accompanied by long commute hours, I surprised myself by posting a 2:12:59 20-mile time at the Clarksburg Country Run. Based on that time, I felt like I was in shape to easily break three hours in Santa Barbara. However, during the week leading up to the race, I developed a nagging upper hamstring and IT band injury on my right leg and both legs felt relatively dead during the weekend. I didn't know if it was due to racing too hard at Clarksburg or mismanaging my taper, but my sub-3 intention seemed a bit more far-fetched by Sunday morning.

Still, I decided to run a very disciplined 6:52/mile pace for as long as I could before deciding how I felt in the latter, hillier miles. That plan went well for most of the race, and this was one marathon where I could honestly say I picked the right pace and didn't make any mental mistakes. Still, the pounding of the downhill sections during the last eight miles took its toll on my legs and I had a lot of cramping issues by Mile #23. It wasn't too difficult for me to hold a 7:00/mile pace, but anything faster would cause a calf, hamstring or quad to immediately cramp. Though I could see my friend and training partner a minute or two ahead of me throughout the race, there was nothing I could do about it towards the end. Even the overall winner who was trying to qualify for the 2012 Olympic Trials experienced the same phenomenon on that course. So, I ran conservatively and cruised into the finishing chute in 3:03:24.

The addictive thing about endurance sports is the drive to improve. The sane side of me says that I should be proud of my race execution, which was much smarter than my blow-up at Vineman. However, the perfectionist in me knows that I'm capable of improving by a few minutes and I'm already itching to prove it to myself. Luckily, there is a humbling and cathartic feeling in one's post-marathon legs that counteracts the ambition in his/her head and heart. That feeling can only be described by this commercial from the 2007 Flora London Marathon.

Overall, my own performance was secondary to those of many of my teammates. I am proud and amazed by the personal records and Boston qualifiers that were run by some of my friends, and I can't wait to join them on Heartbreak Hill again in 2011.

Shopping Engine Demographics

2009-11-22T14:21:00Z

My company partners with 17 leading comparison shopping engines, and we are often asked by merchants to recommend the right engines for them. While we can certainly make suggestions based on the products that they sell or the past results of similar retailers with whom we have worked, we like to have additional data points to help merchants set an intelligent strategy.

One source for objective and normalized traffic and demographic information about comparison shopping engines is Alexa.com. Similar to the services provided by sites like Ranking.com and ComScore, Alexa aggregates data from users who have downloaded their proprietary toolbar. This browser plug-in measures the popularity of hundreds of thousands of websites while dividing those results in the demographic dimensions of the Alexa user base. Thus, if you want to know whether a website is more popular amongst members of a particular age group, gender or level of education, Alexa can provide some estimates to guide you.

I recently compiled some Alexa numbers about our 17 comparison shopping engine partners in order to help our merchants better understand the differentiation between these sites. (We are currently working on a really interesting stealth project that will provide further insight in this area. I hope to announce it in a couple of months.) Here is what I learned:

When comparing traffic fluctuations amongst these top engines, it is no surprise that the recently-launched Bing Cashback is the fastest-growing one. We didn’t even include it in the graph below for that reason. Aside from Bing, the engines that are growing in popularity this year are TheFind (91.6% improvement in traffic ranking), Buzzillions (88.4% improvement), NexTag (52.8% improvement) and PriceGrabber (49.1% improvement). There were some minor drop-offs amongst a couple of engines, but most of them maintained their popularity or improved thus far this year.

With regard to gender, the engines that are popular with males are buySAFE (by a wide margin), Google Base, Amazon and PriceGrabber. The engines that are popular with females are like.com (by a wide margin), Shop.com, SortPrice, Become.com and Smarter.com.

When it comes to age, the most popular engines amongst people under 34 years old are Yahoo Shopping, Google Base, Bing Cashback, TheFind and like.com. The most popular engines amongst shoppers whose age exceeds 55 years are Shopzilla, Pronto, Smarter.com, and Become.com.

The Alexa data also breaks down the demographics by education level and by the source of the IP address from which the user logged on to each comparison engine. From this data, we can assume that TheFind, PriceGrabber, Shop.com and Buzzillions are much less popular amongst students than Google Base and Shopping.com.

