The big tables in the cafe principle

This afternoon I had the pleasure of attending Lunch For Good here in San Francisco, organized by my friend Chris Heuer, the lunch gathered around 50 people together for a tasty meal and serious conversation about how to inspire critical thinking.

At my table as part of our conversation I mentioned my “big tables” principle in evaluating cafes as part of our conversation about groups and spaces. At the table the pet owners were all sharing how much enjoyment they get from talking with fellow dog owners at dog parks. I mentioned that I could never even be in such a space, couldn’t ever own pets of any type.

If you are wonder, no I don’t hate animals, I’m just seriously allergic, so allergic that I stop breathing and have asthma attacks along with concurrent serious skin rashes, red eyes and stuffed sinuses. For a short time I can take some allergy medicines and endure brief exposure, but I refuse to take medicine every day of my life just to live with a pet – and furthermore such prolonged exposure to both the medicine (which does have very real side effects) and to the pet dander which has extreme impact on my well being is not conducive to my overall health.

My point in bringing this up is that while the interactions between pet owners are fantastic and it is great that such spaces spark interactions between folks who might not otherwise meet (though likely they share some common interests and traits since they have chosen to live in a near geographic area) such spaces are not, in fact, truly universal, there are folks, such as myself, who not only are unlikely to be at such a dog park my in fact be completely unable to enter such a space.

We then started talking about online spaces and communities and here I brought the discussion back to physical spaces. Cafes are often cited as spaces where strangers can meet, interact and get to know each other. However as a frequent cafe denizen (I’ve been working from cafes since the early 1990’s) I have observed that there are simple steps a cafe can do that dramatically change how the cafe functions as a social space.

Hence my “big tables” principle.

The bigger the tables in a cafe the more social interactions between strangers are likely.

My ideal cafe has tables big enough for two people to work on laptops comfortably while simultaneously having a plate of food, a coffee and some books or other materials open in front of them. Such large tables usually can readily accommodate more than two people and easily inspire ad hoc conversations and interactions between strangers – starting with the simple question ‘do you mind if I share your table” but often ending up with philosophical discussions.

Today, however, in the era when many folks, myself included as I write this post from a cafe in the West Portal seated on a couch (by myself)  frequently shut out the world via listening to headphones as we work, a cafe needs to take further steps to truly inspire people to converse with each other, to actually create a space where social interactions happen.

A few steps I have observed that help.

1. Watching the volume of the music including any live performers to be quiet enough to enable comfortable conversations. A quiet cafe without any background music however isn’t ideal as people will turn to their own soundtracks. But a cafe with pounding music makes it hard to converse even with friends
2. Regular events which help spark conversations and interactions. One cafe here in San Francisco (On the Corner) has a weekly games night sponsored by a nearby games shop. Such events give strangers a reason to do more than just talk in passing with each other. Other cafes have regular art openings, cuppings of coffee or other events which help inspire people to interact.
3. Sociable staff. This is simple but friendly, sociable staff at a cafe will spark conversations with strangers and regulars alike (and help make strangers into regulars). In turn these conversations will then often offer reasons and entrypoints for strangers to interact with each other. Some cafes (and other spaces) take this to an extreme but generally speaking friendly, outgoing staff help create a space where people get a bit out of themselves and interact with others.
4. Hours that encourage social interactions. Cafes that are open late inspire people (often but not always) to linger and hangout, to use the cafe as an alternative to other evening entertainment options such as bars or nightclubs. One of the more social cafes I have spent time in here in San Francisco is, in fact, a Starbucks. However it is also open 24hrs a day six days a week. Being located near to universities it is full of students studying and interacting with each other until the early hours of the morning.

What lessons can be drawn from such cafes (and other spaces) for online businesses seeking to spark conversations and interactions?

1. The design details matter a great deal. Small, tiny tables in a cafe or a web design that emphasizes an individual experience will lead to individuals being alone in that space.
2. Small gestures can inspire and spark interactions. Many of the cafes that most impress me, where I most quickly feel comfortable and at home are cafes where the staff take a simple step of learning my name from the first time I am there – and not just to call out my order but to greet me by name as they interact with me.
3. Hours and patterns matter.Yes, the web is a global usually open 24hrs a day space but even online most successful communities and sites find rhythms and schedules to fall into. Here on my personal blog I fail in this regard, I do not post nearly enough. In contrast many of my favorite blogs have gotten into a pattern of one or more “open threads” posted every day specifically to create spaces for readers to converse with each other. These posts, in turn, supported by a regular pattern of other posts (the frequency and form of which differ by the blog). Cafes with short hours cater to one audience, cafes with longer hours open later reach a different group.

How do you judge a space? Whether online or offline what about a space inspires you to join it, to engage with the people who might share it with you?

Two models of retail – the Dollar store vs the Apple store

I contend that there are two primary models of reatail, at least in the US (there is a third model I’ll mention at the end which is rarely seen in the US).

In the title I called these The Dollar Store and the Apple Store but more accurately these are the “everything and the kitchen sink” versus the sparse and mostly open. 

In the first model, call it the Kitchen Sink model the buisness model is to have everything that someone might possibly be looking for, to have a surplus of choice and options, to fill most available space with products for sale and to, in theory, sell a lot to everyone who comes through the door. Typically these models combine having everything (or trying to appear to have everything) with a lot of emphasis on price. 

The logical extreme of this model is the Big Box Retailers such as Walmart, Costco, Home Depot, Target and countless others overwhelming the suburban malls of the US (and occaisonally making inroads into he urban centers as well). Typically these stores attempt to have most active inventory right on the store shelves with the customers pulling their own products as they shop. Employees restock the shelves, sometimes help guide customers to the right aisle, and only in select departments of the store (if at all) have a direct customer service role, often taking custom orders for those products which the store does not keep in stock. 

Though in many of these models the store deemphsizes such products in favor of products which can be kept in stock on the stoor “floor”.

In contrastthe other model of retail is the Curated Experience, of which The Apple Stores are a fantastic example. In this model the emphasis is less on keeping a wide selection of products in stock, but rather on highly currating what is avialable for sale. 

Typically these stores have displays which highlight the products which are available but the full inventory of the store is not on the main storeroom floor but rather is kept in the back in a storeroom, off limits to the customers. Most (non-Payless) shoe stores operate in this manner. As do most higher end designer clothing stores. But the Apple Store is an example which many more people have likely experienced directly.

In many ways this is a very old fashioned retail model, this is how, for example, the old fashioned grocery stores operated in the days before the grocery cart and customer self service. Speciality food shops occasionally still operate in this manner, with all the products behind displays and cases and only available via a direct interaction between the customes and the shopkeepers. 

This model of retail is labor intensive, most of the staff has to be able to inteact with and literally serve the customers. It is also built upon the taste and curatiatorial skill of the store’s buyers. In place of trying to have everything that anyone might possibly want this model of store posits that they can choose between those goods (or services) people should want and those which they should not. 

It is the model of a bookstore which instead of cramming every available inch with books stacked upon books (and often barely if at all sorted) is highly seletive with what they buy, turning away more books then they choose to purchase (here I’m describing mostly a used bookstore but the same model also holds for new bookstores to a lesser degree). 

In my experience though I occasionally will suffer the cramped, overly full bookstores, it is the stores such as Aardvark Books here in San Francisco which I return to time and time again, and from whom I buy many books over the course of a given year (in 2008 I’d guess around 100+ books perhaps). What often draws me into the store is a carefully currated window display of the latest used book purchases of the store – almost always hardcovers, in perfect (or nearly so) condition, and not infrequently books which I had recently read reviews of in national publications (I’m fairly certain that they buy books from a number of locals who receive review copies as nearly every book which is getting active reviews ends up in their store window within a month or so of publication). 

The curatorial model is not limited to physical retail stores, if anything it has even more value online. It may seem paradoxical, as online it is technically possible for many stores (especially any store selling digital goods) to have nearly infinite inventory. And I’m not arguing that there is not a place for such mega stores (call them the Amazons of this world) but there is equally a great deal of value in culling away the cruft and of practicing great curation to only highlight a select group of pruducts.

Buyers will then shop such stores less on pure price comparisions and more on an appreciation of the service offered in making them (the buyers) aware of products that they should own and enjoy. 

A short sidenote here. A few days ago I was at a local seasonal market, the Mission Market, which was an experiment where a number of local vendors (many without physical stores) had a booth at a converted Armory in the Mission district of San Francisco. One of these merchants sold music, mostly CDs. Now I have not bought a lot of physical CDs in the past few years (though I have bought more music in the past years than ever before). But I ended up buying two fantastic CDs from this man, entirely because he had a very select collection of works for sale, all clearly curated with care. And of the works he had in genres I enjoyed (which were nearly all of the genres of music he stocked) I already owned a pretty large portion of the works he was selling. 

And not just owned the works, but these were among my favorite albums of the past few years, music which exactly defined what I like.

So I was immediately favorably inclined towards him and especially towards the works which he had for sale that I did not already own – assuming, correctly as it were, that since clearly our tastes overlapped considerably, the works he also chose to stock would quite likely also be works I would enjoy.

And indeed that was exactly the case.

