Branch Metrics | Interview with its CEO & Co-Founder – Alex Austin
In Palo Alto (CA), we meet CEO and Co-Founder of Branch Metrics, Alex Austin. Alex talks about his story how he came up with the idea and founded Branch Metrics, how the current business model works, as well as he provides some advice for young entrepreneurs.
Martin: Hello, today we are in Palo Alto in the Branch Metrics office. Hello Alex, who are you and what do you do?
Alex: My name is Alex. I am the CEO and co-founder of Branch. I can go into a lot of background about myself and where I was born. I am local, I haven’t really ever left California. I grew up about an hour south up here in a place called Carmel, beautiful town. It is my favorite vacation. I highly recommend making a trip at some point if you have never been.
I always wanted to be an engineer. And growing up just like a little ways away, I knew that the best place to be an engineer was in Silicon Valley. I knew since I was probably 5 or 6 that—as soon as I came to college, move here and never leave. My goal has been to slowly make my way towards the hills as far as I possibly can and then die comfortably in bed in Partola Valley at a ripe old age at some point. I am almost there but not there yet.
I have always been building things since a very early age. Studied engineering, actually didn’t study software engineering, focused on electrical engineering I studied primarily device physics. So this whole software thing that we work on today is actually very different than my educational background. But I think engineering is an absolute requirement when it comes to building a company or really addressing any type of problem, and they train you to really solve problems.
So while studying I fell in love with school in undergrad and almost made education my career. I started a PhD in electrical engineering here at Stanford with the full intention to actually go into research and be a professor but through that process, I kind of I saw a lot of friends working and doing really successful things in the industry and then had an offer to join a startup in Santa Clara right at the same time when I started that program and said, “Why not?”
I actually decided why not just do the best of both worlds, get some education while trying to do the masters and the PhD full time and then work full time. For about two years I actually did seven days a week school and work non-stop. Until I said I can’t do this anymore, got the masters and just decided to focus entirely on the startup. The startup was in Santa Clara. The reason I joined was the incredibly awesome promise that we were going to build up a manufacturing facility from scratch. They had really an idea for the technology we need to figure out first how to build it and then manufacture it.
I joined when there were like about 20-ish people or so. The company grew to about 700 and we raised half a billion dollars at the time and ultimately failed. It was a very sad story. The company’s assets were sold to a Chinese conglomerate for the technology, which I had built.
After that I said, “I want to build my own company” and now I blame a lot of the folks that were in charge of the product and some of the strategic decisions for the failure of this startup and I don’t want to make names. I blame a lot of the strategic decisions that were made on the reason that we failed. I think I know we could have been a lot more adequate and prepared for the market changes that occurred. And so I said I am going to do it myself this time. I want to make those decisions so I quit and said, “My turn.”
I fell in love with software over the course of that startup, I built a bunch of different tools, completely self-taught and just started writing apps so I knew I wanted to get into mobile software. The promise that I could write a piece of functionality and software and push it out to a distribution platform that potentially will touch billions of people and run on a really powerful computer in their pocket was more exciting than anything that I could possibly dream of. So I just started writing consumer apps.
My first version was this wild idea that I had an I won’t go into details but I realized quickly that it wasn’t going to be as easy as I thought to build up a company. And so I applied to the business school at Stanford as a fall back plan that if all else fail I can never build a successful company what so ever at least I would get a piece of paper that would say like “I didn’t just spend three years of my life doing nothing.” Fortunately, that was a really good decision because it is where I met my co-founders for Branch and the company Branch came out of that whole story. I can go in to a lot more detail about what Branch is and all that at some point. That is a little bit of background on me.
Martin: Did the basic idea for Branch come when you collaborated at Stanford university?
Alex: I met my classmates like very early on. It is a two year program. I came there basically because I’ve heard that school was very easy and I can work on my own stuff and like barely go to class and just keep working. Then I took a paper at the end which was true although attendance seemed to be the biggest requirement for business school.
I met my classmates very early on. I recognized them as fellow engineers that were very entrepreneurial. They had actually applied for internships over the summer. I convinced them to leave those and join me to build this other wild app idea that I had which was a new type of photobook that we would produce and sell via app. We built that out of the first to second year, launched it officially at the beginning of our second year, saw actually quite a bit of success and operated that business all throughout our second year. We got to be about a million a year in total revenue.
