Category: All posts

Innovation = 30% Revenue from New Products?

Innovation = 30% Revenue from New Products?

A company’s ability to innovate can be witnessed by studying the firm’s ability to develop and commercialize new products. Accordingly, select financial analysts look quantify innovation by identifying the new product revenue contribution to a company’s total revenue. “New products” is generally defined as products created and distributed for the first time in the past 3 years.

Using this quantitative framework, a company’s product innovation can be quantified as:

(Revenue from products created over past 3 years) / (Total Revenue)

According to McKinsey, the most innovative firms have a stunning 33% of their revenue from new products.

By definition, nearly all start-ups achieve 50-100% metrics within this calculation. The key is keeping this innovation of new products alive as a company matures. What is most impressive is when mammoth companies like Microsoft achieve >20% success by launching new cloud products that meet a customer need and can be sold through their existing distribution channels.

Many energy and industrial firms fall between 5-15% in this calculation. These lower levels are due to:

1- Asset turnover is when new product sales opportunities become available. But industrial products and energy generation tend to be in operation for decade(s). Changes in generation are accelerating now, though!

2- Hardware distribution is very different than software distribution. And we now know that software has a faster ability to iterate and create new products for customers. 90% of industrial sales tend to be hardware although the core industrial tech firms are looking to change that balance to more software-driven.

3- Systems interoperability requirements of the physical environment act as a breaking mechanism on accelerated product development

As a result, many energy and industrial firms are now looking to startups to infuse new product innovation and software distribution into their organizations. Tomorrow I will begin reviewing the top industrial partners that are looking to inject technology and software innovation into their future cycles.

Complexity Theory’s Approach to Climate Adaptation

Complexity Theory’s Approach to Climate Adaptation

One of my favorite books of 2020 is a classic, Complexity Theory. The book covers how ideas converge at the edge of chaos. And specifically how technologies come together in unique combinations at almost required points in time to drive forward industry.

Near the end of the book there is a segment on climate change, that I believe is very relevant for our current market status. Right now there are ongoing debates between different fuel types and their pros/cons and various proponents are staking out their positions and getting entrenched. My favorite paragraphs from the book show how we should be approaching climate adaptation by embracing many different technologies. By enabling a suite of differing technologies, we retain optionality to optimize for the long term maxima, as opposed to being stuck in an intermediate peak.

“When you are part of the cycle, as in climate change, it is not a duality of us vs them. It is integration. Accommodation and coadaptation so you optimize for the right peaks and not a local maxima that could extinct you.”

“And so how to maneuver in a world like that: the answer is to keep as many options open as possible. You go for viability, something that’s workable, rather than what’s optimal. A lot of people then say: aren’t you accepting second best? No, you’re not, because optimization isn’t well-defined anymore. What you are trying to do is maximize robustness, or survivalists, in the face of an ill-defined future. And that, in turn, puts a premium on becoming aware of non-linear relationships and causal pathways as best we can. You observe the world very carefully and you don’t expect the circumstances to last.”

Sunday Sales Series – Rooftop and Community Solar

Sunday Sales Series – Rooftop and Community Solar

Last week I covered commissions and take-rates on retail energy products.

Today I am covering the next level of consumer energy products:

  • rooftop solar
  • community solar

As you will see below, the payouts for these two products are the highest in the energy market. Why? The payouts have to compensate the platforms for the high cost of capturing and educating customers on energy options, a topic that is considered by consumers for a whopping 6 minutes a year.

Therefore, many energy platforms are either:

1- widening the funnel by pairing with other home services related products: digital home products like security, connected devices, real estate brokers. The goal here is to have the energy product be a bolt-on purchase in the purchasing discussion.

2- looking to “pull up” customers from more entry level energy products, like retail energy, Nest thermostats, or HVAC relationships. The goal here is to capture the customer when an energy professional can quickly quantify the savings and resilience benefits of these energy products.

Rooftop solar

The costs for rooftop solar have declined dramatically over the past decade. However, most of those costs have come from the hardware and “Balance of Materials” (BoM). But customer education and acquisition costs have barely declined in the same period. While many firms are trying to go to digital engagements, most of the customer acquisition in this industry is hand-to-hand combat. This involves door knocking, out of home education and long sales closes.

These costs are sufficient to create a lucrative business for a digital platform to make real revenues.

Solar is installed on a size basis: the average rooftop installation in the US is around 6-7kW. And a 6 kW system is about $15,000 fully loaded cost to a customer, pre-tax. In the origination market, you can get paid for a qualified lead or for a fully delivered customer. (Fully delivered meaning you get paid upon installation.) Most of the market has moved from lead to installation.