And that, in short, is the Curatorial Retail model. 

At the start of this post I mentioned that there is a third retail model, but one which is rarely seen in the US. That model is the Bazaar Model which can be a variation of either the Kitchen Sink or the Curatorial model but with the addition of a highly variable price. In many parts of the world this is the dominant model, where price is nearly infinitely negotiable and most (though not all) goods and services are subject to rounds of bargaining before a price is agreed upon. 

In the US this is not a common retail model, though to a degree the proliferation of discount codes (especially online) and complex sales at larger stores (Macy’s for example) combined with loyalty cards/store credit cards sometimes creates an environment which feels like every price is variable and subject to many factors. Online the purest form of Ebay historically was intended to be this exact model with the buyers competing to offer the best price to the seller. 

However what the pure auction does not capture in the true Bazaar model is that most of the time the negotiation is not multiparty (i.e. an auction with many buyers and only one seller) but one-on-one. One buyer, one seller who negotiate between themselves about a transaction which can either happen at a price, not happen at all, or be modified (expanded to include other products, shrunk to be something smaller).  The buyer always has the option of walking away (and the seller of simply not agreeing to sell).

With the exception of most tourists to such markets (who usually get the worst prices in part as a result of my next point) buyers and sellers who have a history with each other, who expect to do additiona business in the future (sometimes with the roles reversed) have more complex incentives in the negotiation process than just maximizing revenue/minimizing expense on a given transaction. 

Instead when there is an expectation of repeat business many other factors come into play. 

It is here, in part, that curation can add value, considerable value in fact, to even the Bazaar model of retail. A buyer who trusts the tastes and instincts (and fair dealing) of a seller will often value that the seller put something aside for that buyer over getting the lowest possible price for the product. 

It is my view that in the long term success will depend more on curation than on stocking the kitchen sink. 

And I mean this for both online retailers and for physcial stores. 

Business advice case study – Bohdi restaurant in San Francisco

This post is my personal opinion and advice, unsolicited and uncompensated for by anyone, so take it accordingly.

A few nights ago I had dinner at Bohdi restaurant, a  Vietnamese restaurant here in San Francisco which I have long walked past but haven’t previously had a chance to try. It is a huge restaurant occupying two storefronts in the Mission, in a part of the Mission which has long been borderline but is rapidly gentrifying with new restaurants, shops, galleries and cafes opening up all around Bohdi.

As I ate my dinner I looked around, counted the chairs and tables, counted how many other people were eating that evening (a Sunday night), I watched the one waitress managed the two large dining rooms, and I puzzled on what and where this restaurant had gone wrong. 

Unfortunately based on my observations of hundreds of restaurants over the years, I would predict that Bohdi restaurant will close within the next year, probably sooner rather than later unless they make many changes. 

I should pause here a bit and explain my views and my purpose in writing this post (especially if you are reading this without being a regular subscriber of my blog or a long time reader). I’m a fairly serious foodie and longtime “chowhound”. Back in Chicago I was an active poster and participant on Chowhound, and then later on LTHForum which friends of mine started as an alternative to Chowhound (this was before CNET purchased them). Since college (early 90’s) I’ve been an avid explore of restaurants, especially Asian restaurants, and eat out often. 

I’m the amateur in my family, my father has had a 40+ year career in the food industry helping to design and build food processing processes and factories throughout the world. He’s written many textbooks on food processing and hundreds of academic papers on the food industry. I grew up learning to cook from both of my parents and talking serious food with my whole family. My sister’s long time boyfriend is a former food critic for the New York Times and has recently sold his 3rd and 4th cookbooks which will be published next year. He’s edited recipes for many cookbooks and has worked on multiple TV food series. 

In short my immediate family takes food very seriously. I’m also a serious cook.

And professionally I’m a consultant and entrepreneur, so I look at restaurants not just with the eye of someone who loves food, but also with the eye of someone who is an entrepreneur and who advises businesses. 

So with that said, here are some of my observations about Bodhi specifically and my suggestions for them to consider – and more broadly for anyone who has a food (or indeed other retail) business to think about. 

The good news

• Bodhi serves flavorful and tasty food. The food is good, not without some serious issues (more on that below) but at least they are starting from a good basis of chefs who cook their cuisine well
• Bodhi has a large space with lots of potential. They literally have one of the largest restaurants I’ve seen in San Francisco, not the absolutely largest but a very big space, I counted a bit over 90 seats as they currently have their tables and chair arranged and they are legally licensed for 108 people.
• The location has a lot of potential. They are located on a stretch of Mission St which is almost at the beginning of SOMA. It is a still rough neighborhood but all around them are new galleries, restaurants, shops and cafes which have opened in the past year. The location does not get a large amount of foot traffic, but it is close enough to many parts of the city and parking is still manageable that they could draw a good crowd, and indeed within a few blocks of them are restaurants which are always busy and usually packed. 

The bad news

• They are nowhere near busy enough. They should be serving 200-300 covers nightly for dinner in a space this large, if not more. Instead I’d guess that they rarely serve more than 40-50 covers a night, if that, with perhaps a few additional takeout or delivery orders. 
• Their portions are far too large. Large portions may seem like a good deal, but for a restaurant they mean people do not order as many dishes or as many courses. In many cases they likely mean wasted food and certainly increase the costs to the restaurant of dishes they serve. In large part I think this is in part because they serve food on overly large plates.
• The decor, especially the cheap tables and chairs without any tablecloths is at odds with the menu. They are using uncovered, cheap four or two top rectangular tables and basic standard stackable chairs. In short tables and chairs right out of a discount restaurant supply house. The have a single flower in a small vase on each table but not tablecloths. Everything except the physical size of the space shouts discount, cheap location.  The prices, however, are not exceptionally cheap though neither are they overly high, a few dollars higher for most dishes than the cheapest of Vietnamese restaurants, though the quality is higher. 
• They only have a wine & beer license and no bartender. Though they have a large bar with 9 barstools at it, they have no bartender and are licensed (based on what is for sale) only for wine and beer. And they do not stock a wide range of drinks at that, nor do they push them on customers. Alcohol makes up much of the profits of any successful restaurant, yet they are seriously forgoing this. 
• The layout and single waitress does not draw people into the space. As I sat and observed people walking by and on first entering the restaurant they often looked around a bit puzzled. Here was a huge restaurant spanning two storefronts yet only a few patrons and you have to walk in, past a fountain, and look around to find someone, anyone to guide you to a table somewhere in the vast space. 

So what does all the above mean in terms of suggestions I would offer?

For starters I would suggest that Bohdi make the following changes:

• update the decor at a minimum by adding tableclothes to hide the cheapness of the tables. Better would be to replace the tables and chairs with more natural and rich appearing materials. Tables of real wood, chairs with some design to them. This would be much more in keeping with the neighborhood which is edgy and arts oriented and would make the space feel higher end
• leave no part of the space unfinished, cluttered with storage or apparently unused. At present there is an entire seating area, between the bar and the bathrooms which looks like it is never used. The tables and chairs are just scattered around that space haphazardly. If the demand for that space as a dining area is not there, then perhaps it should be transformed into an extension of the bar and made more functional.
• Remove much of the visual clutter, such as the odd central fountain and the very old (and cheap) art hanging on the walls. Did I mention this is an arts district with countless galleries in the area? Make a deal with one or more of them to hang art on a rotating basis that is more in keeping with the neighborhood (and not coincidentally might suggest holding an opening party in the space each month)
• Simplify the menu still further to have fewer dishes which are even more seasonal and always using fresh ingredients. Write about the choices and suppliers used. Reduce portions (while keeping prices at current levels or even higher in some cases – use local, organic meats and charge a few dollars more for example) . Add weekly or daily specials to try new recipes and to make it special to dine in the restaurant. 
• Upgrade the wine, beer and sake selection. Again look for local supplies, there is Sake brewed here in the Bay Area for example as well as many local breweries and lots of local wine. Include imported sake, beer, and wine but emphasize quality and pairings with the food. Add special beverages for non-alcohol drinkers and train the waitresses on selling pairings. 
• Get demand higher so that the bar has a full time bartender and give very serious consideration since the space is so large to transforming one section to a lounge and to upgrading the license to a full liquor license (which is, I admit costly especially for a space this large). Consideration should also be given to getting a public performance license though that depends on if the space would be used frequently for non-dining events. At a minimum a license that permitted use of one of the two rooms for private events on a regular basis would be a good idea.
• Add the chef’s name to the menu. This is assuming that there is a chef behind the restaurant (if not, get one). But restaurants with the chef’s name attached enter a different category in the mind of patrons than those that are seen as ethnic, cheap dives. With a space that could seat nearly 100 people and should probably see 300+ people a day if not more (since they are open for lunch as well as for dinner) they should be targeting a higher end audience. 
• At the moment I would guess the average cover is less then $20, making these changes would likley move that closer to $30 perhaps even $40 if most tables are getting a bottle of wine or a couple of beers or cocktails. At the moment few patrons would get appetizers, entrees and desserts for everyone at the table, and it did not appear that most were buying wine or many drinks. However throughout San Francisco there is clearly demand for restaurants where the average cover is far higher than $40 and indeed this could be a great date or group dining restaurant where a couple could have a great experience for less than $100.
• With new furniture make a wider range of table types to signal a wider range of customers. At present they have only a very few two tops and every other table is a four top. There should be a few tables set up for larger groups, perhaps arranged for semi-private dining experiences and there should be far more two-tops set up as with only one exception every single group I observed at the restaurant was a couple out on a date.

