Sending a text from and email account is quite simply. Simply find the email suffix for the various carriers:

vtext for Verizon,

txt.att.net for the "New att",

tmomail.net for T-Mobile,

messaging.sprintpcs.com for Sprint, etc.

So a message to your friend in San Jose using T-Mobile would look like 4085554321@tmomailnet.

With the recent name change that Cingular is undergoing, the suffix "cingularme" is beginning to get phased out. Messages are still being sent, though with varing degrees of latency. Sometimes a text can take up to 6 hours to transmit.

Make sure that any automated mail text messages to att subscribers are updated to reflect the "txt.att.net" suffix. I suspect that "cingularme" will soon be turned off for good. If you are experiencing problems or latency for email to text messages to a particular carrier's customers, it is a good idea to check to see if the carrier has changed their text suffix. The carriers do change these suffixes from time to time.

Happy texting.

Ridemax to the rescue. The software is amazing. Select the rides and attractions you are interested in and enter this information into Ridemax. Ridemax provides a custom itinerary to offer the best strategy for your Disneyland adventure. The program gives you time of day, wait time, ride time, and walking time to your next attraction. On a trip earlier this year we used it for our itinerary. The results were impressive.

The magic of Ridemax is in the data. Ridemax has massive amounts of historical data allowing the program to provide accurate predictions for the day of the week, dates, time of day, and more. The system also has a sense of distances in order to calculate preferred routes. The end result is a plan that reduces time waiting in lines and the number of footsteps required to reach the next attraction.

The software algorithms used by Ridemax has been adapted to provide software for more accurate wait times for restaurant seating. As storage costs plummet, computing power increases, and historical data expands, data driven modeling solutions will grow rapidly. One solution in particular that will be gaining more attention is traffic advise. The population growth in the US will tax our road and highway infrastructure system and further the traffic congestion in our cities. More consumers will be using software for optimum routes and departure times for their commutes in turn. With Google's impressive mapping technologies, it would be a natural progression for Google to provide driving directions that take into account historical traffic patterns based on time, date, day, and weather conditions. When that data is linked to our GPS-enabled phones and helps cut our commute times significantly, that will truly be magic.

GetQuik is launching a blog dedicated to providing restaurants with the ABC's of online marketing. We have reserved the domain name (restaurants20.com) in order to provide operators with the necessary tools to inexpensively and easily get online and command a robust online presence. The Restaurant 2.0 blog launch is schedule for early September.

"Built to Last" uses an ingenious method of analyzing "visionary" companies against their "successful" competitors. For example, IBM is compared to Burroughs; Boeing against McDonald-Douglas; and Merck against Pfizer. The difference in performance between the visionary companies versus the merely successful is startling.

Porras and Collins conclude that "visionary" companies do not settle for the "OR", but instead seek the more challenging "AND".

For example, the visionary companies:

- have purpose AND pursue profits,

- have a clear vision AND are opportunistic and experimental, and

- invest for the long term AND demand short-term performance.

"AND" is hard. The key to "AND" is to establish core values throughout the organization no matter the size. In fact, it is easier to establish "core values" at an early stage in an organization's life. These values are the guiding principles, which in turn attract like minded individuals to the organization. A "visionary" company's passionate employees can produce more and innovate faster than competitors whose teams do not have this "sense of purpose".

The concepts in "Built to Last" are profound and are best left to Porras and Collins. For startup founders, this book is a must read. The thing that you hear time and again from successful entrepreuners and VCs is that in order to succeed, the founding team and early employees must be passionate about the business. "Built to Last" shows how the most successful companies scale and institutionalize this passion.

Exhibitors include vendors of food & beverages, restaurant equipment, financial services, hospitality technology solutions, and more. The show attracts 15,000 industry professionals and has many long time exhibitors. The 2007 Western Food Expo was much like the 2006 show, with a few notable exceptions. Organic foods, trans-fat free products and environmentally friendly to-go containers were highlighted by many of the exhibitors.