They payout figures in market are around $200-300 per kW installed. This means that for the average US installation a platform that helps originate and qualify a residential solar customer will get paid between $1,200 to $1,500. At ChooseEnergy, there was a year where we were the largest online originator of rooftop customer solar customers. Since we had an extra exposure on Texas and the northeast, our average installation was 9 kW so we were clipping around $2,000+ per customer.

Community Solar

Community solar is when a customer buys a portion of a (usually) nearby solar farm. Large, utility-scale solar farms look for long-term Power Purchase Agreements (PPA) whereby the credit of the off-taker can be used to help finance the near-billion dollar projects. The off-taker in those utility-scale cases are Fortune 500 companies with big balance sheets.

Community solar is usually designed for smaller scale counter-parties: municipalities, smaller utilities, group buyers. Recent business model innovation now allows for traditional residential or commercial buyers to buy a share of these community solar sites. But the asset owners themselves still need longer-term, high credit commitments from their homeowner purchasers. One of the beauties of community solar, however, is that a homeowner who can’t purchase rooftop solar can purchase community solar. This opens up the market to apartment dwellers or homeowners with excess tree coverage /whose roof faces inopportune directions.

Due to the need for a 5+ year contract commitment and high credit consumer, the education and friction to acquire these consumers is high. This usually means that the community solar provider is willing to pay around $50 per year per kW of off-take meaning around $300 per year of contract signed, or around $1,500 per new customer if a 5-year, standard contract.

The companies in this space include

EnergySage: rooftop solar origination platform; exploring adding batteries

Arcadia Power: Green renewable energy credits to your utility bill w the goal to upsell to community solar products

PickMySolar.com and Solar.com – Solar qualification and origination platform; also adding battery solutions

Solstice: Community solar origination platform

Wattbuy: Retail energy acquisition platform with natural goal to expand into rooftop and community solar origination

A Deeptech Focused LT Stock Exchange

A Deeptech Focused LT Stock Exchange

The number of deeptech companies exploring SPACs is an indication that there is a gap in the market between post-venture financings and pre-scale commercial traction.

This gap poses a question if there can be a Long Term Stock Exchange-equivalent exclusively for more deeptech solutions. Why could this make sense?

Venture capital does a good job at funding early stage entrepreneurs that look to catalyze hard problems. In the deeptech space, however, the money and time between subsequent success milestones usually becomes increasingly capital intensive or lengthy. The technology developed in a lab or with early customers ultimately enters real-world production and integration.

Given how many deeptech investments directly interact with atoms (not just bits) the real world feedback loop requires more time and money. This extension is due to a combination of systems integration, hardware requirements and regulatory structures. Like biotechnology startups, when these deeptech businesses do ultimately achieve their benchmarks, the value and real-world impact is very material. And accordingly, the valuations are step-function increases.

I believe there are cohorts of investors (from young professionals to pension funds) that would be interested in financing these opportunities due to

1) the impact and world-changing potential of these company types and

2) the horizon exposure offered by financing these businesses. Young professionals and pensions like long-term investment horizons that compound over decades.

By my calculation that is around a $5-10BN per year financing opportunity – a figure measurably digestible within the larger equity markets. There probably needs to be a minimum hold period to ensure long-term alignment but everything else is up in the air. And given how these businesses are usually world-positive, perhaps these types of opportunities can also better match to a pre-tax contribution structure?

Who is working on this? Does anyone else feel similarly? With enough interest, I’d be happy to spearhead exploring this opportunity with an enterprising entrepreneur.

Capital Allocators Forcing Energy Transition

Capital Allocators Forcing Energy Transition

Capital allocation is a critical lifeline for the oil & gas industry. The industry is incredibly capital intensive: pipelines, refineries, rigs, fracking sites… are all multi-billion dollar efforts.

Given the capital intensity to build and maintain these carbon-emitting assets, when the money talks, the executives listen. And the money is beginning to talk:

Last year, Larry Fink at BlackRock wrote an impactful note to his fellow CEOs on climate change.

Climate Risk is Investment Risk: In the near future – and sooner than most anticipate – there will be a significant reallocation of capital.

The proclamation was bold, but not specifically targeting any asset or company. But now the allocators are calling out companies and climate negative firms.

That is a big change in communications and I expect we will see this level of climate-related activism grow. And the firms will listen.

The New York, New York Rule to Revenue

The New York, New York Rule to Revenue

Portfolio and revenue diversification has its’ documented benefits.