A few general underlying premises behind my suggestions (here’s where things may be a bit more broadly applicable):

• Curation adds value. It is hard to create a streamlined space and in the case of a restaurant menu. But a tightly focused menu (or selection of goods) signals quality – the assumption being that there is nowhere for a chef to hide on a short menu. Also that every decision has been made with care and attention (as it should have been). A short menu also allows for frequent changes to reflect the best possible ingredients and suppliers. In a non-restaurant context think about the visual difference between higher end retail shops and dollar stores – very few (if any) high end shops are cluttered – instead they sell a relatively small but in theory highly curated selection of goods. Likewise a restaurant with a short, tightly focused menu signals that the chef is very confident – and is only offering the best possible dishes and is not catering to the broad public but to discerning patrons (and everyone wants to be respected)
• Design suggests audience and price. In an artistic neighborhood show respect for art and design. Lazy choices about art to hang on the walls (i.e. stuff that was very cheap) or the use of bulk, cheap furniture, signals a lack of design. Just a few blocks away the new Four Barrell Coffee shows one great approach to furniture – they have all custommade from recycled materials tables and chairs, the effect is striking and well in keeping with their desired audience of “hipsters”. Their other choices, such as playing vinyl for their music and not having wifi are other signals. And they are almost always packed with customers paying premium prices for high quality coffee. 
• If you don’t ask people won’t buy. Years ago I met a professional waiter who shared with me his secret to having average covers which were nearly double his fellow waiters, if they averaged $20 he averaged closer to $40 (which meant his tips were also double or more than double his fellow waiters’ takings). His secret – he asked people if they wanted things. He asked if they wanted to start with a cocktail, he asked if they wanted appetizers, if they wanted wine with their meal, if they wanted dessert, if they wanted an after dinner drink. Especially with couples on a date his technique worked extremely well. 

Sure this last point is simple – but the simple things are often the most important. I’m always surprised by how few restaurants train their waitstaff to always ask if I want something to drink, to check if I want dessert before giving my the bill for my meal. To see if I want some appetizers to start the meal. The better restaurants train staff to do this as a matter of course – and as a result sell much more.

I do not know all of the numbers for Bohdi restaurant, but my very rough estimate would be that between lunch, dinner and delivery they gross far less than $500k a year, probably less than $400k. In s apce that large, however they should be grossing over $3M or more a year (potentially a lot more). And yes, to gross that much they would need to have far more staff, buy more supplies, do more active promotion, spend more on printing, cleaning of tablecloths and the like, but I suspect they would net vastly more than they do today – and with some further changes could net far more than $3M a year (which is based on an average cover of $25, shift to $40 or higher and to high alcohol sales on a regular basis and profits could be much more. 

If I were wokring with a client such as Bohdi restaurant I would start with the following questions (see above for some of the probable results):

1. What strengths does the business start with?
2. What is working already?
3. What resources does the business have?
4. What is the initial impressions of the business (if retail on walking past, on first entering, if online on first visiting the site)
5. What does that impression signal about the target audience and especially about the price expectations of that audience?
6. Does the actual experience then reinforce (or call into question) those initial impressions?
7. What could be done immediately to start to change? 
8. And then what further changes should happen, ideally looking to make changes that reinforce other desired outcomes and build on it (i.e. start with tableclothes, move to partnering to improve the art, then throw opening parties to build awareness and get people in, then change the menu to help grow revenues, then reinvest in getting better/higher quailty furniture, then in expanding/enhancing the bar options etc)

As I noted this is based on my experiences of walking past Bohdi and of eating there once as well as my long time observation of the restaurant industry. It is certainly possible that I’ve missed some key aspects to Bohdi’s particular situation (they might do a booming lunch business for example though I doubt it). And as in every case, if I were working with the business it is likely that there would be other issues that would be discovered and would need to be addressed – every situation has surprises and unique aspects.

But hopefully this (admittedly long) post helps them (if they see it) and inspires others to rethink their particular business.

And yes, I’m available to do extended versions of this type of consulting work (the first meeting is free but after that I charge).

Quick ways to judge a restaurant or cafe

I take food seriously. Professionally I organize large group dinners after conferences and other events on a regular basis, my friends and family often ask for my recommendations for places to eat for a range of occasions. Though in my family I’m the amateur, my sister’s boyfriend of many years is a professional food critic for the New York Times and multiple book author, just sold a major cookbook with one of the hottest chefs in NYC (and thus one of the hotter chefs in the world), that book deal being for enough that he doesn’t have to do much beyond writing that book for many years.

But even in that company, I would like to think I hold my own when it comes to finding and discovering restaurants both where I live and as I travel. In Chicago I was a very active participant on the old Chowhound (before CNET purchased the site) and then later on a site and discussion board my friends set up after being fed up with the slow software of chowhound – lthforum. In San Francisco I have occasionally contributed reviews to Yelp and the occasional post back on lthforum or on my blog, but mostly I haven’t been writing about dining out as often I used to do.

Here, however, are a few of my personal rules of thumb, offered to help you (and to help anyone running a restaurant or cafe) as you choose your next place for a meal or a coffee. These are not all firm or universally true, but most of the time they offer a very useful filter. For the sake of many restaurants I sometimes wish I didn’t always notice these small details – but many times over the past year my instincts have been proven right more often than not – restaurants I walked past and my instincts said “will be closed soon” are now closed and for sale, restaurants I entered with a group (their choice, I tried to convince them otherwise) were indeed horrible meals as I predicted.

Breakfast or Brunch

1. Coffee from a can or vacuum pack bad, from a local specialty roaster good. Breakfast places start with the coffee, if they take that seriously enough to buy it from a local roaster (and incresingly most states and cities have at least one)  that holds promise for the rest of the menu
2. Real maple syrup. The best breakfast and brunch spots just offer real maple syrup and don’t offer any alternatives. Some okay to good spots offer real maple syrup as an option. With very very few exceptions spots that don’t offer real maple syrup at all aren’t particularly good (at least don’t take their food very seriously)
3. Fresh squeezed juices in season. Fresh squeezes seasonal juices squeezed on the premises are another sign of a restaurant that takes what they serve seriously and are rarely found at a bad place.

Note that I didn’t focus on the exact dishes of a breakfast or brunch spot, though I do also tend to find that restaurants with smaller, more focused menus generally speaking have better food that restaurants with pages upon pages of breakfast or brunch options. But these simple elements – coffee, maple syrup, fresh juices are all signs of places that are almost certainly worth trying. Oh and any breakfast spot that names itself after breads (Toast to take one commonly used example) better bake those breads on the premises if they truly want to be worthy of the name.

Lunch

There are many approaches to lunch. When making suggestions for places I differentiate between places for working, professional lunch meetings and places for dining alone or with friends and colleagues. For the former, price is not an issue but speed, quality, quiet and privacy can be key factors. For the later, price is often a factor, quality, suitability for a range of diets, and speed.

In San Francisco there is quite a range of lunch spots. Here are a few that I can recommend highly.

• Medicine Eatstation - located in the heart of the Financial District of San Francisco in the Crocker Galleria this is one of my favorite places to get lunch in San Francisco. They are known for their vegan and vegetarian cuisine, Japanese Zen temple foods, but they have a range of fantastic fish dishes as well. Lunch will typically run you about $15-20 a person here, so this isn’t a budget place but neither is it overly expensive and the quality of food is amazing. The service is order at a counter and then find a spot at many large communal tables, so this is great when dining alone, or fantastic for informal meals with a group, though not ideal for a private meeting or discussion. However for the quality of food and the ability to provide an amazing meal for vegan or vegetarian friends this is well worth dining at (and more times than not I eat vegan when dining here though I’m a confirmed omnivore)
• E & O Trading – I generally do not suggest chains, but I make an exception for E&O Trading. Their location in San Francisco which is just off of Union Square makes for an ideal location for a business lunch. The food is quite good, but what makes E&O Trading ideal for business lunches is that the design of their booths is ideal for private business conversations with 2 to 4 people, and they do have larger tables (though generally a bit less private depending on the table location) for larger discussions. Well worth knowing about when meeting with clients in town for a conference and staying near Union Sq.
• Canton Seafood and Dim Sum – One of my favorite restaurants in all of San Francisco, a restaurant I frequently use for large group dinners, greatly enjoy going to for lunch when near Moscone Center, and which I have also always enjoyed their dim sum weekend brunches. What makes Canton a great restaurant to know about is that they offer very high quality Chinese cuisine, at amazingly reasonable prices, and are very willing to accommodate large groups with a fixed price menu. (Feel free to mention my name if you book for a large group, the managers all know me as I have group meals there on a regular basis). For lunches they have even been known to open up their upstairs banquet hall for large groups.
• Spork – located at Valencia and Hill in the Mission District of San Francisco Spork has, I think, the best hamburger I’ve ever eaten. Not best in San Francisco or best in a long while, but best burger I’ve eaten in my lifetime. Every ingredient works perfectly, the price is right ($8 for a single, $10 for a double) and the toppings, bun, and sauces as well as the quality of the cooking just combine to make for an amazing meal. They also serve a great dinner but for lunch they are now my go to place when dining in the Mission. They offer a small, very focused menu at lunch highlighted by the burgers which are amazing. A place that takes the food they serve seriously but don’t take themselves too seriously – the result is one of my favorite discoveries of 2008.