Government regulations and changing consumer sentiment are fueling the green and organic movement. The new demands present additional challenges to restaurant owners and operators. Change is never easy, but there is an opportunity for those operators who get ahead of the curve and embrace the green movement. Whole Foods in groceries and Patagonia in outdoor clothing have built a loyal following by embracing enviromentally-conscientious practices, consumers and products. California is requiring earth friendly to-go containers and bags, while New York City is leading the way is eliminating trans-fat. Restaurant operators need to decide whether to make the move to green and trans-fat free products and foods now, or wait till government regulations force them to make changes. The Western Food Expo is held in Los Angeles, so there is a decidedly California influence. It will be interesting to see if the May 2008 National Restaurant Association show in Chicago will be as green as the Western Food Expo. It could be that the green movement is the latest fad that will lose its appeal in a few years. Unlike the Atkins fad, which indeed was too good to be true, the green movement has the potential to evolve from trend to standard.

Now both Google and Yahoo! are yelpifying their local search results. Yahoo! does well in providing users with yellow-page style merchant results. Google does everything search well. Both giants have been paying attention to Yelp and are adding the ability for users to provide and update merchant information, as well as comment and review merchants.

Kudos for Yelp for building a robust, loyal and passionate audience. With both Google and Yahoo! in the game, it will be a race to see if Yelp can outrun these giants. The more agile startups won the first round in the new Web 2.0 world. YouTube won in videos, Facebook & Myspace won in social networks, and Flickr and Photobucket won in photos. The giants are making a comeback. Technorati in blog search is going through tough times. As Google flexes their muscles, hot web 2.0 companies like digg and Yelp may find rougher seas ahead. If Yelp and digg do get overwhelmed by the likes of Yahoo and Google, it could signal an end of the web 2.0 boom. The web 2.0 concepts such as "user-generated content" and "social networking" have made the web more useful, personal, and interesting. We are reaching a stage where web 2.0 features are no longer strong differentiators, and instead are becoming commonplace. Yelp and digg can still win due to their active and vibrant communities, but from a technology standpoint, Google, Yahoo! and Microsoft are closing the gap.

BooRah is a Palo Alto based-company providing restaurant reviews and information for over 75,000 restaurants. BooRah has found great partners in newspapers looking to provide a robust restaurant review section for their online properties. BooRah technology drives the restaurant search, information and reviews sections for Palo Alto Online and the San Francisco Bay Guardian, in addition to numerous others.

For restaurants in the GetQuik network, customers and readers of Palo Alto Online and the San Francisco Bay Guardian will be able to place take-out and delivery orders using the "Order Online" button from BooRah's restaurant reviews search engine.

GetQuik is looking forward to working with BooRah and expanding the reach and sales of our restaurant partners.

How do workers function during these brutally hot days? The report explains that the human body can adapt to hot temperatures by creating "heat shock proteins". These heat shock proteins stop cells from committing suicide as a natural reaction to heat exposure. The body can perform at a high level until the core body temperature hits 104 degrees. Then everything falls apart.

Everyone has heard the stories about the amazing work and production that a small startup team can acheive. Extra hours, passion and focus make up for the lack of resources and other advantages of larger organizations. It is important for a startup to be able to maintain a high level of performance over a long period of time. Most startups get off to a strong start as the team is excited, energized and motivated. Over time, a startup can burn out as the team gets exhaused from the massive hours and energy exerted in getting the business launched. This is the business equivalent of the body hitting a core temperature of 104.

It is important for a startup to quickly get accustomed to a high performance level while still maintaining a sustainable level. A performance level that is too low will result in lost time, missed deadlines, and insufficient cash flow. A performace level that is high but unsustainable, will burn out the team and leave the business short of the goals that come with sustained progress over time. This delicate balance is critical for the success of the startup. Only those with drive and stamina, or huge amounts of external capital, can realize the full potential of their business vision. For those making the journey, it is wise to keep the "twice the money, and twice the time" warning in mind as you work towards your goals.

There is a boom within the boom taking place. It seems that just about every consumer Internet startup has released or is working on a Facebook application. Facebook provides an amazing distribution opportunity for companies looking to accelerate their customer base and awareness. I was at a Lunch 2.0 event @AOL the other day, where I ended up spending half the time talking about Facebook application strategies and technical challenges. There was a solid represenation of Facebook application developers/consultants, and those looking for these technical experts.

The poster child for how to do a Facebook app right is iLike. iLike has a strong myspace following, and has used this experience and knowledge to producing a robust Facebook application. If you check out iLike's web-site, there is no mention of their Facebook app in their FAQ's, but plenty of myspace Q&A. They currently have 5,971,561 Facebook users.

