Author Archives: Mukund Mohan

Should accelerators in India help entrepreneurs “fail fast”?

I was at Delhi for the TIE India Internet Day, last Friday. Over 400 entrepreneurs, investors and startup enthusiasts gathered at the Sheraton in Saket for a day long session. There were 8 startups chosen to pitch at the event and there was an investor connect session as well.

Alok Mittal chaired a panel with 4 of us including 2 VC’s (Shekhar Kirani from Accel and Sanjay Nath from Blume) and 2 Accelerators (Sameer Gugalani from Morpheus and myself).

There were 3 slides that Alok presented about the maturity of the Indian startup scene, which were to serve as a backdrop for our discussions.

One particular slide generated a lot of discussion. The slide showed that 20+% of companies went from one accelerator to another and from one seed round to another without progressing, which indicated that they were “surviving” but were “living dead”.

Alok’s question was if we were not helping our entrepreneurs “fail fast”?

First off, let me state my bias – “I dont like the concept of fail fast”. Absolutely detest it. Whether its in the valley or India, failing fast is way overrated is my opinion and an excuse for folks not willing to spend more time learning about markets and drilling deeper into the problems faced by customers.

I think there are multiple reasons and subtleties to  the question, specifically in India.

First, Indian entrepreneurs dont take (or dont get) enough money in each round at the very early (angel, seed) stages, since the cost of money is too high. If you are giving up 10%+ at the angel and 25-30% at the seed stage, that money is ridiculously expensive. So entrepreneurs tend to think they can get liftoff with very little funds, and that ends up hurting them in the long run since they go back and dip into the same set of investors for another round, when they realize they are not ready for a significant up round.

Second, Indian entrepreneurs pay a lot more for talent, since startups are perceived to be risky  and so it is not uncommon to see talent getting 110% of their salary with some stock options, since the options are considered “worthless” in India. I know there are some folks that are the exception.

Thirdly, the cost of startup failure is fairly high in India already. Failed startup entrepreneurs rarely start again in India. According to our own research, over 50% of failed entrepreneurs, head back to a bigger company after their venture to pay of debts, “settle down” or bow to social pressure and get a fat paycheck.

Given these 3 arguments, I think it is absolutely important that we nurture our entrepreneurs and ensure they stay very lean until they find the product-market fit or liftoff. That takes a long time in India, thanks to fewer early adopters or paying customers.

Bottomline, “failing fast” is not a mantra we should support or promote among Indian startups, is my perspective.

What culture in any company is and is not? #startup

Until a few years ago when I used to hear a few very well respected startup experts on the importance of culture or what it was, I would ignore the remainder of their speech. Culture is nebulous, ephemeral and arbitrary thing I thought. After a closer reading of many startup’s  culture, documented in a series by a website, I would think that it was about being friendly, flexibility at work etc.

It was plain to me that when you get a few reporters who have never run a startup or been an entrepreneur, all you get is pithy statements – open culture, flexible work environment, with no digging deeper to help you build a framework for the topic.

I have a new theory about culture and not just startup culture in particular.

Culture defines how your company respond to situations.

When you are just one person culture is how you respond to certain situations – it is your personal ethos. When you have a cofounder, then it is how both of you decide to respond to situations. When you grow larger, it is the set of guidelines for your team on how to respond to situations. I dont know if that’s sufficient, so I’d like your feedback.

Let me give you an example.

I had a good friend and entrepreneur who came to see me yesterday.  He and his cofounder have been going through some tough times lately. Their team had significant performance issues which they were unable to turn around.

They were a small team of 10 folks so every team members performance would affect the company in a significant way. One of the team members, who was a good contributor had gone through some personal challenges and that affected his performance. He was well regarded, so his lackadaisical approach post his challenges, resulted in problems for the entire team. They all got more lax at work. Deadlines slipped and this “virus” soon spread to the entire team including their 2 sales people.

The founders realized the cause of the problem, but since he was an early employee, were loathe to let him go. They still wanted to “solve the problem” but were not sure on how to.

Take a few moments now to think about how you would handle this issue in your company if this happened. The simple response – “We would talk to the person and tell them to pull up their socks”, wont suffice. This is way past that stage. You have to take some action. The time for talking has passed is the assumption you have to make.

