初创公司陈述竞争优势须避免6大雷区

    潜在投资者可能会问投资对象的一个最重要的问题是能拿出什么方案成功应对竞争。不只是今天，而是在他们投资的3-5年内。这个问题没有一个完美的答案，但很多错误的回答会马上降低你的可信度。

    这个概念即“可持续竞争优势”。好的回答或许是“我们在基础科技领域有几项专利，潜力巨大，我们有望在未来十年每年都推出新的产品，永远比竞争对手领先一步。”这意味着当前具有竞争力、行业进入门槛高以及未来保持领先的潜力。

    我们都知道凡事皆无一定。因此，理想的回答总是要结合一点为人处世的技巧，展现出充分的信心、谦逊和诚实。投资者往往只是想看看你如何应对这些难题。下面是一些常见的错误回答：

    • “我们一个竞争对手也没有。”现如今谁都知道这可能是最糟的回答，因为这意味着你的产品没有市场，或者你根本没有费心去了解竞争形势。要知道就算汽车和火车也会构成竞争，因此，不论是拿出替代性的解决方案，还是什么也不做，都是真正的竞争。

    • “我们有先发优势。”率先进入市场对于像IBM或通用电气（GE）这样的大公司是有意义的，因为它们有资源可以保持这个优势。但对于在大公司的夹缝中求生存的初创企业来说就不是这么回事了。一旦大公司看到你的业务发展迅速，它们很快就会回过神来，后来者居上。因此，这样的优势不可持续。

    • “我们的产品是真正的颠覆性技术。”这是先发优势论的变体，潜台词是技术变革带来了巨大的领先优势。投资者会怀疑你的技术是否有出路。颠覆性技术往往需要多年时间才能被市场所接受，这么长的时间投资者可等不起。

    • “只有我们的团队能做到。”不管团队有怎样丰富的经验和高学历，这样的说法都会使人觉得狂妄自大。世上没人能垄断知识和技能。投资者只会得出结论，这个团队可能不切实际，很难合作。

    • “我们计划免费提供产品，靠广告赚钱。”低价竞争往往可以奏效，但免费意味着没有真正的价值。只有能拿出5,000万美元砸向病毒性营销，将页面浏览量提高到每月百万人次，拉到相当金额的广告费，所谓免费才是一项不错的短期互联网策略。

    • “我们的专利将提供保护。”专利是有价值的，因此这个回答比前5个都好得多。但投资者都知道，仅凭初创公司是无力承担高昂的专利诉讼费用的。而且如果有机会，大多数专利都是可以绕过的。

    最后，尽量阐明应对竞争的方案后，明智的做法或许是承认这个方案并不完美，但同时强调自己有经验、有知识来应对永恒的市场竞争。它告诉投资者：你们对自己的产品有充分的信心，但同时具有务实的态度。投资者喜欢务实的人，但不是不敢冒险的人。

    可持续的竞争优势不是目的，只是过程。不管是否在寻找投资者，每个优秀的创业者最好还是为此做好准备，以免到时措手不及。

    本文作者马丁•兹威灵是初创企业专业顾问公司Startup Professionals Inc.的创始人兼首席执行官。

    译者： zdm

    One of the most important questions you will be asked by potential investors is how your solutions beats the competition. Not just today, but over the three to five year life of their investment. There is no perfect answer to this question, but there are many wrong answers which will immediately jeopardize your credibility.

    The concept is called "sustainable competitive advantage." A good answer might be "We have several patents on the base technology, which is so robust that we expect to roll out new products every year for the next ten years, always staying a step ahead of our competitors." That implies competitive now, a strong barrier to entry, and the potential to stay in the lead.

    We all recognize that there are no guarantees. So the best responses always require a combination of street smarts, confidence, humility, and honesty. Investors are often just checking to see how you tackle hard questions. Here is a collection of common red flags to avoid:

    • "We don't have any competitors." As everyone should know by now, this is the worst possible answer, since it implies that there is no market for your product, or you haven't bothered to look for competition. Remember that cars compete with trains, so alternative solutions, or doing nothing, are real competition.

    • "We have the first mover advantage." First-to-market is meaningful for a large company, like IBM or GE, which has the resources to sustain their move, but is not relevant for a startup, when surrounded by "big gorillas." If they see you getting traction, the giants will awake quickly and step on you. This advantage is not sustainable.

    • "Our product is truly disruptive technology." This is a variation on the first mover argument, implying a paradigm shift that gives you a tremendous lead. Investors will suspect you have a technology looking for a solution. Disruptive technologies typically take years to catch on, which is longer than they can afford to wait.

    • "Only our team can make this work." This statement comes across as arrogance, no matter how much experience and technical degrees your team has. No one in this world has a monopoly on knowledge and implementation skills. Investors will conclude that this is probably an impossible and unrealistic team to work with.

    • "We plan to offer it for free, and live off advertising revenue." Undercutting competitors in price is always a good strategy, but free implies no real value. Free is a good short-term Internet strategy, if you have $50 million to spend on viral marketing to get your page-views up to the million per month needed for significant advertising revenue.

    • "Our patent will protect us." Patents are worthwhile, so this answer is far better than the first five. Yet every investor knows that a mere startup will not be able to afford a patent battle in court, and most patents can be circumvented if the opportunity is large enough.

    In the end, after stating your best arguments, it's probably smart to concede that there are no silver bullets, but emphasize that you have the experience and knowledge to put up a never-ending fight. This tells investors that you are realistic, despite your conviction and confidence in your product. Investors like realists, but not wimps.

    A sustainable competitive advantage is not a destination, but a journey. Whether you are looking for an investor or not, every good entrepreneur better plan for this journey before he finds his backside exposed.

    Marty Zwilling is CEO & Founder of Startup Professionals Inc.