And those are just a few of my favorites. There are many, many other great options scattered throughout San Francisco and for that matter most cities.

A few things to look for for a business lunch location:

• Style of tables and booths – for a private, business lunch an open layout with tables crowded near each other is not good. For serious discussions high booths or private rooms offer the best venues
• Fixed price menu option – if you are organizing a business lunch or dinner for a large group arranging for a fixed price menu or taking advantage of a regularly offered fixed menu greatly facilitates either splitting the bill, or streamlining the ordering process allowing for more time for business discussions and less distractions around the ordering process. Any good restaurant catering to a professional business crowd will include a range of foods on such a menu, with good options for vegetarians and lighter dining options. Further the foods should be “clean” to eat – i.e. not messy, not finger foods generally speaking.
• A seasonal menu and specials that actually change from day to day – these are related elements. A very good sign for nearly any meal is a restaurant that prints up new menus each day (implying they take their food and sourcing of that food fairly seriously though you do have to watch out for places that are trying to hard and can’t deliver). Baring a menu that changes frequently at a minimum great places have true daily specials that are, in fact, special to that day and season. If the “daily specials” board or menu in the window look worn and faded that’s probably, generally speaking, a bad sign.
• A short, focused menu - whether for lunch or dinner my broad, general rule of thumb is that a short, focused menu is a sign of a restaurant that takes the food seriously. Nothing on that menu should be bad or below their standards. In contrast all too many restaurants have pages upon pages of menu both for lunch and dinner and as a result while they have an occasional dish they do exceptionally well, they almost certainly have many other dishes that are rarely ordered, use poor quality (often frozen) ingredients and are often quite disappointing. This rule of thumb holds exceptionally true for lunch.

Cafes

• Large tables – one of my very simple tests of a cafe is the style of tables they use. Small, tiny tables (“French bistro” tables while looking pretty imply a place that does not have people sitting down, sharing tables and working together. My strong bias is for cafes that are laid out for people to be social and to work, with room at the tables to have a couple of laptops out plus beverages.
• Coffee source – frequently truly great cafes, if they have the space or the facilities nearby, roast their own beans. I take coffee seriously and in San Francisco we’re blessed with many cafes of different styles who likewise take the coffee they serve quite seriously as well.
• Small drinks menu – this is a personal preference. As a rule of thumb, though not universally true, I find that cafes that have a very focused drinks menu (often forgoing syrups, frozen drinks and the like) are places that take the coffee they serve very seriously indeed. But this is not always the case, there are exceptions, mostly when I’m selecting a cafe (for the coffee) I look for signs that they take what they make seriously. “Latte art” is almost always a sign that they have highly skilled baristas.
• Looseleaf teas – not every cafe serves great tea and great coffee, but as a general rule of thumb cafes which have looseleaf teas which they then use to make either pots or individual cups of tea are typically places that are owned by owners who care about the quality of what they are serving. There are many sources for teas today, so I am relatively agnostic about the vendor of the teas a cafe serves, but almost always places that take tea seriously enough to have looseleaf tea take everything else pretty seriously as well (there are, in fact, many cafes where they don’t do a good job on the coffee, but do serve looseleaf teas and otherwise have great spaces so I just order tea there and enjoy them that way)

But a cafe is a highly and deeply personal thing. For me I like places that have wifi, a busy but not overly loud atmosphere, power outlets (though I can forgive a lack of one if the cafe has other redeeming features – Ritual Roasters in SF comes to mind) and which show signs of design and thought having been given to them to make the cafe a place that appeals to adults. A growing trend which I celebrate is cafes which also serve wine and beer, not so much that I partake, but that they tend to serve a more adult clientèle and almost always also have tasty food options to go with the drinks.

My personal preference is also for cafes which stay open late into the evening, but a great cafe that is only open during the day also has its place.

Dinner

• Focused menu and theme – fusion can work, but almost never does a restaurant that tries to combine many cuisines into one, often overly long, menu do justice to any of the dishes. In contrast most restaurants with a tightly focused, often seasonally influenced menu at least start from a place where it is likely they can prepare good, tasty foods. The cooks and ingredients still need to be of high quality however.
• Busy when restaurants should be busy - not every great restaurant will always be busy, some haven’t yet been “discovered” but, for example, a restaurant which is quiet at 7pm on Valentines Day (one of the busiest dining out nights of the year) is almost certainly a restaurant which is not going to be open much longer and should be kept away from. Now, a busy restaurant is, however, often not a sign of a good one, but an empty restaurant when most places would be busy is typically a major warning sign.
• Ethnic restaurants with mostly non-ethnic tourists is a very bad sign – sure the restaurant may have been written up by national press and be in all the guide books, but if the restaurant, particularly if in a particular ethnic neighborhood does not also cater to the locals you are almost guaranteed a disappointing meal in my experience. Whether in Little Italy or Chinatown this is not always a completely accurate guide, but more times than not it helps you avoid the truly bad places for places that have a better than average chance of serving great tasting food (though you still have to figure out what to order if you don’t read the menu/speak the language)
• Attention to the details – this can be hard to judge from outside of restaurant, but look at the tables and the menus in the window or step inside and ask for a menu. Generally speaking restaurants that have paid attention to the details at each table, that haven’t used the cheap, standard issue items from mass restaurant supply stores (cheap napkins, salt & pepper shakers etc) likely are paying attention to the food and the rest of the elements of the restaurant.  In looking over a menu, without being pretentious does the writing of the menu communicate care about the foods being served? Does it show a point of view? Does it make sense as an overall menu?
• Pricing that is fair but not too cheap – this is a personal preference, but though my pocketbook might at times appreciate cheapness, my stomach almost never does especially if I take it to an extreme. Cheap restaurants or for that matter any place that feels it has to compete almost solely on price is generally speaking a sign of a restaurant that is either owned by someone who doesn’t know the business well or someone who is getting desperate. This is a rule that especially also holds true for cafes and lunch spots, generally speaking great restaurants charge a fair but not cheap price for what they serve counting on the quality of what they serve and the overall experience to bring people back again and again. This is not, however, to suggest that restaurants which appear to be expensive will also be good, generally speaking they are not, these are often restaurants which are catering to people on an expense account or people who do not eat out frequently – so quite often overcharge for foods (and especially for wines) without making up for it by serving great food and wine.

There are many other factors I look for when I look over a menu and decide about a restaurant. A few smaller tips, generally speaking menus where every dish has lots of ingredients and sauces are rarely good. This is bit of a personal preference, but I find that such dishes usually suffer from elements not being of the same quality and of being drowned in the respective sauces. My preference whatever the cuisine is for chefs who start with extremely high quality ingredients and prepare them with extreme skill and restraint, not overwhelming the dish with too many flavors or too much of any one sauce.

If you are looking at dishes of other people who are eating a few other simple signs which can be warning signs of a potentially bad restaurant.

1. Lots of leftovers – if everyone leaving the restaurant has doggie bags or if most tables have lots of dishes that seem to have been uneaten (especially true of family style restaurants) this is a sign of a restaurant which is likely both serving too large portions and likely a kitchen which is highly uneven. Both tend to be signs of a meal that will almost certainly be a disappointment.
2. Garnishes – plates with lots of parsley or other garnishes tend to be a sign of a restaurant which is also trying too hard.
3. People waiting to place orders or pay bills – both are signs of either waitstaff that don’t care or are overworked, and both in turn are signs of a restaurant that is not being managed well (and that usually is reflected in the food as well as the service). A related issue is if people seem to have empty water glasses, or if messy tables are left messy for long periods of time
4. Messy plates – there are many types of food and dining, not every restaurant is going to serve food that is photographic ready, but if the food is leaving the kitchen sloppy, it is almost always a sign of a kitchen that is lax, that is taking shortcuts.

I hope these tips help please leave comments with your own additional rules of thumbs, suggestions and tips & tricks to selecting a great place to dine – whether by yourself or with a large group.

Notes on Transit – transitcamp without being there

This weekend in Palo Alto TransitCamp Bay Area will take place. I was not able to attend (in not small part because via public transit it takes me 2+ hours if I catch all the right trains and buses to get from my house to Palo Alto) but as my contribution here are some observations and thoughts I have about Transit.

First some personal background. I grew up in Oak Park IL, moved to Chicago where I lived for another 13+ years, two years ago I moved to the Bay Area. In 2004, I sold my car and have not replaced it, when I sold it (a 2000 model I had bought in Dec 1999 as a new car, that car had only ~13k miles on it). So for about the past 8+ years I have primarily relied on public transit, not on a personal car for the majority of my transportation. With the occasional taxi ride (often to/from an airport – more on that as well, and yes, to a degree taxi policies and licensing should be considered as part of overall transit).