Yesterday I outlined 2 examples of how they could respond. I am going to call it the Zynga approach and the SAS approach. Having so many friends at both places, I feel they are poles apart in their culture .

The SAS approach is an “all hands on deck” approach. When a problem is noticed, such as customers not buying quickly enough, then the entire team rallies behind the problem and tries to solve it together. The pros of this approach it that it builds camaraderie and good-will, which leads to both higher performance in the short term and better morale in the long term. The cons of this approach is that there’s a lot of work for everyone in the short term to make up for the person that’s the slacker, which results in some bitterness among team members towards the “guilty” party.

The Zynga approach is “set the bar very high for performance”. If an individual is not performing to the level set by the objectives and metrics, they would replace that person after 1 or 2 warnings. The pros of this approach is that there’s a high bar for individual and team performance and everyone feels that they are accountable and responsible. The cons is that this environment tends to be rather detrimental to the team dynamics in the longer term.

Which road you take determines your culture.

The step function of #changes that are happening in the #Indian #startup scene

Most everyone believes that startup growth happens in step functions. You work for ages on something and it seems like there is little progress, but as an entrepreneur you are plugging away at it and suddenly one day, the growth is dramatic. Then it plateaus for a while and grows again. That’s the same for startup ecosystems is my opinion (not researched).

Step Function Growth

Step Function Growth

I am starting to see the next step function of growth in the Indian technology startup scene. There are a lot of people (entrepreneurs, investors, etc.) contributing to this growth and its hard to point to why it happened except in hindsight.

First, what metrics should we track so we can really know if there’s a step function or no progress?

Here are a few that we track at the Accelerator.

1. # of startups: How many startups are getting formed, where are they getting started, etc.

2. # of funded startups: Time taken to fund startups, amount of investment into startups, stage the companies are in at the point of angel investment etc.

3. Pace of growth: How quickly are they signing customers, how quickly are they getting VC investment, how quickly is their revenue growing, etc.

The NASSCOM 10K startups initiative is one such forcing function contributing to the growth.

Yesterday in partnership with NextBigWhat they organized the first of several #startuproots event.

A big part of that event was the #sharktank, which had 4 companies out of 200 that applied, that were going to pitch to investors and they had to make a decision on the spot.

For those of you who are not familiar with the sharktank format, the startups get 5-10 minutes to pitch, the investors get 5-10 min to ask questions and 2-5 min to make an offer. The entrepreneurs can then take some time to make their decision and then make a counter offer.

All offers are binding, save for legal and financial due diligence. Which means if and investor gets cold feet later, they cannot back out.

Yesterday, 4 companies presented. I had heard about 2 of those companies before (but did not know they were chosen) and the other two companies were fresh and new.

There were 8 investors who were part of the sharktank, but only 6 were serious. The other 2 seemed more there to critique and provide theoretical knowledge about startups.

Pankaj Jain from 500 startups, Ravi Gururaj from HBS, Ranjan Anandan from Google, Anirudh Suri from India Internet Fund and RK Shah from HBS were on the investors side.

Tookitaki (ad-tech space), Moojic (retail music hardware), Credii (Mid-market IT decision support) and Lumos (solar panels for backpacks to charge your phone), were the presenting companies.

All four got funded at the end of the event. I personally thought 2 of them would definitely get funded, but all 4 getting offers was truly a step function change.

I was personally pleased that Lumos got funded. They are doing something new and innovative that most Indian entrepreneurs wont do – Working on a non-software, difficult to scale hardware business, because of their passion.

I have to call out a special mention to RK Shah. RK is not a technology entrepreneur, (he runs a textile unit) neither is he a professional institutional investor. He wrote 2 checks himself yesterday. We need more RK Shah’s in India.

Finally big kudos to Jaivir, Brijesh and the rest of the NASSCOM 10K startup team. In less than 1 week, they got 850 signups for the event, and 500+ people attending.

How to be ruthless as an entrepreneur and compassionate as a leader

Early in the morning yesterday I had a chance to catch up with a friend and entrepreneur who had started a company 2 years ago. I have known him and his cofounder for a year now and got an opportunity to learn about their business and employees very well. They are both very strong technical folks, and had raised a small seed round of funding from a few angels and a institutional investor.

Both the cofounders are among the nicest people I know. Patient, good humored and simple, they were both genuinely great bosses who attracted a cadre of folks who were loyal, intelligent and blue-collar in their attitude and expectations.