According to most developers, the technical challenges in developing a Facebook application is low. Still, creating a successful Facebook app is not easy. As with the web, a functional application is not enough to ensure widespread adoption. For companies like iLike and Slide who have figured out how to harness the power of the Facebook network and platform, the payoff is substantial. For others, the Facebook opportunity will take more experimention and research before a payoff is realized. Those looking to make a hit of Facebook should be prepared to iterate and invest in their Facebook strategy.

The hype behind the F8 is enormous, some of it warranted, and some overblown. How fast can Facebook expand? The expectations could not be higher. One thing is certain, it is a great time to be a Facebook developer, employee or shareholder.

The discussion ranged from valuations, deal structures, pitching tips and more. Steve and Kevin gave different examples of the do's and don't when approaching angels. One of the more memorable points that Steve emphasized was to avoid answering the "What valuation are you looking for?" question. Steve suggested it is better to gather competitive deals and see what valuation offers are proposed by the interested investors. Kevin focuses on the consumer internet space, and his deal preference is to invest only if the startup has a live product. Steve's background is in the semiconductor space, so he and Kevin had a few differences in investment strategy.

The one universal point that Steve and Kevin agreed upon was in regards to whether a person or team is "fundable". The deal breaker for both Steve and Kevin is an entrepreneur who does not listen. No matter the intelligence of the founders or the early success of the startup, if the founders and especially the CEO will not listen, these guys will NOT invest in the company. As is the case in most angel deals, Steve and Kevin are looking to add value and provide advice to their portfolio companies. They invest more for the joy and excitement of the deal, and will not waste time on a team that does not value their input. There are passive angels looking to put money into deals and let the team execute without getting involved. However, this passive investment or "dumb money" is more the exception than the rule (at least in the Bay Area). Founders need to wear a lot of hats in the formative stages of the company. An outsider such as an experienced angel can identify which hats do not fit well. The founder may already "know what they do not know" as Steve pointed out, which is good. Founders who believe that they are well equipped to wear all hats may live to wear them all, as getting an outside investment with this attitude will prove to be a challenge. That said, being a good listener does not guarantee funding, but the inability to listen will create a major barrier to a startup's fundability.

When classifying customers, the conventional wisdom would use the following rating system.

Good customers are:

- patient,

- willing to pay for quality,

- flexible, and

- loyal.

Bad customer are:

- fickle,

- unreasonably demanding, and

- expect free services.

When launching a new product or service, your most valuable customers possess qualities of both of these "good" and "bad" customers. You want to listen to the customers who are demanding, though reasonable; and loyal, but only to a point. These customers are willing to pay extra for superior service, but expects a significant value in return for the extra cost. These customers are a product manager's best friend. If you listen to your "good" customers, you make assumptions that you can charge a premium and offer a good but not great product and thrive. Once the product hits the market, the flaws in features, quality and pricing levels will quickly be exposed. On the flip side, if you try and please a "bad" customer, a product manager ends up delaying product releases while trying to incorporate an enormous set of product features, many which are only useful to this ultra-demanding customer. Even then, this customer will want everything free and will leave your product for a cheaper alternative without hesitation.

The fair but demanding customer is the ideal market research target. Especially if she is comfortable in being brutally honest. She will explain the must have features and service levels. Additionally, she will provide an excellent idea of which add-on features or services she is willing to pay for. If you are lucky, you can get a good sense of the $ amount she will be willing to spend for the product and the various add-ons and extra service levels. Many times this $ amount will be zero. It is the responsibility of the product manager to figure out which features and services to enhance, remove/eliminate, and add based on the market research collected from this valuable customer feedback. A common mistake that product managers make is to waste time and resources building "cool" features that are not considered valuable to the customer base. The other big mistake is to leave out must-have requirements due to a lack of market research. Listening to the wrong customers as explained above can also lead to a product that is too weak, or one that does not have broad appeal.

The Sony Playstation 3 is an example of a product that has disappointed due to a wide gap between what the customer cares about, and what Sony believed the consumer would require and be willing to pay a premium for. The $600 price tag was too high for the price of admission for these Blu-Ray Disc playing, graphics-mastering machines.