After graduation we entered an incubator with this printing app and all of these companies in this incubator saw this tool that we had built primarily to give us an edge in user acquisition. It was a linking tool. They said, “I want to use that too” and I have never built a product in my life that people would see and say, “I want to use it”. So I knew there was something there. By the end of the incubator we had actually sold all of the assets to the printing business and decided to focus on this linking tool explicitly because it was basically growing more organically. People who would use it would tell their friends etc., etc.
The tool itself is really a platform for app developers. It is a linking tool and the core premise is very simply and I don’t want to go into too much detail. But the core premise is like in the web links are very standard. Every web page is filled with. Let’s look at Amazon as an example, they have millions of products that you can buy, each one of those products has a unique link. In the transition to apps links disappeared. When you build an app you say, “Here is the first screen, here is a second screen”. It is a completely self-contained story board of functionality. You don’t have the same linking mechanism. Whereas marketing and all sorts of features that were built sharing, as an example, you can’t share a page in an app. It just doesn’t make sense. You can share an app but you can’t share a page unless you create links that allow you to do it. So we brought that linking concept and applied it to apps so that individual products inside the Amazon app for example could have a link. They didn’t necessarily link to the website.
So we wanted every page, every object like news article, product, photo, video etc. to have a link in an app just like they do on the web. And with that it unlocks a whole mountain of really cool functionality and things for app developers.
That is the Branch platform. It is really a linking solution for app developers and they use it for pretty much everything – marketing, advertising, building features, etc. Anything you can imagine, basically every link that points to an app should be a Branch link is the goal because we do linking for apps much better than they ever could.
BUSINESS MODEL OF BRANCH
Martin: What is interesting, for me the idea is very obvious. Of course you should say like deep links in an app. Why wasn’t nothing else out there?
Alex: The biggest thing we introduced was primarily using these links as a method of user acquisition. There was a study published that around 20 percent of the top 200 apps had set up deep linking for their app, where we created and allowed developers to start using deep link when users didn’t have the app.
So let me describe a little bit of the difference here. Let’s say you already have Yelp installed, somebody sends you a link to the Yelp website, Yelp has already set up deep linking where they can open up their app and show you that thing. That technology had been available since the first version of Android and iOS, the ability to open an app and load a specific page. The problem comes when it is a new app you don’t have installed. There was no way to say, “I want you to install the Yelp app and then have this page open up afterwards”, so they carry trough that context and expectation through the install, just the technology does not exist outside of what we offer.
User acquisition and growth is the most important thing when it comes to building an app business because it is so hard. It is impossible to get your app discovered and so everybody is so focused on growth in UA. When you actually have the ability now to market your app or promote your app based on the content inside, you can drive much more growth in terms of new users adopting it as well as new users like activating, signing up or buying something in the app.
A shift towards content when it comes to app promotion and instead of promoting an app, whereas when you look at the current state of app marketing you still see people buying installs. You will see like you are browsing your Facebook news feed and they have a ton of advertising that is for apps. There is no advertisement for like articles or products or that type of thing when it comes to apps. So deep linking unlocks that.
We are now at the point where nobody wants a dumb app anymore. They want to watch a video or they want to read an article or buy a product or something like that so it is an absolutely required transition in the mindset of building an app to set up all these links to point back to these products.
It is crazy that it wasn’t more recognized but I think the biggest problem was you couldn’t use deep linking for user acquisition, therefore it wasn’t solving a problem that everybody had. It was solving sort of a small edge case that was like a tier 1 type problem, so barely anybody adopted it. Now you can use it for everything and now it solves everybody’sproblem. I think that is the difference.
We estimate that we now have about 10 percent of the total deep linkable app market, using Branch. The remaining 90 percent do not use anything else. They don’t use another tool, they just haven’t heard about us yet. A lot of what we do is education in things like “Why should this be the top priority in your product roadmap for next quarter or tomorrow and why don’t you add this today.” A lot of that is like our entire focus from a company and growth perspective as this sort of storytelling in order to convince all of the rest of the ninety percent why it is the most important thing for them to use today.
Martin: So imagine, I am an app developer, walk me through the process of getting ready to have my app deep linked.
Alex: Sure. The biggest challenge when it comes to setting up deep linking is that apps aren’t structured to support it. As an example, Apple designed XCode as the platform where you build an app. XCode has you layout the story board and it even have you indicate an arrow that says “This is the entry point”. Often developers will put like a splash page as their entry point and then they will have.