Yesterday was a more sober meeting though, since the business was not in the best of health. He was fighting the good fight, but it was very tough going. In the last 3 months, a very reputed institutional investor had pulled out of a verbal commitment to a term sheet, which caused the company to rethink their plans. Their bank balance was at about 10+ L (1,000,000)  INR, salaries and gross burn (monthly expenses) were at 7 L INR (700,000) and net burn (after revenues) was at 2 L INR (200,000). Revenues were growing, starting at 5 L INR (500,000), but not as fast as they’d like.

The business was losing money month-on-month and they had about 5 months to survive.

The part that bothered me the most was that he knew the numbers well, but did not take any action, because he ran the company from his heart. He had known about the situation for 3 months now and still had not taken any corrective measures.

That to me is one of the biggest mistakes most non-business (technical or developer) entrepreneurs make.

They are not ruthless about their business, and tend to make all decisions from the heart and gut alone, not from the head.

It was clear to me that he had to create a longer runway for his business.

There are only 2 ways to survive. Make more revenue (increase sales) and lower expenses (reduce cost).

Most technical entrepreneurs estimate sales to pick up faster than it actually does. I understand their optimism, but its probably (not scientific, but my gut says so) the #1 cause of companies having to close down prematurely.

Most technical entrepreneurs also dont lower their expense fast enough. For a software company, 70+% of their expense, in the early to mid-stages, is payroll. I understand their reluctance to do so, given how tough it is to hire good talent for startups, but that would be my #2 cause of companies having to close down prematurely.

It was clear to me that he had to reduce his headcount, by 50% at least, to quickly get his business into the ICU and rapidly look for new sales opportunities to increase revenues. While the revenues were largely not in his control (given how finicky customers are), the expenses are within his control.

He had some very valid reasons (as I mentioned he is a very nice person) to not reduce headcount. A few folks in his team had just gotten married and a few had families to provide for.

I have been in this situation two times just in the past 3 years. At both times, revenues from a customer suddenly were in jeopardy and I had to take corrective action very quickly. The day we got to know about it, we had to let go of 4 folks in a very close knit team of 7 and the second time let go of 3 people in a smaller team of 6 people.

I had to be ruthless about the business since I wanted the company to survive. Without those cuts, the business would have folded and the folks would have been out of a job in 3-6 months anyway. I thought it would be more appropriate to be proactive.

I also had to be compassionate as a leader so I took great pains to call at least 50+ friends to find a position that paid better and was more stable for most of my colleagues.  Everyone of them got a role that paid higher and was closer to their home. One of my colleagues was going to get married, so we made a few adjustments to his salary as well so he could get a better pay hike at his next job.

The 7 colleagues are still good friends, and although there might have been some ill-will towards my actions in the early days, I am confident that now they understand that I had to do what was required so the business could survive.

When the writing is on the wall as a business person, have a strong action bias. 

There may be tons of reasons, which are all very valid and humane, for you not to take any painful measures. Your first commitment should be towards your people – so do what it takes to help them land on their feet someplace else, but take the necessary actions to ensure that your business will live to fight another day.

You owe it to your dream, your passion and your family to give your startup a fighting chance and keep it surviving as long as you can.

But ruthless as an entrepreneur, and compassionate as a leader.

Above all, always be a force of good.

Why its “never make or break” for an entrepreneur #nevergiveup #ycombinator

I had a very good entrepreneur who came by and talked to me yesterday about his company. After 2+ years of being at it, he finally claimed he “got a break” when he was selected to be interviewed for YCombinator. He had applied a couple of times before and was not shortlisted. He was obviously excited and I was thrilled as well. He and his cofounder are really awesome folks who are among those very rare breed who make everyone around them feel good even when the chips are down. They are both fairly young and an absolute pleasure to hang out with.

The last month, had been extremely tough for them. They figured out that the market in India was not quite ready for their web service, both culturally and also from the ability to monetize. They had both been in the US, and moved back to India so they could lower their costs during the prototype phase. They were facing the choice of moving out of India to the valley or just pivoting to another idea.

In the evening after the initial euphoria had died down, though, he made a remark that surprised me. He said “this is make or break time for us”.

I could understand, but there was a tinge of disappointment in my heart. Two years in a startup can do this to anyone. Two years in an Indian startup is even tougher for most founders. I have a theory about startup in India.