Whether a merchant should be making any decisions based on nebulous third-party data from a source like Alexa is certainly debatable. I always recommend that you perform your own tests to draw your own conclusions for your own business. If you have the time to invest three figures to find out if you can earn five or six figures on an additional comparison engine, then I always think you’re better off defying the demographic data that you might see here.

Ironteam

2009-11-22T14:03:00Z

Today marks the end of another blog hiatus for me. I apologize for my absence. My drop-off in posts during August coincided with my commencement of a new career role, which has entailed a lot of what Jim Collins would describe as The Flywheel Effect. The good news is that SingleFeed's marketing flywheel is gaining momentum, and we are starting to reap the fruits of that labor.

Another activity that has been keeping me busy has been Ironteam. This group is the little-known division of the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society's Team in Training program that prepares athletes to complete an Ironman-distance triathlon (2.4 miles of swimming, 112 miles of cycling and 26.2 miles of running). Approximately a year ago, I experienced a lot of things that led me to this organization. I was discontinuing my involvement with the Balfour Leadership Training Workshop just as I had the opportunity to visit the Huntsman Cancer Institute and attend the last birthday party of a coworker's wife who was battling Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia. Her infectious strength and positive spirit made me want to get involved in finding a cure for her disease. I was also racing fairly often and one of my race club teammates was an Ironteam coach, so I asked him how I could get involved. Generally, only alumni of Team in Training programs have the opportunity to become mentors or coaches, but there was an opening for someone to help the team with their running, and I gladly accepted the position.

Our Kickoff Meeting was just two weeks ago, and I will admit that I arrived with some apprehension. As an outsider, I viewed Team in Training positively, but it also seemed a bit cultish. Everybody seemed to know each other and many of the athletes have a racing resume that is deeper than mine. However, after having a chance to meet and coach our team of dozens of inspirational people, I'm really glad I have joined Ironteam. Amongst the group are dozens of people who have lost siblings, parents, friends and spouses to cancer. While some of the team is made up of endurance racing veterans, we have members who will bravely make an Ironman triathlon their first foray into this sport. To put that into perspective, these inspirational people are devoting hundreds of hours of time and energy in order to make a personal contribution of thousands of dollars to help cure blood cancer.

I should mention that the program is working. Since its founding more than 20 years ago, Team in Training has raised almost $1 Billion for cancer research. In the 1960's, the survival rate for a young child with Leukemia was 4%. Today, as the result of research and medicine that has been developed over the years, that survival rate has become 85%. Of course, the other side of Team in Training is working as well. More than 400,000 participants have had the opportunity to train for marathons, cross-country skiing events, triathlons, cycling centuries and hikes. So, I certainly feel fortunate to be involved with this group, and I plan to blog regularly about the team's progress as our athletes prepare for Vineman, Ironman Louisville or Ironman Canada next July/August. Right now, it's time to squeeze in a run before I meet them for their run later this morning.

My Next Career Challenge

2009-08-07T14:25:00Z

Many of you know that I recently accepted a position with a comparison shopping optimization (CSO) company in San Francisco. SingleFeed was founded a couple of years ago by comparison shopping expert Brian Smith (author of ComparisonEngines.com) to help merchants experience more ease and improved ROI from working with various comparison shopping engines (CSE's). The company is undergoing a unique growth spurt which they will leverage by bringing me on board to build their sales and marketing organization.

Why Comparison Shopping?

The past six years of my career have been spent with companies that provide online marketing services. At Digital River's Fireclick division, I had the opportunity to learn the web analytics industry, and at WhatCounts I gained loyalty e-communications expertise. I love online marketing because of its metrics-oriented nature. Almost everything can be broken down into a replicable ROI equation - put in X and you should get Y. If not, try A versus B and we'll figure out which one to repeat in the future. Gone are the days of marketing teams that have their heads in the clouds and their fingers crossed for good results.