Let’s just say it is a very simple app either a splash page or screen and then you have list of products and maybe there is a product detail page. So you have a single entry point which is the splash page. The next entry point is a login page, like you need somebody to log in and then they could see the products. There is no way to actually in XCode structure your app and say, “The user can click a link and then enter the product detail page.”
Often, if you try to open up the product detail page before you go to the splash page or even the product list page the Apple crash. It is just the way that people have been building apps since mobile apps were actually the thing you can build. What is required is to say: “Forget about all that stuff that you have learned about how to build an app. There isn’t a single point of entry. Every user can be dropped in at every single point in that storyboard level.” You as the developer need to say “Ok, drop him on Branch, Branch will tell you right when the app first opens up what the user is expecting to see, what link they just clicked, what page have you load now that you know that information.”
So let’s say it is a list of shoes you can buy, the user just clicked on the pair of red shoes with this ID. Load the product detail page for the red shoes. And the developer says, “Ok, awesome. I will do that.” And they will bypass and make sure that everything Is all set up so when the user sees that red shoed they can click buy or done and go back to the product listing.
It is basically re-architecting the traditional structure of an app to support multiple entry points. That is the bulk of the work like adding Branch is actually adding one line of code. It is super, super simple to add us. It is just like changing the mindset of the developer to say, “It is more complicated than a single point of entry and now I need to support multiple entries.
Fortunately, the story is very compelling. We have shown that if you go through that process you can see up to a 2x conversion rate to buy that thing, that pair of red shoes. You can see on average across network of thousands of apps that use us now. If a user gets a deep linked experience as their first experience to the app they are twice as likely to stick around after 30 days. So a 30 day retention doubles if you offer them a deep linked experience because it is so compelling that they are likely to keep using it again and again. It is a good story so the one day in terms of restructuring the app is totally worth it.
Martin: I totally get the point that share- ability is key and also that we have multiple entry points and I see another parallel. When the internet was first born, you had first search engines. Then you had Yahoo structured search and had 1000 links or so. If I am looking now at the apps I maybe have downloaded 30-40 apps. I can’t download a million of them or look for them but maybe there are some apps which include some interesting content , which is helpful to me and I would like to find them. But currently no every app is indexed and those kind of deep links. How should I find them? I wouldn’t need to install all of them and this Is I believe the pain that you are trying to solve.
Alex: Our core mission when it comes to building… So we give this tool for free, we believe that the world that will exist on top of the technology that we have created and given to everybody is something that will benefit users and developers so much more and it will create an opportunity for us to monetize far more than we would if we tried to charge some sort of service fee. The core problem that we’ve faced as an app developer and I still consider myself an app developer… Like I built an app for my fiancée for Christmas where I aggregated all of the hikes in the Bay area and then indexed them by keywords. So when Sunday morning I feel like I say “Let’s hike”, we want to see flowers and a field and an ocean view and it will tell us exactly which hike we should go on. I didn’t publish it because I know that publishing to the app store is a completely fruitless effort. There is absolutely no point to push in an app into the wild now because discovery is impossible. You will never be found in the app store because there are so many other apps on top of you that have already locked up every single keyword, you will never be found.
The only other alternative today is to go to Facebook and then give them a massive amount of money and say “I want users.” It is so bad that Facebook is monopolized, like the single control point to the users to an app that they now are charging like 5 dollars and 50 cents on average for install. There is no world where a five dollar and 50 cents cost of a customer will ever make sense. That means that LTV for a used has to be more than 5 dollars and 50 cents which is crazy. We are selling things with our e-commerce app and barely make like 6 dollars LTV which means there is nothing left to pay ourselves. Anyways, it is like a house of cards, like completely unsustainable.
The problem that we face that we want to solve with what we do is discovery. We want to fix app discovery. And the way that we can do it is with data that the developers give to us by using the tool. The data that they give to us are the links. They have created links to pages that were previously unlinkable.
If you think about an app like Dubsmash, they create a single link that points to every single video that is watchable in the app and they give us all the company metadata. It is basically like the equivalent of a web crawler. When Google set out and all the other companies that have built sites before that, they had to write a page crawler that would crawl all of the text and figure out when somebody types in a query to say “looking for their friend’s video”. Videos were a big thing back in the early days of the web but to say search for your friends video they would try to match that text to whatever page they previously scraped. We have indexed the Dubsmash app where no crawler, no web crawler can actually get all of the information.