The jury is still out on the iPhone. Apple and Jobs have been on a hot streak in mastering the customer requirements and commanding premium pricing in turn. There may not be a better judge of the consumer value-proposition and feature sets than Steve Jobs. So unless you are Steve Jobs, make sure to seek out the honest, tough, but not impossible customer and listen, listen, listen and then create your specifications.

A couple of months back, I received an email from Wiley Publishing mentioning that I could get a free copy of Dov Seidman's new business book "How". I needed to provide my mailing address, and they would send me the book. I was tempted to provide the info to get the book, but fearing a spam storm or some other type of "gotcha", I ignored the offer.

A couple of weeks later, what do you know. In my mailbox was a new hardback copy of "How". GetQuik's address is listed on our company web-site, so the contact at Wiley must have found that address and mailed it off. I have written about "The World is Flat" by Thomas Friedman, and have also written about how the Internet is creating transparancy, in turn creating major change to business as we know it. I assume the publicist at Wiley did a Technorati search under "The World is Flat" or Thomas Friedman and came across this blog.

It is an intriguing campaign to reach out to random bloggers and send them a book in the hopes that they 1) read it, 2) like it, and 3) blog about it. The reason the campaign works is that the content of the book maps well to this particular blog campaign. Additionally, it is well written and thoughtful book. Seidman has a blog and a web-site devoted the book to further support the publicity for "How." Wiley has created a solid on-line campaign to promote this book, so it will be interesting to see the sales results. John McCain went with a heavy on-line fund raising strategy for his 2008 campaign, and that has severely backfired for him. McCain is back to pressing the flesh and doing more traditional fund-raising. Although an online marketing strategy is innovative and can provide tremendous buzz, the key is whether that buzz translates into sales. Of course the product has to be good in order to generate buzz. I am still in the middle of the book, but it is already clear that it doesn't suck. If Seidman's sales of "How" do exceed expectations, these blog/on-line campaigns will become more common. Transalation - more free books for me :)

Tiger is far and away the best golfer in the world, so business as usual, right? There is a subplot to Tiger's run away victory. He has a well publicized feud with Sabatini that began earlier this year when Sabatini claimed that Tiger was "as beatable as ever" at the Wachovia Championship. Tiger went on to win the Wachovia. Prior to this tournament, Tiger had failed to close the deal in the Masters and more recently the British Open. So the matchup with Sabatini was just what the doctor ordered. Tiger is a hyper-competitive, clutch performer. He plays best when he is challenged.

A reporter asked Sabatini after the tournament if he would temper his comments on Tiger in the future after this sound defeat. Sabatini's response: "Why?" he said. "I hope I inspire him and play well enough that I can give him a good challenge." Mission accomplished on the former, no so much on the later. Maybe Sabatini has never heard the saying, "those you fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it".

Sabatini is one of the world's best golfers, and perhaps his fearless attitude is part of his success. At the same time, it is probably wise for Sabatini to reconsider his Tiger strategy. When confronting a stronger opponent, it is best to consider if a offensive or defensive tactic is more effective. If the competition is strong, competitive and intelligent, it is best to respect this opponent and fly under the radar. Against a slower, beaurecratic giant, a more aggresive tactic can be effective. It is important to know who you are up against so you don't end up Tiger meat.

Who wants to mess with wires trying to hook up their laptops or computers to their TV? Who wants to watch "Ocean's 13" on their Apple iBook when they could be enjoying it on their 50" Flat-Screen TV with surround sound?

Before the DVD wars began, NetFlix was in a great position to broker an Unbox-like deal with TiVo or better yet, use their sky-high stock to acquire the struggling company. Instead, Blockbuster's Total Access created a major headache for NetFlix and embroiled the DVD leader into a brutal price war that has caused a major hit to their stock price.

All the while, Amazon with the visionary leadership of the once again Internet hero Jeff Bezos has stormed into the on-demand movie game. Rumors have already been swirling that Amazon may acquire NetFlix. This would be a huge win for Amazon. It is probable that both NetFlix and TiVo will end up in the Amazon empire. The combination of these three companies could dominate the video on-demand market. Blockbuster's Total Access would lose big to the on-demand and low-cost structure of Amazon/NetFlix/TiVo. Unless Steve Jobs can figure out how to get the AppleTV to be a run-away hit, instead of a "hobby", Apple will be hard pressed to compete. The only company two companies with a chance to fight the on-demand battle would be Microsoft and possible Sony. Through the Xbox and PlayStation consoles, they would need to get an onlike move catalog and transaction engine working fast. The smart money would be on Amazon. NetFlix missed an opportunity to use their highly valued stock to acquire strategic targets, I would not expect Amazon to duplicate this mistake. A friend of mine mentioned that there are some tax implications for Amazon to acquire NetFlix, so that could be a significant hurdle. Regardless of if Amazon does acquire TiVo, NetFlix, both or neither, you have to admire his recent moves and his "Unbox" bet.