There’s one part of about the Indian entrepreneur that struck me as their unique value proposition.

Survival.

That’s it.

You survive after starting your company, beyond the first year, you deserve an achievement award.

Survival is the Indian startups unique value proposition.

So imagine all you are trying to do is to stay alive, making some revenue, but not quite making it big. That’s the only stage you are hoping to get to. Till the breakthrough idea, investor, channel, customer or accelerator comes by. Breakthrough in the context of giving your venture a fillip.

Lets then imagine you get that break.

Chances are, that break will not suffice. Not because its not the break you wanted, but because  the chances of it being the only thing that propels you to the next step in the ladder are slim.

That’s the case to keep going and building momentum. That’s because 90% of people will give up at the stage.

If you dont get past the YCombinator interview, have a plan B. Keep going. Dont give up. That was my advice to him.

I know that’s easy to say but very hard to execute. 2 years of no paycheck is bound to turn any  person cynical and jaded.

Here’s hoping he reads this and makes up his mind to have a plan B if the YC plan does not work out.

When and why should an Indian startup “move” to the Valley? #bangalore

Yesterday a friend who works at a large company and is experimenting with a side project had heard from several founders that given the type of product he wanted to build, he should relocate to the valley.

I have heard many variations of this advice so I wanted to give him a framework to think through this issue.

I initially thought the debate was very simple and based on customers alone. For cutting edge early adopter customers of any type – consumer or business, there’s no better place for a startup to be than where their customers are.

Then I also looked at the problem as one that has multiple dimensions.

The dimensions are:

1. Customers. Specifically type of customers – Cutting edge consumers on smart phones – Valley. Later stage consumers using SMS on feature phone – India, etc. You get the drift.

2. Financial situation of the founder. The valley is expensive. India, not so much. You can build a product and experiment until you get some initial version or product market fit at a far lower cost than the valley. Especially if you are a non-developer founder. Even if your customers are in the valley, you can have one founder in the valley or go to the valley every few months (its tough, but possible).

3. Stage of the company. Earlier stage, with rapid iteration it is better to be where your customers are, but honestly it can be done with remote customer meetings using web conferencing.

4. Product. Most founders tend to think what they are building is unique, but that’s never the case. There would be at least 10 other folks who are aware of the problem and possibly trying to solve the same problem. If the product is relatively simple from a technology standpoint and requires a lot more business development and sales execution, then its preferable to be in the valley would be my thinking.

5. The entrepreneurs network. Most entrepreneurs dont realize that it takes significant time to build a good network of partners, investors, customers and employees that are needed to support their venture. I have found (not statistically, but just my rule of thumb) that it takes me 2 years to build a network from scratch in any new area, location or domain. If you have a network in the valley, by all means, move there, but if you dont, getting legal help, hiring the first few employees or getting the first few customers will be hard.

As I follow up to getting funded by US or Indian investors post, I had many folks reach out to tell me that it was not a fair debate. While there were pros and cons, most felt that the valley was a much better place to be.

All things equal the valley is possibly the best place in the world to start a technology startup, but that does not mean you cannot start at other places and move to the valley later.

Given the type of your customers, stage of the venture, the type of company (B2B, B2C, mobile apps, etc.), the product you are trying to build, financial situation of the founders and your “network”, you will find that going to the valley vs. staying in your home country is a very good debate and a hard decision, not a no-brainer.

I have removed the aspect of obtaining a US visa, which albeit a hard issue, is still a procedural and administrative one than strategic.

Pickup lines of Indian entrepreneurs #startups #funny

I love to beat a dead horse and a meme to death. Given how much I like to stereotype, I think the fictional entrepreneur from each city in India will possibly use these pickup lines to get attention from the opposite sex.

Bangalore: She will most likely meet you at a traffic jam someplace, riding a Kinetic Honda and you the smarty pants guy she’s trying to woo are on a sports bike. While every car and bus driver is right behind honking like there’s no tomorrow, she pulls out her smart phone – (Android dude, iPhone is for the Mumbai-types) and shows you the traffic sensor app she has built in just 4 weeks, which tells you what the traffic patterns are in M G Road, and while she’s at it, she’ll also tell you to come to the side of the road, and in 10 minutes flat, she’ll root your phone, install Zomato to check out the best places to eat in Indiranagar or Koramangala and then drop the line “Do you want to come and work at my startup”?