The other really important piece of data is that we see how popular each individual video is. So we know at a video level how many times is has been watched, shared clicked on and etc. So we can see that this video is actually more popular that that video. So when you are looking to find something entertaining on your phone, Branch has a single index on everything that is actually watchable let’s say, plus we know exactly of the watchable things, what is the most popular and trending video today in the mobile ecosystem. So when it comes to showing you things that you haven’t seen in an app before but definitely should no other company can surface that information but us. We are going to use this to build an app discovery engine, where we don’t promote apps; we promote the content that resides with them.
Our goal is just to create an alternative discovery mechanism that allows people to find things that they are looking for and developers to connect with those users who are looking to interact with them. I just want to look back in three years. If we can say that thousands of developers, thousands of businesses were only successful because of the channel that we created then we have built a successful product. That is my goal. I just don’t want anyone ever getting in the situation where they poured years of their life trying to create a product or a business in mobile but they fail because they didn’t have access to something to deliver them users. Whereas in the web you can actually invest in SEO and get a substantial number of users just through search queries on Google. And like tons of businesses that have been built purely on that organic channel by pushing content that people actually want to find. We need to create that same mechanism for apps. That is our core driving mission. How that will look will change over time.
Martin: And what type of customer segments are you currently targeting because in the first phase you said the big apps, they have already deep links for themselves so therefore I would assume you would rather target the long tail apps.
Alex: When you think about there is a difference and this is often confused but there is a difference between reengagement and discovery. Discovery is finding something new that you have never seen before, finding a new business or video or an app that you would have never found otherwise. Whereas for the head of the market, you already have interaction, you have some relation, like you have Yelp installed on your phone. If you want to find a restaurant you are going to go to Yelp. That is the restaurant finding app. You don’t need a tool to surface you restaurants when you are looking for Thai food. What you don’t have is something to push you things that you should see but have not yet seen.
So when it comes to solving discovery the mid-tier and the long tail is really where we can shine. We can say this particular video maybe it is on a Dubsmash or one of the other thousand apps that also allow user generated content. We can push you to the thing that you should seevery similar to the things that you have seen in the past but having not seen. In that case it is really around like the long tail and the stuff that you would never find otherwise. We want to try to find things like diamonds and just surface them, that is discovery. When it comes to pushing new content that will be the type of thing we focus on.
However people want to see the types of things that are being shared very frequently across the head of the market like Fandango or Zappos. Where you have heard of the brands, we can surface the things within those that you should see and also haven’t seen yet. So it is a discovery within an existing brand and category. If you want to buy shoes you want to go to Zappos directly but we can show you other shoes because everybody loves them. There is discovery you can do within those existing brands but when it comes to locking up new things it is the mid-tier and long tail that we want.
Martin: Alex, if you look at Google, they have Google Analytics on desktop and I believe they have also some kind of SDK on the mobile. What keep them from going in the same direction of deep linking?
Alex: So they have a bunch of initiatives that try to index apps. They have this thing called the app indexing initiative and the goal for them is their product is search. So you type in a query and you will get a result. The goal for them is to take their existing index of web results and deliver the user to the app if they have it. Surfacing peer app content for them is actually no that of the great user experience.
If you would search for, let’s stick with the Dubsmash example and they surface Dubsmash and you did not have the app installed on your phone, they have to send you to an app store when you click on the link – which is from a user experience perspective just awful. You click on a video, you go to the app store. Nobody wants that.
So their focus is let’s take all the stuff the great stuff that we have on the web and deliver a compelling search result and if the app is installed we will send the user there. So app indexing is primarily a tool that allows the developer to list what their web content indicate to google that it is also on a corresponding app page. But unfortunately a lot of folks have not yet adopted deep linking. So the subset of those app links is actually pretty small.
But for their use case it doesn’t make as much sense for you to index pure app content. Because of a search user experience it is poor. So it is just not their key focus. It is possible that some of the thing they are doing around Google now could start to overlap when they want to recommend you apps that you haven’t seen yet that you should that are related to something you are doing on your phone but so far they haven’t gone in that direction.
ADVICE TO ENTREPRENEURS FROM ALEX AUSTIN
Martin: Alex, what type of advice could you give first time entrepreneurs?
Alex: I have a lot of advice. It is incredibly hard to build a company be it from the life ending problems that you face from a day to day that are product or customer related, or financing related or whatever. Like you are creating something from absolutely nothing and everybody is trying to kill you and stop you from doing it. So it is tough.