Here are a couple of observations followed by a few suggestions. Primarily I will focus on issues specific to the Bay Area, but I’ll note some additional elements based on my experiences in other cities both in the US and around the world.

• Current transit is, mostly, focused on the needs of “commuters”
• In the Bay Area we, simultaneously have too much and too little transit (I’ll explain)
• There are many options for how to pay (as an individual) for transit – in the Bay Area we have nearly all of them (far too many)
• When thinking about transit private (individual) and private (corporate) should be part of the discussion, as well as all of the factors that influence those choices (tolls, parking availability & pricing, zoning requirements especially around the construction of new parking, metered vs free vs permit parking, zoning rules around mixed use vs. sole use vs. “strip malls” vs. sidewalk frontage or set backs etc)
• Tourists have different needs than residents, not all residents have the same needs, and those needs vary by time of day, day of week, month, the weather and the age & health of the individuals.
• The groups who have the most political influence are rarely those who have the most vital needs for public transit, though the aspects of public transit which do impact those with political influence tend to be those which get the greatest funding.

Here in the Bay Area by my count there are at least the following varieties of transit which should be discussed.

1. Private Cars
   • an unusual aspect being the commuter lanes & toll policies which combine to create an unique system in places of the bay area for ride sharing by strangers (essentially “hitching” but with a more fixed pattern)
   • toll policies preference travel in certain directions
   • parking and zoning regulations dictate certain patterns in SF while zoning & building patterns dictate others in the rest of the Bay Area
   • motorcycles and scooters
   • special cases of rental cars
   • special cases of tourist cars (“go cars” guided tours of San Francisco for example)
2. Shared Cars (City Carshare, ZipCars) and Commuter vans
3. Taxis (and to a lesser extent limousines)
4. Amtrak
5. multiple ferry services
6. CalTrain
7. BART
8. Muni – buses, cable cars, and light rail
9. A large number of public bus services – most one per town around the Bay Area, a few like AC Transit crossing multiple towns, and a couple which cross towns (TransBay)
10. Private bus services
    • Corporations (Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and a few others) have formal bus services for employees
    • Certain buildings & neighborhoods in San Francisco (and some buildings in other cities) have bus services, typically for residents or workers in those buildings usually between the buildings and main transit centers (Caltrain station being a main point)
    • Local universities have services for students between residences and campus locations and between multiple campus locations throughout the area (U. C. Berkeley in Berkeley, UCSF and many other schools throughout SF
    • Tourist specific buses (some of which do offer “on/off” services. There are some public tourist buses as well (in the Presidio, in Golden Gate Park)
11. Public handicaped special bus services
12. Greyhound
13. Bikes
14. Walking
15. Select light rail in other towns than San Francisco
16. Major airports (Oakland, San Francisco and San Jose)
    • these also have internal transporation and special buses connecting the airports and trains
    • for some reason no airport in the Bay Area has trains that run directly to the terminals
17. Private airports (and to a lesser degree helicopter pads)
18. Private boats & boat dock

That is a lot of transit options – many of which any one person rarely experiences and uses. Like much of the state of CA the private car, usually driven without passengers is a very commonly used form of transit. For that matter there are many people who never use any of the other services – especially public buses

Payment methods and models:

1. Pay on entry – most buses, MUNI in SF, Ferrys
2. Pay on exit – CalTrain – exact amount varies by start and end point (and varies considerably from a low of <$2 and a high of many multiples of that
3. Prepaid – MUNI (monthly passes), most Tolls w/automated pass, to a degree BART since you have to have a card with value added to it already (new “TransitLink” will have aspects of this
4. Payment via special unit – bus coupons in San Francisco, parking cards in SF

Some questions I have:

1. What is the GOAL of Public Transit? (Not or at least not solely I’d argue to “get workers to work”)
2. How should transit be funded (currently few if any transit services are fully funded by the riders in the case of public services)? Private services (buses etc) are parts of the cost of some other business (office building, large company etc)
3. How can the many specific focuses and political complications of have dozens of public transit agencies be minimized to better serve the needs of the entire Bay Area?
4. How can Public Transit in particular emphasize the public service aspects of transit, not just serve the needs of one sector of the public (businesses whose commuters have to get to/from work during “regular” business hours).
5. In particular, in my view, public transit should have many 24hr options, be sure to have 24hr access to hospitals in particular, should avoid creating isolated sections with no inexpensive transit options for much of the day, and transit should build into their business models flexibility to accommodate changing circumstances (planes which are delayed at airports for example)

Some specific suggestions

1. In San Francisco (and across the Bay Area more broadly) the last trains, especially across the Bay, should run for 1 hour AFTER bars & nightclubs close (and if on weekends this means running 24hrs – so be it). This both serves a very strong and real public interest (keeping people off the streets when/if drunk) and it as importantly would encourage more people to stay in the city after work for entertainment and/or head into the city on the weekends – without clogging roads with cars and without requiring preplanning in the morning (i.e. choosing to drive instead of taking the train). Combined with bike parking at many stations (already done) and with local bus/transit services so people could avoid driving from train stations home (perhaps also with friendly parking policies that encourage overnight parking without serious penalty)
2. Trains (and buses) which leave from Bay Area airports should run until also an hour or so AFTER the last plane lands – if this means running very very late, again so be it. Ideally the trains would be in communication with the airlines and be sure to wait until all bags were off and arriving passengers were directed from the baggage claim to the buses to trains (and were made aware that trains would be waiting for them). This might be slightly costly (but heck, I’d imagine airlines might kick in some dollars in fact) but would dramatically improve impressions of the public transit services for visitors and locals alike. A related point, ideally public transit should run TO the airports in time to clear security for the FIRST planes of the day (and yes, this might in the case of SF to OAK traffic suggest running nearly 24hrs – see a trend in my suggestions…)
3. Monthly (and Weekly) passes should be available WIDELY. From ALL machines and from all hotels – at a minimum as a starting point. My local Safeway almost without fail SELLS OUT of Monthly MUNI passes – that is completely unacceptable – each pass is simply a piece of paper – 1000’s more of them should be printed each month – NO store should EVER sell out of them. Chicago solves this by NOT selling a monthly pass – instead Chicago sells a pass good for 30 days from first use – but with the variety of ways transit s paid for in the Bay Area that might not work (can’t easily visually show the pass where that mode is needed such as on buses)
4. Fine amounts for not having a pass/ticket in modes of transit where one is required at all times (most of the bay area services) should be SPELLED OUT AND POSTED.
5. Unlike many cities, the bay area does NOT have a single, universal taxi number – and taxi rates are extremely high – which discourages many people from using or thinking about using a taxi. At a minimum there should be ONE number (perhaps per area code) for taxis which would work with ALL taxis. Outside of SF taxis can be nearly impossible to find at times (Palo Alto in particular I’ve had problems at times)
6. ZipCar and City Carshare are good for many people – but serve people who need one-way transportation or need open ended transportation relatively poorly (I most often need a car on days, such as this weekend, when there is an event or events happening down the peninsula which I would want to attend – and which I couldn’t easily predict when I might return from the events – both because I don’t know travel times and traffic well and because I not infrequently will stay late at event and/or want to go out with folks from an event – to get dinner for example). This is a very hard problem for car share services – but for me at least, and I’m sure I’m not the only person, $60/day though perhaps actually a good deal is a very big hurdle to overcome to think about spending to go to an event. (For that matter the $10-12 round trip to take Caltrain down to Palo Alto is pretty painful as well)

Much of the transit system fails because of serious gaps in the transit experience between commuters (many of whom have their passes paid for by their companies or significantly discounted) and the use and costs born by everyone else. I buy a monthly MUNI pass in San Francisco ($45) which is a good deal – and it makes it trivially simple for me to get on/off buses, trains or even the cable cars if I’m traveling within San Francisco – however I can’t, for example, use that pass to get to an airport (why the San Francisco airport at least for purposes of transit isn’t “in” San Francisco still befuddles me).

Yes, the trip planner is useful (though why there isn’t a mobile and iPhone interface for it I don’t know) and NextBus is also helpful, but even so there is also too little flexibility in too much of the transit patterns in the city – travel in the commute times is uncomfortable (very packed – suggesting that even more trains/buses could be run then) but at least trains and buses arrive fairly frequently – but if you wait just a bit everything slows to halt. And if you want to travel on, say a Sunday, good luck – your options shrink to almost none (no Caltrain back to San Francisco after 9:30 or so on a Sunday night for example).

Plus the payment complexities and the inability to pay on the train in most cases (you can’t even pay the gate agent at MUNI or BART but must fight with the often broken/flaky machines) also makes transit a frustrating experience. From CalTrain’s giving change only in dollar coins (and not taking payment on the trains) to MUNI’s insistence on using two different machines at times to get change (for dollar coins and for quarters).

So those are some suggestions and questions and observations I have about transit. I with I could have made it to the TransitCamp this weekend – but as I noted, it would have been costly for me in terms of time (and money).

Fixing “Chrome registration failed” error on Firefox 2.0.0.8+

Since the update to Firefox 2.0.0.8 I have been experiencing a problem of three “Chrome Registration Failed” error messages being presented to me every time I restarted Firefox.