Chennai: He’s likely to meet you at the Marina beach, taking the bus from Anna Nagar, where he stays with his 3 other bachelor friends. He’ll notice that you have 3 other friends who you came to just hangout with, and try and get your attention by ordering “sundal” but constantly looking at his smartphone to find the next Rajini saar joke that he can find. He’s hoping his laughter will pique your curiosity, and you’ll ask him what’s so funny. While he’s likely to tell you 2-3 of the Rajnikanth jokes, he’ll also ask you for your “Kulam, Gowthram“, etc. just so he knows that you’ll pass his parents approval. Finally after you expect him to ask you for your phone number, he’ll say “What’s your parents’ number? I want to give it to my parents”.

Hyderabad: She’s extremely rich and decked in 2 tons of gold, and the daughter of a very rich man who’s made a lot of money in real estate, agriculture or owns many wine stores in Andhra. Her startup is her way to “show” her dad that she can do something on her own. While she wont tell you she’s passed from Osmania university and has a MBA from a college in London, she’ll certainly make it a point to ask where you work. When she’s satisfied that you are a “true techie” working at a large company, she’ll drop her line “You want to come to our office for a movie marathon”?

Mumbai: He’s already tired after a 2 hour bus / train commute and is looking for any distraction from his 100 Sq. ft. “Global headquarters” startup office space in Vashi, which seats 10 people. He’ll likely meet you at a coffee shop in Bandra, trying to order an exotic drink that the “Bangalore-types” just dont get. While the drink is being prepared, he’ll order a vada-paav as well, and see that you are standing in the line behind him. He’ll pull out his iPad and show you the pre-release version of a movie that his startup is the online partner for, and try to see if that gets you to think that he can give you a “chance” to be in a Bollywood flick. His line is very well rehearsed, “Do you want to catch a movie next Saturday? I can get us invitations to the first screening”.

Delhi: She’s with 3 other friends, at Ambience Mall using the coupons from a daily deals site, when she notices you. She’s dressed really well, possibly in the high street fashions from Kimaya and that’s really surprising given she’s an entrepreneur. In her attempt to prove that she’s worth your time, she’ll loudly speak on the phone “Just ask him to call my assistant and she will connect him to the information minister’s office”  (with a hint of a humble brag for good measure). Before she can finish the sentence though, the phone will ring and the sheepish grin will reveal that she wasn’t really talking to anyone at all. She’ll offer to buy you coffee and will make it a point to let you know that her startups is both making revenues and is profitable, which should convince you that she’s worth dating. Of course her pickup line is still “I know the Deputy Commissioner of Police, so I’ll be able to get us parking in anyplace in Gurgaon”.

Pune, Kolkata and others, feel free to write your own pick scenarios and I’ll link to them all. Just drop me a note on twitter.

Delhi entrepreneurs will outsource technology, Bangalore will outsource sales, and Mumbai, everything but finance #startups #entrepreneurs

 

Tweet

Tweet

I put a half serious tweet last week based on several conversations I have had with entrepreneurs in Delhi, Mumbai, Pune, Bangalore and Chennai. I have been to Hyderabad as well, but the numbers are low.

I have limited data, since I am not in Delhi often. My observations are based on looking at 51+ applications from Batch 1 and about 60+ applications from batch 2 of our accelerator from NCR.

Besides that I have interacted in 5 events in the last 6 months at Delhi – Think Next at Saif, Reverse Pitch at 91 spring board, one VCCircle event, one at Leela with people matters and an event of Media companies and startups at Le Meridian. In all at these events I met a cross section of about 120+ companies and founders.

The following are my observations, so use a grain of salt.

1. I met fewer than 5% of developers and technical architects in these events and fewer than 2% of founders from our applications at NCR. The deep technical people dont come to these events or apply to our accelerator. We prefer meeting and dealing with developers, technical folks than generalists such as domain experts, marketing or sales founders. In contrast to those numbers, developers make up 14% of Bangalore applications and Pune a close 10%.

2. Delhi founders dismiss strong technology plays as “engineers building solutions in search of a problem”. This statement is my interpretation of a “show of hands poll” that I did in 2 events.