Advicewise the most important I think is really around attitude. So this is one of the reasons I mentioned that engineering is a really important degree to gather to go through that process like four year education at least where you are just confronted with a continual onslaught of problems that you have no idea how to solve. It is like a problem set you will get and electrical engineering is much more mathematical. It is like here is a proof, you need to prove this one like low level physics equation from base principles. I have no idea how to do it but I am going to fail this homework if I don’t figure it out. The consequences are not that severe but it is literally all I can do is have the confidence that I can figure it out and if I just go and keep going and pushing in every possible direction, eventually I will get to the answer.
Having a confidence to know that even when you face something that you have absolutely no idea how to solve you have no idea how to do, have the confidence to know that no matter what if you work your butt off and don’t give up you will get to the answer. I think it is like perseverance that I call it.
I wrote an article I recommend reading it. The title is called ‘Just keep building’. The first time you try something, it is going to fail miserably, it won’t work at all, you won’t have success. And the most important thing is to look at and analyze that failure, see what you did wrong, what assumptions you made that were incorrect then take all of those learnings and then use that as the launch pad to build the next thing. It is the only way that you will actually succeed. There is not a single entrepreneur ever that is ever said I have a great idea and they turn it into a billion dollar company. This does not happen. It is a fairy tale. Just pick a direction, go as fast as you possibly can until you learn that it is not working. Learn everything you can about how and why it failed, take a new direction based on those learnings and go. Just the most important thing is to keep moving as fast as you possibly can because the only thing that you have like fighting against you is time and money which is equivalent to time. You can’t keep doing that forever because you probably will run out of food and rent. But you should keep moving as fast as you can.
This execution and lack of fear of making a mistake is absolutely the most important thing when it comes to building a company. Just be prepared for a lot of disappointment but use that disappointment, feed off of It to move on to the next thing, knowing full well that no matter what at the very end you will find that answer.
I have a ton of advice on building company culture, fundraising and all that kind of stuff but I think what is the single most important thing is that it is not about networking, going to the social events and doing this kind of stuff. It is about what you build and accomplish and just keep doing that as fast as you possibly can.
Martin: Alex, I am very interested in your advice on corporate culture.
Alex: Culture is an interesting one. It defines a lot. We are now 45 people, that is still a very small company. It is very manageable I know everybody. I can interact with everybody. I know what everyone is doing. It is definitely not the point where it is out of control and I don’t have insight on what everyone is doing. But it is just on the border. And especially when I go into things where I can’t be involved as much, as an example going through a fundraising process completely sucks me away from the company. I have absolutely no idea what is going on. I am going from this meeting to that meeting, I am dealing with things that are totally unrelated to the day to day operations and you just have to have faith that every individual person has enough competency, internal guidance to make their own decisions and make sure that they keep going in the direction that you hope they will.
The only way to accomplish that is with culture. You can set a high level goal of “This is where we want to go”, but everybody needs to be able to make the same sort of decisions on their own and not just like they face a problem and just set back and hope that it will get addressed.
What I found to be the most effective and I stole this actually from our previous startup – it is sort of an emphasis on individual accomplishment. It is how you make sure everybody know that they are only successful if they personally achieve success in whatever project they are working on.
We do it in a way where we try to shine light on individuals. So we actually have every two weeks a review where every department head who is responsible for marketing, sales , etc. will get up and actually present individual numbers reporting on peoples projects. Sales is very easy. We show individual levels so it is really on the projector, everybody’s name indicating their success over the last two weeks. So people can see like “Awesome job, you know, Austin” or whoever it is and on the team it is like “You really killed it last week”. And that person is recognized in an individual level.
Same thing goes with marketing, same thing goes with engineering and support like all the various aspects of the business. Everyone is recognized at individual level. At the same time the person who is like not doing so awesome is also presented right in front of the whole company. So it is driving them to have a sense of individual accomplishment.
We are not like a family, we are a team of rock star players where everybody should feel lucky to be on the team with the other folks. They should look across the table and be like, “I am so lucky to work with that person.” And if they don’t feel that, they don’t belong here.
It is just the focus on the individual and what that does is when that individual is faced with a question or a problem or whatever, they know that their own personal success relies on them being able to push past it. There is nothing more motivating than my personal achievement. An emphasis on the individual is absolutely important.