While I wanted to remain in the online marketing services community, I found inherent flaws with each of the past two industries. Web analytics is great for pointing out all of the inefficiencies in your conversion funnel, but it does little to solve those bottlenecks. I have learned from working with companies of all shapes, sizes and budgets that every e-marketing team is short on resources and very few people know how to properly optimize a site based on web analytics data. Loyalty email has been the second biggest no-brainer in the online marketing world (after search engine optimization/management) for a number of years, but it comes along with its own issues. Regardless of the purity of the intentions or the explicitness of the permission that goes into initiating a sender-recipient relationship, I feel like most marketers end up abusing that priviledge eventually. Whether it's the 17 promotional emails a month I'm currently getting from Performance Bicycle or the unsolicited credit card offers I get from my favorite airlines, I wholeheartedly believe that there isn't much of a fine line between permissible messages and spam. There is just a big gray area, most of which proves to be an annoying rain cloud.

I find CSO to be a much more beneficial (and credible, as I mentioned in an earlier post) form of marketing. People are proactively searching for products and shopping engines are already trying to convert those visitors into buyers. The ROI on submitting feeds to additional engines is a bigger no-brainer than email marketing, but managing those feeds can be even more confusing than juggling one's paid keywords. After all, there is only one Google (alright, two if you count the little Bing that could) but there are dozens of leading CSE's that each have their own non-standardized formatting nuances. Scaled correctly, the CSO space will someday solve complex and time-consuming advertising challenges for retailers while offering unparalleled conversion rates and ROI.

Why SingleFeed?

There are a few vendors in the CSO space which span the continuum of merchants from large to small. There are only a couple of companies that truly focus on data feed optimization and services meant to develop a retailer's comparison shopping success. Of those providers, only one is led by Brian Smith, the world's premier expert on comparison shopping optimization. I feel like SingleFeed is uniquely poised to gain a significant market share while developing technology that can save smaller merchants time and concurrently offering the sophistication that the world's largest retailers need.

SingleFeed is at a compelling point of inflection right now. Their team is at a similar stage of development as WhatCounts was when I joined their organization, but their customer acquisition traction is significantly higher. I'm excited about building a sales and marketing strategy and team in the years to come and I have no doubt that SingleFeed will be a "household" name amongst the Internet Retailer Top 500 and beyond very soon.

The Marathoner's Paradox

2009-08-04T18:50:00Z

A couple of days ago, I had the chance to participate in a relay much different from the one I blogged about in May. I don't remember how the idea dawned on us, but a friend and I decided we would put together a three-person team to do the Vineman 140.6 Mile Relay. (Vineman is not an official World Triathlon Corporation event, so the term "Ironman" isn't supposed to be used in conjunction with it. Still, it is certainly a well-measured and legal Ironman-distance 140.6 mile course consisting of 2.4 miles of swimming, 112 miles of cycling and 26.2 miles of running.) Since my friend is a strong cyclist and his coworker is a great swimmer, I was recruited for the anchor leg of the relay: the marathon.

This was my sixth marathon, and those of you who are endurance sports enthusiasts understand that racing can be as rigorous mentally as it is physically. The dichotomy between the physical bravado of the sport and the mental restraint necessary for endurance can cause an arrogant athlete to develop a slow, sloped learning curve. Such was the case for me this time. Our team still took the first place prize at Vineman, but it was despite my performance.

There are three types of marathoners: the completers, the "competers" and the elites. Each of them has a distinctly different racing strategy. The completers simply want to finish the 26.2 miles without quitting (or dying), so they are able to begin at a pace slower than their long training runs with the hopes of being able to hang on during the final miles. The elites generally know exactly what their bodies are capable of, so they are mostly concerned with the surges and lulls of the lead pack as they race. It is the middle-of-the-road "competers" who encounter the mysterious paradox between maximizing one's potential and fizzling out too soon before the finish line.

The common analogy that I have heard is that endurance racing is like slowly letting air out of a balloon. You have to let the air out at a pace that allows you to have some left at the end of the race. If you let the air out too quickly, you'll be deflated too soon and you'll have nothing left in the crucial final miles. Unfortunately, the guaging of the pace of deflation involves more art than science. Whether you start out slowly or quickly, those final miles are going to hurt. With prolonged effort comes increased heartrate, accumulation of lactic acid, lack of glycogen, prohibitive muscle tears, cramps and fatigue. So, even that slow pace will be harder to maintain after a couple of hours of running. On the flip side, how will you ever set a new personal record if you don't try to run faster when you feel good?