3. In our internal database of 402 technology and software companies we track at Microsoft based in Delhi, our own biased, internal ranking of “technical” expertise at these companies, our average rating is at 2.9 on a scale of 5. Bangalore and Chennai top at 3.7 and 3.5, followed by Pune at 3.3. I cant share more details about the ratings yet, but will do so as we get more comfortable with sharing this data and not getting people flaming us for that.

While we are certainly not dismissing Delhi as a non-technology startup hub, we certainly dont see deep fundamental technology startups in storage, cloud infrastructure or networking from Delhi. Bangalore or Pune are likely better bets for those. This data was reconfirmed to me by both SAP and Intel who have startup engagement programs in those cities.

Why forced mergers in the eCommerce space is a good thing

Right now there are many distraught entrepreneurs and industry watchers who are either a) saying “I told you so” or b) saying “this is bad for startups”, when they read the latest “forced merger” between several eCommerce companies. While many felt it started with Flipkart and Letsbuy, the most recent BabyOye and Hoopos has more commentary on the negative side.

While we in India, have been witness to these mergers only in the last few years, this has been happening in the valley for eons  The new age name given to some of these funded startup exits is acqui-hire. Somehow acqui-hire in the valley is great and forced mergers in India is not.

There are and were many naysayers when there was a raft of funding in the eCommerce space a few years ago. Many folks were right about unsustainable business models, rampant discounting, unsustainable customer acquisition costs, etc. To them I say:

From Alfred Lord Tennyson’s poem In Memoriam : 27, 1850

“‘Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.”

The eCommerce bubble in India has created a new set of entrepreneurs. They did it with other people’s money. No one really lost except for the LP’s who I am sure are now once bitten, twice shy about returns from Indian startups.

Honestly though, I have talked to 5 Limited partners at large organizations who are disappointed with returns from Indian Venture capital, but also realize they dont really have much of a choice but to stay invested.

There are some that claim that other deserving entrepreneurs, who were working on non eCommerce startups, were ignored during the eCommerce bubble. That’s absolutely nonsense.

In India over the last 3-5 years, if you were a good entrepreneur with a good business, great team and chasing a large market, you were able to raise money. The ones that did not get funding, either were chasing smaller markets, were going to grow slowly or were not sufficiently good teams.

Now what do I claim that mergers are good for Indian startups?

1. They help companies and their employees consolidate to create one large player in a mid-sized to big market, instead of 10 players chasing the same market and being extremely competitive.

2. They provide a means of employment for the many employees at those companies who were not the founders or the investors.

3. They give hope to the many entrepreneurs in the making that you can have a “failure” and still be considered for another opportunity in a startup.

4. It provides the investors an opportunity to consolidate their portfolio and hence double down on their winners, without spreading themselves too thin. That way the remaining portfolio companies win.

5. It frees up time from several investors having to spend time on middle-of-the-road companies, and gives them more time to spend chasing new opportunities.

6. It is easier to merge a company in India than it is to shutdown. The process to shutdown a company is also a lot more expensive.

Anything I missed on the other goodness from the eCommerce forced mergers?

When does serendipity play a role and when does it not?

M. E. Graebner describes serendipitous value in the context of the acquisition of a business as “windfalls that were not anticipated by the buyer prior to the deal”. source.

As the new buzzword in the startup world is serendipity I thought I’d take a few minutes to share the fear I have of many folks engineering serendipity.  Put many interesting (or intelligent) folks in a room they say and serendipity happens.

I do though unfortunately feel many folks are taking it to the extreme. Given the many conferences, meetups and events that occur for startups, I am sure its very tempting for entrepreneurs to make sure they are at all of those meetings, to ensure they dont “miss out”.  If you are however meeting the same people again and again and doing the same things, talking about the same 10 startups, there’s little room for serendipity.

At most startup events, I see the same folks who make up 50% (increasingly) of the audience both on the investors side and the entrepreneurs side. While its good to see many familiar faces, I am doubtful that there’s much serendipity and goodness that will come out of it.

As an entrepreneur the one thing you have on your side is time, besides your ideas and intentions. I dont believe you can really waste any time and much worse, attend meetings just to make serendipity happen. I would highly recommend a very strict discipline of attending events that you believe you will have a good chance to get something done, and then hope for more serendipity to happen.

If your sole purpose of attending events is to make magic happen just because you are there, then you are going to likely waste more time and get little done.