So we have very relaxed management. There is very little oversight in general. Everyone is running as fast as they possibly can, everybody knows they live and die by their own work. Every person that I talk to when they start in the company is “I want you to look back 10 years from now like your resume coming out of Branch and say I did the best work in my life for that company.” If they don’t feel they are going to be able to achieve that then they are not going to be successful and they should leave. But if they can, if they are focused on improving themselves, driving to be the best they possibly can they will for sure be able to do that. I think that is one of the most important things.
We are not like, I forbid ping pong tables. People say it is a no-fun policy. I don’t want people to feel this is a comfortable place to like come in and relax. This is a place where you come to get shit done. To accomplish things that you would have never have chance to accomplish in any other role. It is not a place you are going to come and kick back on the couch and hang out with friends. You can do that outside of work. So when you walk down the halls here everybody is super heads down and it is very, very quiet. Everybody is working as hard as they can. It is an unbelievable feeling when you are a part of it. It is really cool.
Martin: I totally get the point that you are trying to align the company success with individual success of the people. And for the people that are on the top 30 percent I totally get it. Do you perceive that sometimes the bottom ten or twenty percent are feeling bad just because they are visibly shown as being not as good as the others?
Alex: Yes, but the best part about that it’s there is no motivator like the feeling of inadequacy. There are a couple responses to that feeling of inadequacy. It is either “I am going to kill myself and improve myself and make sure like a 100 percent I can succeed here and I will do better “ or you leave. And both outcomes are great for us, because we don’t really want somebody that to be honest and frank sucks on the team because no one else is going to feel lucky to work with them.
I was a part of a group for a long time R&D group and I’ll try to describe as idealistically as possible, where I was an individual contributor and there were a couple of other individual contributors on my team one of which I felt did not do any work. They contributed from and idea perspective but ideas I felt were actually toxic and detrimental to the overall productivity of the team. I asked in every single one on one that my manager fires this person because it was bringing me down. There is nothing more demotivating than being on a team with somebody you feel is not contributing. You are constantly thinking about like “We really are wasting company dollars paying some jackass, sorry, to sit around and spitting nonsense ideas, is super unproductive”. So I ultimately left because of that. I just didn’t wanted to be a part of it.
I don’t want anyone here to ever feel that same way. I want to make sure that everybody feels like they are lucky to work with everybody else otherwise that person shouldn’t be on our team. We need to accomplish incredible things and move with speeds that very few companies have been able to and execute a couple of different strategies that have us excelling in many different areas. If we can’t move very effectively, if there is somebody dragging us down and lagging the team then we won’t succeed. It is super, super important that everybody is high performing.
Martin: Alex, how do you balance the individual contribution with the group contribution? Imagine, you have a sales department and on the one end maybe I will be focused only on getting more sales for me and getting something like a competitive environment, which is maybe in the end not maximizing the target metric which is potentially sales, whereas maybe I will have more individual contribution in sales but I will give more referrals or other value advice to other sales people and thereby contributing.
Alex: The important thing there is just to make sure that the metrics don’t create that sort of divisive organization. So in the sales example we actually award assists so there is the ability for people to earn. There is a guy that all he does is just assist. He is still like one of the top performers and everybody recognizes that he is an essential part of the team and really, really valuable. He is not closing but just because we created the metrics that allow somebody like that to be successful.
Martin: It is like in basketball. You have some assists, some blocks.
Alex: Exactly, and then the same thing with marketing. On our blog we have a very large emphasis on content, there is a lot of people contributing to the blog. There is a person that manages the overall publishing aspect of it and he sees it as his domain to report performance and drive promotions and all that kind of stuff. People contribute individual articles and because you contribute individual article, when that article does well the blog guy will promote it. He will see a lot of success through a lot of work that he does on promotion. The person who wrote the articles sees a lot of success because they got their own personal brand. We don’t ever say anything that this is written by Branch. It is written by an individual so we just try to make sure that even though the ultimately the company is benefiting greatly from all that the individuals are rewarded appropriately depending on the work that they do. You just be careful that you don’t create those divisive cultures because I have seen them tear companies apart especially sales is one of the most dangerous ones, but just be careful.
Martin: Alex, thank you so much for your time.
Alex: Yes, of course.
Martin: And I wish you so much luck with your startup.
Alex: Yes, it is going to be a wild ride.
Comments are closed.
In this article, we discover the 4 L's of a successful lead generation starting with 1) a brief …