The guesswork is largely dependent upon one's training. I went into Vineman feeling as well trained as I did before Boston (but not as well trained as I was before my personal record marathon last Fall). Thus, I decided to go out at my personal record pace for as long as I could before the natural slowing would occur in the latter miles. While my plan worked well for 18 miles (two hours often seems to be the magic "wall" for many marathoners), the debilitating pain set in sooner than expected and I ended up with an overall time 10-15 minutes slower than expected. Was that something that I could have gauged beforehand? Had I added twenty seconds per mile to my pace in the early miles, would that have translated into a faster final 10K? It's really difficult to know the answer to those questions, although it's not for lack of mulling over it during the past few days.

The philosophy that is taught by the Endurance Nation program used to coach Ironman athletes seems the most logical. Make yourself go "stupid slow" for the first six miles and then count how many people you pass between the 18-mile marker and the 26.2 mile finish line. The simple truth is that it's hard for most people to walk faster than 14 minutes per mile, so if you do anything in your early miles to reduce yourself to walking thereafter, you have essentially shot yourself in the foot. Even if you add 30 seconds per mile to each of your first six miles (a total of three minutes), you'll gain back much more than three minutes for every mile you don't have to walk later on.

The good thing about sports that have a mental component is that the lessons can compound over time. I might reach a plateau in physical capability soon, but maybe I'll still hit some personal records by racing smarter with some stupid miles.

The Most Trusted Satirist

2009-07-24T16:14:00Z

As a quick follow up to my previous post about the evolution of credibility in news media, I think today's release from Time Magazine is fitting. Many news sources are buzzing about a recent Time poll of 9,400 Time.com visitors asking, in the wake of Walter Cronkite's death, "who is America's most trusted broadcaster?" The top four answers in the survey were Katie Couric (CBS), Charlie Gibson (ABC), Brian Williams (NBC) and Jon Stewart (Comedy Central).

So, what was the most prevalent answer? With 44% of the vote (a full 15% ahead of the second place anchor), Comedy Central's Jon Stewart was the favorite amongst Time.com visitors. A closer look at the state-by-state breakdown shows that there is no chasm between red states and blue states in the results. Whether you live in Alabama, Texas or California, your neighbors trust Jon Stewart the most. They prefer satire and they are skeptical about information from any source that is presented as fact. In the interest of full disclosure, I will say that I find this trend to be very reflective of my generation (and we're the sons and daughters of the people who read Time Magazine).

I should mention that Brian Williams' second place finish in the poll put him a solid 10% ahead of Charlie Gibson (with Katie Couric trailing in fourth place with less than one-sixth of Jon Stewart's votes), and Williams is a clear favorite in states like Indiana, Vermont, North Dakota and Wyoming (a couple of which are Republican strongholds).

Overall, the notion of drawing perspectives from a variety of sources that I mentioned in my post earlier this week tends to be true for Stewart's Daily Show. During the first 15 minutes of the program, you'll find clips and commentary from many news agencies (albeit some of them brazenly fictional) mixed in with a blend of fact and hyperbole. Sure, there are some people who don't understand satire (a portion of which actually believe that Stephen Colbert is a staunch conservative), but for those Americans with a funny bone, maybe Jon Stewart is the Walter Cronkite of the future that I mistakenly overlooked.

The Most Trusted Name

2009-07-20T16:27:00Z

The recent passing of Walter Cronkite has caused many of us to ponder the meaning and evolution of the word "credibility." As people offer their impressions of "the most trusted man in America," they seem to long for the days when they could take Cronkite's word as the gospel, and they didn't need to temper it with varying perspectives or sources.

Was the CBS Evening News actually any more credible than any other medium? Or has our nation simply become less trusting as they have become more sophisticated? Perhaps we are like the child who finally learns the truth about Santa Claus and therefore second guesses every other factual or fictional tale.

Many people contend that political slanting and less diligent fact checking have led our news to become sensationalistic. They might believe that even Walter Cronkite would have trouble earning our trust in our contemporary news environment. I agree and disagree. I believe that our age of increased communication has simply brought new light to the same age-old trend. Are our leaders more corrupt than they once were, or do we just know more about them because of the growth in media? Are our celebrities wilder than their predecessors, or are our diminishing opinions the result of more aggressive paparazzi? Do our news agencies inject more opinion than they once did, or are we just more aware of it because we can now easily compare fifty versions of the same story?