Jeff Bezos is truely a bold businessman. His strategy to burn cash during the Internet boom is proving to be prescient. He understood that the market conditions were such that he could get a huge infusion of cash from VC's and then the public markets due to the Internet fever of the late 90's. By using this bundle of free cash, he was able to innovate, acquire a huge base of customers, and create a world-class infrastructure for his on-line marketplace. He did make some really bad calls on Internet flops that eventually crashed with the dotcom bust, but the core Amazon business was too important to disappear and become a footnote in the history of the Internet. He was able to successful raise capital through a debt-offering to save Amazon after the bubble burst and slowly brought Amazon to profitability. Now with Amazon's stock soaring again, Bezos is making some bold new moves. There is very few people like Bezos who can make daring bet the company moves on a regular basis. There is a lesson to be learned from the Amazon roller-coaster ride for both startups and public companies.

The mantra in business is "Cash is King". Seems simple, but what is important to understand is that cash is not always 100% aligned with profits or cash flow as evidenced by Amazon. In the early stages of a company, it actually can be limiting to try and reach a profit status too quickly. An Internet startup may find a way to carve out a slim profit margin, but in turn lose the opportunity to build a huge account or customer base against VC-funded competitors. The decision to burn to acquire customers or move towards profitability is highly dependent on a huge set of variables. The variables include current cash position, burn rate, industry, competition, funding environment, market size, market growth rate, customer acquisition costs, lifetime customer value and more. Once a company goes public, share price is the key measurement. If a company generates tons of cash, but the markets undervalue the company, the company becomes an acquisition target for private equity or companies that the markets are rewarding with higher P/E valuations. It is interesting that NetFlix founder Reed Hastings mentioned his biggest regret was taking NetFlix public too early. As NetFlix was hugely rewarded by Wall Street, while Blockbuster's stock was tanking, the natural step for Blockbuster to take was to copy NetFlix. This has brought NetFlix to its current DVD-war battle and destroyed huge amounts of market value. Although there is much complexity to the "cash is king" rule as discussed here, the majority of the time, it is best to focus on generating positive cash flow and increasing this cash flow at a steady, sustainable rate. Although...

The best companies are able to convince its customer's of their value proposition and position themselves effectively against the competition. At the same time, these great organizations are self-aware and understand emerging trends, competition, and their shortcomings. A classic example is Microsoft.

Microsoft convinces their customers they have the best technology and software, whether this is true or not. Yet, Microsoft internally keeps its employees on their toes by taking an underdog position. When Netscape appeared to be on the verge on altering Microsoft's position of power in the software industry, Gates was able to rally the troops and launch a major counter-offensive with Internet Explorer. He created a sense of urgency that Microsoft's future would be in jeopardy if Netscape were to outflank Microsoft. We all know how that story ended.

Now that Microsoft has matured and Gates has mellowed out, the question is whether they are now drinking too much of their own kool-aid. Although Microsoft is taking on Google in search, the passion and drive at Microsoft does not seem to have the same energy as the prior Netscape battle. This time around, Microsoft seems to be trying to talk away the Google treat. Microsoft is describing Google as a one-trick pony, which is dangerous thinking. In the past, Gates & Co. would have declared that the sky is falling and Google's search will destroy Microsoft and the software industry as we now know it. If Microsoft is unable to impede the Google juggernaut, Microsoft may actually unwittingly assume this underdog position. As Andy Grove famously coined, "only the paranoid survive."

What I don't understand is the popularity of "IMHO". I assume that if someone is texting, sending IM or commenting on a subject, they are providing their "HO". Does a comment have more effect if someone drops the "IMHO"?

One interesting impact of IM and especially texting is the need for concise, non-superfluous conversations. I like the acronyms, but only if they serve a purpose. :)