With today’s update to Firefox 2.0.0.9 I had hoped that the problem would have been resolved.

Nope. Instead it only got worse, whenever I tried to update my add-ins and then edit their options, the add-ins pane froze. Looking on Mozilla.org I found one suggestion for a fix (delete the extensions.ini, extensions.cache and extensions.rdf files from your profile). On doing that however not only did it NOT fix my problem, but in fact it made it worse – every single add-in I had installed was reset to a “needs restart” and even after a restart the add-ins were not installing.

So on experimentation I tried the following:

(all this is on Windows Vista)

Right click on the Firefox icon on your desktop.

Select “run as administrator”

And poof – problems gone, all add-ins installed and working.

I then closed Firefox and restarted it (figured running as administrator is not a good general practice).

But count me as in the “pox on both your houses” camp here – to both Microsoft and to Mozilla.org. Microsoft for having such a clunky OS that occasionally you have to run processes as administrator (i.e. as “root”). And Mozilla.org for two serious bugs – first error messages that are BEYOND useless – reporting on an error WITHOUT NOTING WHAT CAUSED THE ERROR. And second, for building a USER application (a browser) which for some reason does something during the installation process of components (i.e. add-ins) which requires administrator rights.

Seriously bad coding somewhere.

And this is a case where Google failed me. Nothing I found after searching almost literally 100+ websites and online discussions had this fix, not even discussions on Mozilla.org (which reported inaccurate fixes for this problem in fact).

So hopefully this will help someone and the last two hours of my life which was wasted on fixing this will at least help someone else.

Update – some of the comments make it clear I was unclear in the above. After initially running Firefox as administrator I have not had to do so again, something about that one running fixed what I can only suspect were either permissions or registry issues. This fix has survived reboots and subsequent installations of additional Firefox plugins. Glad it has been helpful to a few of you (about 100 people or so a day have been reading this due mostly to Google searches)

Shifting from event planning to company launches

This past Wednesday the MeshWalk Palo Alto which I have been planning for a bit over a month took place. Nearly 100 people participated over the course of the day, well over a dozen investors and 75+ entrepreneurs. I was thrilled, as some of the MeshWalkers have noted, at how diverse the participation in the MeshWalk was. I have long argued both in this blog and in comments and discussions elsewhere the value of diversity – that though I am indeed a white, male American, I want to hear and meet people of many different backgrounds, with a variety of perspectives.

One other note about the MeshWalk, one of the participants noted that it was only the second event he has seen which included public transit directions in the conference materials – and the other event was a conference on green and sustainable development so it was somewhat expected there. As a rare CA resident (and rare American) who does not own a car, I too have noted this lack in the directions and descriptions most events provide.

So, though I will be planning many future MeshWalks, now my attention and focus shifts from the active planning of a large event to the launch of multiple projects (companies) this summer. It is a balancing act – I have a great deal of important work to do as my contribution to these projects – writing projects to complete, data entry, UI testing, sales and business development calls to make, important business milestones to define and track, to a degree business plans to write (more specifically not formal plans but simple yet informative spreadsheets to track the key metrics for each business – and thus our plans and timing to test, measure and prove the business models). In short plenty of work (and these being bootstrapped startups, probably really plenty of work for multiple people but work which I will have to complete for the most part myself).

But I have to balance this with the important role of getting out of the house, of talking with people of doing business development not just via email or phone calls but also be in person meetings – both one-on-one but perhaps more importantly in many cases via attending and participating in the wide range of events throughout the Bay Area (and at times conferences and events outside of the bay area). Just this evening, while getting dinner with a group of people after one such event I had a brief conversation and exchange of cards with someone working at a company that is precisely who I need to talk with to line up as a participant in the beta trials for the ad network we are building. And at  the party before the dinner I spent a lot of time reconnecting with people – learning for example that one friend may soon be taking a C-level position at a large firm which may be a potential client for one of the projects I’m working, I also chatted with another friend who thought I should talk with the organizer of a conference at which I might be an appropriate speaker, etc. In short the social glue which binds business – for even at the largest of scales business is personal.

Yes, the numbers have to work and you have to deliver, but opportunities arise from this social fabric. In comparing the tech landscape of Chicago to the Bay Area, as I was doing multiple times in the past few days, I have been noting the fluidity of the business world here (in the bay area). People who work at your competitors today may be your boss tomorrow (probably at an entirely new company). It is not just that every investor knows each other (or at a minimum talks with each other) the same holds true with most positions here in the area.

It is one of the reasons I do not hold to the position of being “in stealth”. I do see the role that mode can play in group unity and in an ability to take on large targets/competitors and perhaps launch and surprise them – but one major tole it takes is to disconnect your team (and partners & investors) from the casual conversations which permeate San Francisco. Just tonight, for example, at the same table were Twitter employees and Pownce employees. Yes, they compete, but they also attend the same parties, know many of the same circle of friends, and it is not unlikely that at some future company current competitors will be working together (perhaps as investors if both firms are successful).

Tonight (Friday) is the TechCrunch Party where some 500+ people will attend, network with each other, and chat. At the last party I actually had some really interesting conversations – I hope I have many tomorrow as well. However I am also in a new mode for tonight’s event than I was previously.

For this event I have a number of specific goals – a bit of a rarity for me – so let me share them publically here (as I mentioned, I am very much about being open).

1. In the late summer/early fall we plan on conducting a trial of a new ad network. This requires building relationships with both publishers (broadly defined – in our case specifically application publishers mostly, though possibly also some “content” sites) and equally with the right matching mix of advertisers.  So I am actively networking to talk with application publishers, direct advertisers, and media buying/campaign management firms.

2. The purpose of the trial – in addition to making money and providing a valuable service to all parties (including the users of the applications) – is to prove out portions of our business and help us raise the right amount of capital. So I need to be proactive in starting conversations with the right mix of investors (and also need to define the scope of funding we’ll need – as well as what in the current market we should expect & try for).

3. In addition to the ad network, we have two other projects which are getting ready to launch (or in one case open up the launch much more widely). So I need to think about how to spread the word about these projects and how to seed the initial launches – i.e. who I know who would be interested and passionate users (and thus testers – by beta we really do mean beta).

4. And again in one of these cases (possibly in both) we are investigating raising funds (probably angel scale of investment) and we will be seeking ways to prove those business models as well. For the content play – think a Zagat’s like guide by business people for business people I need to talk with the organizers of conferences and trade shows. Especially ones to be held in the Bay Area (SF or the East Bay in particular) or in Chicago.

So I have some agendas in my conversations at events these days. But as well I want to spread the word about my own events to people who might enjoy participating in them (next MeshWalk is Aug 12th in Seattle after the Gnomedex conference for example).

If you are reading this, wondering how/if you “meet” what I have outlined above, please feel free to ignore what I have written and when we meet, perhaps tonight at the party, just tell me about yourself and what you are doing – I am always happy to help if I can, if an introduction makes sense making it (whenever possible at that event). My philosophy is always to try to be helpful, to assume the best of people until proven wrong, to give. I try to be open about what I am doing – but also attentive to others and what they are doing, listening for when I get a sense of “hmm you have to…” as I talk with someone.

So a bit of a mental shift for me this weekend, but a good one.

Advertising – do’s, don’t’s and other thoughts

As some of you may know I am in the process of forming an Ad Network (working name is Nearness Function) with my business partner, David Spector.

This afternoon I had a wide ranging conversation with a fellow entrepreneur who is moving to the Bay Area (side note – one very positive sign, smart, talented, experienced people from all over the country are continueing to move to the bay area – and even buying homes here). In the course of the conversation we covered a number of my thoughts on advertising – and where/what we are planning with Nearness Function.

And then early this morning, while I was reading my gmail I encountered an example of what I am hoping to avoid – while also illustrating to a degree exactly what we are planning on doing as well.

So, first the example.

In gmail (which I use as my primary email – helps simplify a multiple platform/machine work style) there is a small line above your message window which displays “clips” (rss feeds) and occasional ads. While reading my mail this morning, it displayed a “sponsored link” which was – apparently – a link to a real estate listing for a home for sale in Noe Valley – the neighborhood in San Francisco where I live and which I love.

So, out of curiosity about the price of homes in this area, I clicked on the link.

First, the good stuff – the stuff which is related to what we are planning.

1. Google clearly discloses sponsored listings. In this case with the words “Sponsored Link” on the same line and in the same graphical element as the link. I strongly feel that ALL commercial messages on a page (other than a page which is, itself clearly the company’s own site), should be noted as such. i.e. much as in magazines or newspapers advertisements sometimes have the words “advertisement” superimposed over them. Though better still is a design where the words are unnecessary as it is always clear what is an ad and what is not.

2. The ad is, at least minimally, contextual. I am not certain what in my email triggered this ad, but I do indeed live in Noe Valley (I may have noted that in the body or subject of an email). It is not unreasonable to guess that as a resident of that neighborhood whether or not I was actively looking for a new home I might be interested in a listing for a home for sale in my neighborhood.