Do I think anyone can once again hold the title of "most trusted person in America?" No, I don't. Even in the technology world, we can no longer read a whitepaper by an industry analyst without first thinking about how the author is paid. In this day and age, we have to invest the time to read various conflicting angles on the same topic to determine our own opinion. Then, we have to recognize that our hard-earned notion is still just the opinion of one person. Someone else might read the same assortment of articles while reaching a completely different conclusion. Whether you are researching health care reform, vendor evaluations, or your best option for local Italian food, there are so many opinions and vantage points to sort through that none of them can be heralded as the "most trusted source." In fact, I think the most credible sources of information these days are review sites and services (such as comparison shopping engines, TripAdvisor, etc), but stories like this one about Yelp make you wonder if anything can be trusted anymore.

Overall, I find myself becoming much less interested in following snippets from one particular news source and much more interested in finding a compelling story and gathering various perspectives on it. Ask me about the "Octomom" and I couldn't care less (I didn't even know her name until I went to copy that Wikipedia link). Want to know my take on Paula Abdul parting ways with American Idol? You won't hear it...I'm not even sure that's newsworthy. However, if you ask me about prospective justice Sonia Sotomayor, I also can't comment because I am still gathering various viewpoints in order to formulate a solid opinion.

Maybe the difference between the days of Walter Cronkite and our current age of information influx has to do with the selection process. Decades ago, the news agencies decided what was newsworthy and what was filtered away from our eyes, ears and water coolers. Today, we have access to almost everything that transpires across the world, and it's our job to do the filtering.

Twitter is Creepy

2009-06-17T19:00:00Z

As a person who has spent the past six years of his career working with online marketers, especially on their e-communications programs, it made sense for me to dip my toe into the social media waters a few years ago. Since then, I have evaluated MySpace, LinkedIn, Twitter, Bebo and Facebook and only the latter one has created an enjoyable experience for me.

I didn't like MySpace's user interface and I was at an age where most of my peers weren't really on there anyway. I haven't touched that profile in years.
LinkedIn is a decent way of managing my resume and career contacts, but the people in my professional life who I really interact with are on Facebook as well. I'd rather talk to them there...it's more personal.
I have blogged about Facebook before. I think it's the perfect friendship management solution. I'm don't think it's a social networking site, because I'm not really interested in proactively recruiting new contacts on there. However, for keeping up with the friends, family members and coworkers that I already have, it's unparalleled.

So, that leaves Twitter. You can surmise by the title of this post that I'm not a fan of it. I gave it a fair chance and I'll continue to keep it in my online marketing repertoire so I'm up to date as it evolves. Yet, I feel like Twitter offers a less appealing subset of what Facebook offers. Should there really be a rivalry between Twitter and Facebook? That's a fair question since most people think they serve two different purposes. I think those people are wrong...everything that Twitter offers is a part of Facebook. (Yes, Twitter-lovers, I know you disagree but I'll be happy to show you those features on Facebook if you'd like a tutorial.) Plus, Twitter isn't picking up as much steam as everyone thinks. There was the article in April that explained that 60% of new Twitter registrants stop using the service within 30 days. Then, a couple of weeks ago a study by Nielson Online showed that during April of 2009, 13.9 billion minutes were logged by more than 200 million users on Facebook (the Internet's #4 most popular site, with more than 100 million people logging in regularly) while only 300 million minutes were logged by Twitter's user base of less than 10 million. Another interesting study by the Harvard Business School found a stark 80-20 (or actually 90-10) rule showing more than 90% of tweets were generated by the most prolific 10% of their membership.

So, there is no question that Facebook is absolutely obliterating Twitter in usage. The question is, what is Twitter lacking? I think it has three major deficiencies:

The notion of gaining a follower without confirmation is creepy and disingenuous. When I first signed up, a few friends started following me. When I started tweeting, I suddenly attracted a barrage of people trying to promote their own businesses. Memo to you guys: if everybody follows each other for the sole purpose of pushing each other up the rankings, the bell curve will rear its ugly head and your comparative popularity will remain constant. All you are doing is allowing spam to permeate yet another communication channel. Yes, I called you a spammer and I'll stand by that statement ; )
Twitter's user interface doesn't lend itself to the personal interaction that Facebook offers. Pictures, color (in the figurative sense and the literal sense) about someone's life, communities and interests bring our Facebook friends to life. Twitter is a cold world of acquaintances, most of which wouldn't bat an eyelash if you stopped following them (or passed away, same thing in their eyes).
Twitter's lack of critical mass makes it a less fruitful pursuit. The "gas station" philosophy of marketing comes to mind. Where do you want your gas station to be located? On the corner were the other stations are...you'll draw more business. Where should you look for loyal subscribers? Given the choice, I'd rather set up a fan page on Facebook than a Twitter account. With twenty times the active users, it seems like a no-brainer.

I, of course, am not saying that Twitter is devoid of value. Certainly, if you are tweeting on behalf of a corporation or a news agency, I think you are partaking in a higher value (free things usually have a high ROI), more interactive and more personal alternative to email newsletters. If you are a celebrity, your ability to circumvent the filter of the media by using Twitter is priceless. If you are a creepy spammer, Twitter is also a better alternative for you because you can hide behind the veil of anonymity. I'm just saying that I find Facebook to be a much better pursuit for online marketers, and I hope that Twitter's eventual investors and suitors recognize its comparatively low value.

Will I keep tweeting? Sure, I'll keep feeding my Facebook status through Twitter to experiment with it. However, through this post I'm going to mark myself down on the record as a reluctant member who dislikes the service. Now, feel free to follow me ; )

Back From the Mountain

2009-06-17T18:32:00Z

On Sunday, I reluctantly returned from the Horizons leadership program for college sophomores at which I was facilitating. Coming back down the mountain from Snowbird was a difficult journey for all of us; there is a certain type of utopia that can be created in a pure environment like that. However, as one undergraduate put it: "Sometimes we have to go to the top of the mountain to derive the perspective we need when we return to its base." I thought that analogy was especially fitting for this particular experience.

On the mountain, we taught each attendee the differences between effective/situational leadership and enduring values-based leadership. Then, we helped them identify their own core values and we challenged those values through experiential and interactive exercises. Of course, in order to be a great leader, one must truly understand and embrace the differences between diverse people. Thus, we spent a lot of time delving into each person's fundamental biases and perspectives when it comes to social style, values and personality. Lastly, each man established a two-year vision in accordance with his values as well as some goals, actions, development areas and mentors that will help him move in that direction. As facilitators, we get to spend the next two years mentoring the attendees as they achieve their goals.

The top of the mountain is the perfect place to find enough solace for the introspection it takes to uncover one's own latent values, vision, goals and plans. (I'll be honest...it was also a great place for a snowball fight.) It's amazing how much we miss while amidst the daily grind of our sea level lives. The perspective that we gain by stepping away from a moment to evaluate is priceless. As Socrates stated: "The unexamined life is not worth living." How often do we take the time to analyze the trajectory of our lives?

I'm really looking forward to the next two years of partaking in the examination and coaching of eight exceptional lives. Alex, Ben, Casey, CJ, David, Glenn, Kevin and Pat are each rock stars in their own right, and I have grown to admire their individual talents, temperaments and convictions. Of course, mentorship is a reciprocal interaction and there is a lot of inspiration and perspective that can be gained from each mentee, regardless of his age. It is for that reason that we all were willing to return from the mountain; for the excitement of employing our newfound perspective and accountability network in our daily lives.

Huntsman Cancer Institute

2009-06-10T12:39:00Z

On Monday, I had the opportunity to make my second visit to the Huntsman Cancer Institute and Treatment Center in Salt Lake City, Utah. Off the bat, the name of the facility might make it sound like a solemn-feeling hospital. While there are certainly some stark reminders of the fragility of life, a visit to this center is truly an uplifting experience.