3. A small thing, but the ad link opens up in a new window, I know this behavior is the standard in these types of ads so I am less reluctant to click on them than I might be if I had to back out to get back to my email (I have Firefox configured so these new windows open as new tabs in the window I’m working in).

But now for the bad stuff.

The ad, though it claimed to be an ad for a new listing in Noe Valley (and even noted some of the specifics about the property and listed a specific URL), did not, in fact, end me up at the URL as listed. Instead it was redirected/remapped to another URL which presented me with a form to sign up to be a “VIP Buyer” on some Real Estate listing site.

Why is this bad?

1. My trust has been abused. I clicked on what looked like an ad link to get more information – in this case a full listing – and instead was sent someplace else.

2. Before I have seen anything useful, before I have been given any reason to trust the company advertising (and indeed I have only been given strong reasons not to trust them) I am asked to give a bunch of personal details – including my level of interest in making one of the bigger investments most people make in their lifetimes (buying a home). Yes, I’m an entrepreneur so though CA real estate is costly (and I’m renting for now) it is not likely to be my biggest investment – but for the vast majority of people a home is their largest investment.

3. The page I was redirected to appears to only have, itself, links back to the same form – i.e. all of the links on that page that seem to promise more information – samples of what the service is the company performs – lean only to the form.

So the net result is that my trust in the filters that Google employs on its advertisers is diminished – and with it to a slight degree my trust in Google.

I was so annoyed by this ad that I found the form on Google.com to report on advertisers and reported my very poor experience with this advertiser (whom I am not linking to as I have no interest in helping them via free links).

And neither would I be interested in helping with with paid links. Either here on my personal blog, or as an advertiser on my new ad network.

Which brings me to my points. Leaving aside, for the moment at least, the specifics of the ad network technology we’re developing and building, there are some very important aspects of the ad network which I have settled on, and which I can talk about.

1. Our focus is on messages which are useful and valued by the people who receive them. This means no spam ads. No “get rich quick” messages. No “free iPhone” gimmicks. No online versions of cheesy infomercials.

2. Sometimes the best message is no message at all. We will require all of our publishers to accept that at times showing no message is the right action. That is, if there is not a relevant message to show, rather than running a junk ad, showing nothing is the right action. Google does this already, they do not always show ads. Other forms of media have realized this as well – not all commercial messages at all times or in all placements add value – and the wrong messages are not just poorly performing, but will reduce value (people stop using the service, switch to alternatives, are that much less likely to take action even when a relevant message is presented (i.e. if all the ads I have followed in the past from a site ended up with me being sent to a scam site, even when a valid, non-scam advertiser is presented, I will be more distrustful – and may even assume that they too are a scammer.

3. Openness and transparency, not stealth or secrecy is core. People have many views on the “stealth/no stealth” debate about how to launch and sustain a startup. Do you talk openly about what you doing or do you stay in “stealth” until what you are building is ready? Do you require NDA’s from people to talk with you – or do you write blog posts like this one?

You are reading this post (I hope). So guess where I stand on this last point….

My view is that, especially for an ad network, we can’t be in stealth mode. We need too many partners – publishers (in our case a far more complex set than just online content – we’re focusing on dynamic applications), advertisers, media buyers, even other ad networks.

I will go into more details about what we are building. But if you are an advertiser, a media buyer, or a publisher feel free to contact me. Especially if you are building dynamic, AJAX applications on the web, widgets (including Facebook widgets – though no widgets to places that do not allow advertising), mobile application (whether iPhone style web apps or downloads), or even if your firm builds desktop applications. Over the summer we are building partnerships and will be looking to have our first alpha in the late-summer/early Fall.

Tools that make simple tasks too complicated

I am planning on buying an iPhone later today from a friend who has an extra one she purchased for someone like me, who waited a bit too long.

However, to make the iPhone useful, I need to have my sync issues solved. Specifically I need my contacts, calendar, and current media & podcasts to be available to me on the same system (doesn’t appear that you could say sync just contacts & calendar data from one system, music & video from another).

So to accomplish this in my case means finally breaking down and moving the entirety of my media collection to the iTunes instance on my Windows Vista system (my new ThinkPad Tablet). I have been avoiding this as Vista is the worst OS I have ever used and I didn’t want to tie more of my real data to a system running a crap OS.

And this process only reinforces that sentiment.

After investigating for a while, I learned that it is possible to move iTunes library data – but that the process is FAR more complicated than it should be.

First you have to export the iTunes library which generates an XML file. So far, so good. This makes sense, is a nice format (sorta) for interchange and okay, I can probably live with this.

But this is where the combination of Apple and MSFT start to make what should be a common and easy process an utter nightmare.

First, let’s bash Apple a bit here. Apple seems to have a fundamental dislike of letting the user have access to or control over where iTunes points to for its files. So there is NO way to automatically import the exported library file and at the time of import, tell iTunes where to find all the files (i.e. how to remap the file pointers from the old computer to say a new computer).

Instead you have to edit the XML file by hand and do some form of global search and replace.

Now this is where MSFT steps in to make what should be in 2007 a trivial task into a complete nightmare. I opened up the XML file – first place MSFT crashed and burned. The process of opening up a 22MB XML file takes 10-20 minutes on my brand new, dual core ThinkPad.

I am not exaggerating here over 10 minutes to open up an XML file.

Seriously, isn’t opening up a file something we solved back in the 1990’s?

Then Word insists on opening it into a mode that is specific for XML files. And if you make the slightest change, it insists on autosaving (which takes another 10 minutes or so).

Plus it breaks the usual conventions of how a word processor UI works – it shows a hand cursor which does not appear able to actually get you to a text insert/edit point, but if you use the keyboard you can – very non-obvious.

Then my global search and replace took 20-30 minutes to complete. Along with an error message along the way that Word had encountered an error and could not undo, did I want to continue.

After more pain and waiting, it finally did complete.

So I tried to close Word.

When MSFT insisted on applying their namespace to the file because they had not detected a namespace on it.

ARGHHHHH. 

I tried to just save it as a text file.

Crashed Word completely and utterly.

Still haven’t been able to reopen the file to see what state it is in – after another 20+ minutes of a spinning cursor while trying to open the XML file.

Unfrigging believable. In 2007. On a DUAL CORE system. This is a system with more processing power than probably all my previous laptops COMBINED. (and via my companies I have owned a fairly large number of laptops). But in daily use you would never guess that I have so much CPU power on this laptop – it is by far the slowest and most irritating laptop I have used in well over a decade.

Waking up from sleep takes 4-5 minutes. Not much of an exaggeration. Vista insists on waking up, locking my system (takes 30-45 seconds) then when I finally am able to unlock it, Vista boots into my main screen, then blacks the screen entirely, resizes everything (drops down to a much much lower screen resolution), then spins the cursor and eventually wakes up and resizes the system BACK to my full screen resolution – but as a result has usually resized all my windows as well as my desktop image to be the wrong sizes.

And all that takes 4-5 minutes most of the time.

And that’s from SLEEP – not hibernate. Sleep being the mode that is supposed to be nearly instant to wake up from.

And don’t get me started on how quite frequently when it does wake up from sleep mode, Vista manages to break something with the wifi and I’m unable to get ANY wifi connections without a reboot.

And MSFT wonders why people aren’t running out rapidly to buy and upgrade to Vista.

Now nearly three hours after starting to work on prepping my laptop for the iPhone, I’m still not ready – the laptop is spinning and not working (well) and my desktop systems are too slowly moving all my media to an external HD (which is taking far too long itself), just so I can later move them from that disk to my laptop (yup, another long delay in the process).

Annoying. Very very annoying.

(and though I did burn an Ubuntu CD this morning as well, that doesn’t solve my issues as currently there is not a way to sync Ubuntu with an iPhone, though I suspect Ubuntu, unlike Vista, would scream on my ThinkPad)

United Airlines – it’s not time to fly

I will never, if I can avoid it, give another dime of my money to United Airlines. And I encourage all of you to avoid them as well.

This is the tale to date of my problems with United Airlines this Memorial Day weekend 2007.

This weekend I am in Madison Wisconsin for a convention. I planned to fly here yesterday from San Francisco on one of the few airlines which fly into Madison, United (well via their United Express division which flies to Madison from O’Hare in Chicago). My flight from San Francisco to Chicago was fine, very full but left on time and even arrived a few minutes early (though I did have to pay a lot to sit in almost the last row and have only a few cookies to eat – not being willing to pay $5 for the offered boxes of random food).

However the problems arose after I arrived in Chicago. I went first to the gate for my next flight, though I had a couple of hours before it would leave. I checked two things – one if there was an earlier flight which I might catch (since we had arrived a bit early) and that the 2:45pm flight I was supposed to be on was on time. At a bit after noon I was told that there was no earlier flights and that my flight was running on time. So I went and got lunch.

I then returned around 2pm, only to overhear the gate agent very quietly telling people that the flight to Madison was canceled (note that no public announcement, at least that I heard was made to this effect). I waited in line for the single gate agent, growing increasingly annoyed at this point. I finally reached her, only to lose my temper a bit as she seemingly refused to give me any information or good options (she was telling the other passengers that the next flight was already full and on standby, but would probably go – our flight having been canceled for wind sheer problems), she mentioned a bus as an option but would not (or perhaps could not) tell me when it was or how to both catch it and get United to pay for it. Nor could she tell me what would happen with my bag which I had checked (more on that in a bit).

I lost my temper. She refused to talk further with me and directed me to “customer service” at Gate 18. As I was racing off there and picking up my bags which were on a nearby seat, another United (I think) employee approached me. Tried to answer some of my questions – but mostly threatened me with the Chicago Police if I remained not calm (though at this point I was calm, was not cursing at him but was definitely not using a quiet tone to my voice – I was angry with United).

I broke off with him and went to Gate 18, calling my family who live in Chicago (and who could look up the bus schedule on a computer) as I walked. As I got to the line for the customer service my father called me back with the bus details – in the parking lot in 10 minutes there was a bus leaving for Madison.

I gave up on the literally over 100 person long line for United Customer Service (apparently not just the canceled flight had caused that – but also other flights which had been late causing lots of people to miss their connections) and ran, literally, to the bus. I got there with about 30 seconds to spare, paid my $25 and got a seat next to friends who it turns out were on the same bus.

On the bus about an hour later United Airlines (well their computer) called me to inform me that I had be rebooked on the 8:30 AM flight on May 25th from Chicago to Madison. The voice then gave me an 800 # to call and promptly hung up, having only said the phone number once – and very very quickly at that (why it could not at the minimum repeat a phone number more than once I do not know and the call had come in from some other very random number).

At this point I started trying to call United Airlines using the numbers on the claim envelope for my bags. (noting that their tickets as printed from my computer do not have any phone numbers on them at all, so if you need to call United and only have your e-tickets you are just out of luck).

I spent almost an hour on the phone with United on that bus. Trying to determine when (and if) my bags would arrive in Madison, and what (and if) I could do to get my money back.

Upon arriving in Madison, checking in to my hotel, getting dinner etc I then resumed calling United.

Among the problems I found with their “customer service”

1. Each type of issue MUST be dealt with via a different phone number. One for baggage, one for tickets, one for refunds.
2. Each person on the phone cannot then transfer you to another one of their numbers directly – they can only give you the number
3. Though they are well scripted and speak clear English, it is clear also that all the customer service folks are in India (probably) and cannot, for example, connect you directly with the actual people on the ground in O’Hare or Madison.
4. United apparently makes it very hard to get them to deliver your bags to your hotel in cases such as mine. After spending hours on the phone with them, and having repeated assurances that “I’m sending a message to the agents in Madison and O’hare about your bags” only some of those messages seem to have made it through.
5. I was, in fact, told I might (they could not say one way or the other) be charged for the delivery of my bags – however they could not even tell me what, if any, such charges might be (I’ve since learned from the doorman at my hotel that the charge is, he thinks, $100!)
6. Though the agents on the phone told me repeatedly that to deal with my refund I would have to “go to the airport” when, in fact, I was at the airport (in Madison) I was told, again repeatedly, “No you have to call this number, and then given a small scrap of paper with the address and phone number for refunds – and the generic united.com URL)
7. At no time did anyone from United EVER offer to do anything for me. No offer of compensation for my additional costs to get to my final destination, no offer of a hotel room in Chicago had I needed one due to being rescheduled on a flight the next day (and note this was at a city I was connecting through, they had no way to know that I probably could have stayed with my parents had I really needed to). Nor any compensation for the hotel room I had reserved in Madison (or even worse the potential problems had I missed checking in and lost my reservation for the whole weekend!)
8. Not to mention anything for my time and the many hours delay (and nearly day+ delay) in getting to Madison. I was traveling (mostly) for personal reasons, however I had planned on spending most of this morning on work – not on getting my bag from the airport or phone calls with United. Likewise I had planned on attending some events in Madison last night (which I mostly did manage, though only barely, to make) and I had planned on then spending much of the evening working – now I’ll have to do that work at other points in the weekend – diminishing my enjoyment of the convention.

So needless to say, I am annoyed with United.

And I think this gives a number of lessons for what not to do around customer service.

First – have ONE number for customer service, not more than three. Make sure that ALL agents at that number can, at a minimum, direct any call to any other agent so that in one single call ALL of the issues of a customer can be dealt with.

Second – delays in getting to an agent, especially by a time-sensitive business such as an Airline – of nearly 15+ minutes are just unacceptable (more than 5 rings really is unacceptable). And though the automated systems are, at times, useful, hiding the “agents” options is just annoying (and “operator” or selecting 0 should get you there as well)

Third – Never ever ever have the automated system finally get you to a human only to have that human before you can get a word in edgewise transfer you BACK TO THAT SAME AUTOMATED SYSTEM! I’m serious, that happened to me when trying to get to a human to understand where my bag, in fact, was.

Fourth – Do NOT ask customers for any code which is NOT LABELED AS THAT CODE on the documents in front of the passenger. For example “baggage claim code” when the bar code label has no sublabels and lots of different numbers printed on it. Further when what apparently is the number, does not in fact work as the computer asks).

Fifth – instead of waiting for a passenger to ask for things they do not even know might get covered (like say the costs I nearly incurred to get toiletries this morning so I could shave, moisturize etc) MAKE AN IMMEDIATE OFFER to all of your customers whom you have just failed. And don’t wait to speak with each person individually, make it publicly and use contact information to reach out proactively to each person (United did, for example, have my email and phone numbers – but beyond one phone call have not used either to contact me further – an apology via email would be appreciated for example).

Sixth – threatening your customers is not a good tactic. I was threatened with the Chicago Police. Later, I was threatened with the risk of having the rest of my travel canceled if I did not proactively call and contact United (since I was not going to fly on United to Madison my return flight home from Chicago in a few days had the risk of being automatically canceled. I have, at this point, been told it would not be canceled – but until I am back home safely in San Francisco I will not rest easily.

And my pain though bad could have been less than that of a friend of mine with nearly the same problems (he was supposed to be on the next flight at 4:30 which was also, it turns out, canceled just minutes before board – like me they did not tell him at just after 2 that it would be canceled – so instead of getting on the same bus I took or preparing to take the 4:30pm bus he went and got lunch). In his case, he had a bit more time in O’Hare then I and tried to get his bags which had been checked. They refused to get them claiming not to have enough people – even when he told them that the contained his blood pressure medicine and other supplies – that, apparently was not sufficient cause or emergency for them to get a passenger their own bags when they need to use alternative transportation due to the airline’s cancellation of flights (and in his case he was told that not just every other flight yesterday but all of the flights today were already completely full so he might not be able to get to Madison via United before Saturday. However in his case the flight he was on was codeshared with US Airways so his phone customer service problems included the problem of one airline not acknowledging that his canceled flight had, in fact, been canceled – and then the only refund they have offered him is not cash back but a credit on a future US Airways flight (which after this experience he does not really want to use in any case).

So in rather long form that is where things stand now. I have, finally, managed to get my bags. So far I have wasted a few hours on the phone with United, had repeated promises from them broken (they promised to deliver my bags to my hotel, they promised to get them here on various flights which each were either in turn canceled or left without my bags). Directly I have spent over $40 in other costs (bus fare, food on the bus ride, etc). I also spent 2 more hours on that bus than I had planned in my travels (the flight was less than a hour), and then spent another 30+ minutes today going to and from the airport. Last night instead of catching up with old friends, I spent hours on the phone. Today instead of 4-5 productive hours of work, I spent most of the day worrying about getting my bags – and spent the morning unshaven and looking and feeling like a slob (though I was lucky that I had, in fact, packed a change of clothes, had I not, I would have had to early this morning find someplace in Madison to buy a shirt and clean underwear)

I am tempted to send United a bill for my time & expenses. At my regular day rate they would get a bill for much more than I spent on my tickets to Madison (and those cost me more than $500). A lot more than that in fact.

I think if all companies such as United were liable for their customers lost time & expenses when the company was at fault many more companies would take a much more proactive approach to customer service (and for anyone who does not have an established day or hourly rate some minimum yet high rate to be used – or perhaps a minimum liability of at least what the customer spent with the company). I could see setting a cap here as well – perhaps not to exceed 5x what a customer has spent.

I do not think I will take United to court, but nor am I done with them. I will still have to fly home with them in a few days. And I will have to spend likely another hour on the phone with them to figure out how to get a refund from them for my flight they canceled (as well as reimbursement for my costs – at least the $25 bus fare).

Annoying.

Do not use United Airlines (or US Air) if you can at all avoid it. And I’d even suggest looking at non-air options whenever possible.

UPDATE May 31st 2007 – the return

So I did get back to San Francisco, but not without some hiccups along the way. I was unable to check-in online OR at the computer check-in terminals at the gate – apparently my ticket was flagged as “itinerary  changed” (online it showed my reservation but said “no electronic ticket found, go back to where you purchased the ticket and then try united.com again…”).

At the gate the agent, without any explanation or discussion of my options issued me a refund of about $84 for the canceled flight (this on a total ticket which was about $500 for the whole round trip). Unclear where this number comes from, when I had priced one-way tickets from Chicago to Madison earlier they were showing up as over $200. But as it is higher than the cost of the bus I spent, I’m not fuming – just puzzled and still annoyed at United and very disappointed.