Jon Huntsman, Sr. is a self-made billionaire who overcame an impoverished Idaho upbringing to become the Founder and CEO of Huntsman Chemical Corporation. Instead of stockpiling wealth, he became one of the world's top three philanthropists, providing aid to many nations over the years. After losing his mother to cancer and battling the disease himself, he decided to invest in research and treatment to eventually find a cure. His first order of business was to create a learning center where patients would be able to study the affliction to better understand its innerworkings. He then decided to link up with the world's largest human genome database (with roughly 10,000,000 records) to find hereditary trends and markers that might be able to predict risk factors. The center was also one of the first to open up their research progress to the world (instead of trying to compete for a cure that could eventually be a windfall). This stance of cooperation over competition was unique at the time. Finally, he built a state-of-the-art treatment center with breathtaking quality. He and his good friend Bill Marriott made a pact which shows their confidence in the facility. They decided that when (not if) they find cures for various cancers, they will transform the hospital into a luxury hotel. It won't be difficult to do, the building is already exceptional, complete with gorgeous courtyards, great craftsmanship and some of the best views of Salt Lake City that you can find.

The college students that I am mentoring this week really enjoyed the visit to Huntsman. Jon is an alumnus of the same organization to which they belong, as is his son (Utah governor Jon Huntsman, Jr.). More importantly, his philosophy of cooperation over competition is one of the major themes of their leadership program this week. Yesterday, we were discussing the drawbacks of the American mentality surrounding competition. We often walk into situtations with the assumption that we much be fierce competitors with others in order to reach our personal goals. In reality, there is usually enough differentitation of needs and plenty of resources, and cooperating with one another to ensure that everyone gets what he/she needs is the better strategy. Of course, merit-based rewards are still important, but to ignore the needs of our fellow man is to concurrently ignore the opportunity to become a great leader.

For me, the timing of my two visits to the Huntsman Institute were interesting. The first one was a month after I learned that the wife of one of the members of my sales team had been diagnosed with a particularly difficult form of Leukemia. During the ensuing 15 months of her life, I learned a lot about how families deal with these types of diseases. My coworker became one of my personal heroes in the way that he served his family during and after his wife's time on this Earth. My wife and I flew out to visit them for her last birthday and it was a lesson in marriage that can't be obtained any other way. Thus, this second trip to the Huntsman Institute brought that experience full circle.

Cancer is still one of the top two leading causes of death in the United States. I'd encourage you to take a closer look at the Huntsman Cancer Institute online. If you feel compelled to support their cause directly, you can do so at this link.

Heading to Horizons

2009-06-05T13:43:00Z

I can't believe it has already been two years since I posted a note on this blog about my involvement with the Horizons leadership program. This seven day experience was designed by a team of leadership experts to enrich the lives of exceptional college sophomores. By investing in this group of young men, we in turn foster the development of the families, communities, organizations and businesses which they will lead throughout their lives. In June of 2007, I had the opportunity to complete the training program to become a Horizons Guide, or facilitator and mentor. Tomorrow, I will be heading out to Snowbird Lodge in Utah to take a group of eight sophomores on their leadership journey.

Over the years, I have done a lot of college mentoring through similar programs, particularly at San Jose State University, Stanford University and through the Balfour Leadership Training Workshop each summer. I wholeheartedly believe in the ripple effect of one leader mentoring a few more young leaders who mentor a few more younger leaders. We all know that the world is currently starving for people with leadership skills, but I think we are also devoid of mentorship programs. We are all expected to learn from books, but the concepts of coaching and apprenticeship are fizzling. We live in a funny world where some of the most important roles that people can take (such as leader, parent, or coach) come without formal training. How can we expect to improve if we don't properly invest in our future? For these reasons, I couldn't be more excited about tomorrow's trip to Utah.

I'll try to post again with more details about the experience. On a high level, the program likens leadership to a lifelong journey that we take, where we learn to better understand ourselves and others, build alliances of collaboration within our community, identify guides to assist us, and put our character into action via a purposeful strategy. The program does a great job of integrating curriculum for all four types of learning styles (reflective, common sense, interactive and imaginative) with journaling, discussion, presentations, experiential exercises, video tools and group interaction. Although my involvement as a Guide might seem benevolent, I find it to be selfish as well because I end up learning more by teaching than they do by participating.

I received some background information about the eight undergraduates on my team (dubbed the "Lone Star Group") and I had a chance to reach out to them earlier this week. I can't wait to meet everyone on the mountain!