When covering revenue diversification, most teams focus on removing the downside risks: revenue concentration, regulatory impacts, competition, sales cycles, etc…

BUT, there are two hidden benefits to revenue diversification that are not as well covered that I look for when evaluating a business. I will cover those topics today & tomorrow.

Hidden Benefit 1: THE NEW YORK, NEW YORK RULE

One hidden benefit for industrial technologies that serve the critical infrastructure verticals is how customer diversity grants a start-up exposure to win higher margin contracts. Here is my incredibly simple approach: the higher the margin available in the customer’s underlying product, the more investment that prospective customer can make in advancing IT/OT technologies. This approach is naturally consistent with the “value based pricing” blog I wrote about last month. The driver to this opportunity is the forcing function of lean product development and efficient distribution in the lower margin industries that subsequently creates greater cumulative profitability elsewhere.

If an industrial technology company is forced to make their unit economics work for the narrow-budgeted, low margin commodity provider (read: power, utilities) then the margin available to deliver that product to higher margin verticals should allow for materially greater profits. (competition pending!) These lower margin industries are a bootcamp to focus on delivering the highest value at the lowest price with an efficient go to market strategy. I joke that this is my Sinatra “New York New York Rule” and that ““If you can make it here you can make it anywhere” I insist that start-ups increase pricing when going to these other verticals… they deserve it!

The site, Ready Ratios, shows gross margin by industry. And these directionally line up with my broad strokes interpretation below:

Show me a technology start-up making good margin in agriculture and power and I will show you an excellent business in the other verticals.

Uber’s Big Electric Vehicle News

Uber’s Big Electric Vehicle News

Earlier today the CEO of Uber announced the following:

Awesome announcement and i wanted to do a back of the envelopment analysis of Uber impact for their US footprint:

5 billion trips per year 6 miles per trip is ~ 30 billion miles per year. At 20 miles/ gallon gas that means just in the US alone that Uber is removing 1.5 billion gallons of fuel. REMOVED. At $3 a gallon, Uber is removing $4.5 billion in fuels revenue to the oil & gas industry.

~ 1 kWh takes an EV ~4 miles. In order to power all of the Uber trips with electric power, the US needs to add annual production of 7 billion kWh. A large wind turbine generates ~6 million kWh of energy per year, meaning that to power all of those Uber rides we need to add ~1,200 wind turbines. There are already over 50,000 wind turbines operating in the US and another 10,000+ in development.

At 10 cents per kWh, the cost to the Uber drivers for their energy source is now a total of $700M, a savings of over $3 billion to drivers.

These outcomes, where obvious unit economics drive change, are going to continue to make press releases.

There are many winners in this outcome. Here are a few:

+ Consumers for improved air quality and less local emissions

+ Utilities as mobility moves to being powered by electrons: rate base new renewable generation and local EV infrastructure

+ Energy management firms who upgrade local power distribution: Schneider, Honeywell, Rockwell, ABB. The grid needs to be able to manage increased power flow

+ EV charging networks are now increasingly important

+ Uber drivers who now spend less on fuel

Resilience & Generation at the Edge

Resilience & Generation at the Edge

Decarbonization. Decentralization. Digitization.

I didn’t think we needed to explicitly state “reliability” as a pillar because no-one expected a decline in quality with our next generation structures. But, given the increasing climate-based fluctuations, as well as the intermittent nature of current renewables, we likely need to adjust our 3-pronged approach to specifically include resilience.

I, perhaps incorrectly, thought that we had addressed base-load and resilience issues through better digital controls and more voluminous, decentralized generation. There is an increasingly unchallenged assumption that growth of intermittent renewables will eventually be paired with the cost-decline of batteries. And while I still believe that batteries will be the eventual/ critical complementary power source, there are many ways batteries will engage with the grid… + even the definition of a battery may change to include modular nuclear.

As stated in a past post, Energize is investing in the transition, not the outcome: “Rather than attempting to monetize a self-selected outcome (clean energy) we now focus our process on enabling the energy and industrial transition.” Energize remains focused on the software applications enabled by this transition.

Over the coming months I will be expanding my scope to better understand how and why we can better directly address resilience in supply. There are a number of jump-off points to revisit to see if the technology is ready for prime time:

– vehicle to grid (V2G) software (resi, fleets)

– next generation inverters and home / commercial control systems (and biz model)

– broader co-generation opportunities, including small modular nuclear reactors, modular batteries (readiness, policy)

All of these technologies still assume increased generation and distribution at the edge. I see smaller-scale generation’s ability to grow and iterate more quickly as a key component to the energy transition.

Who should we be speaking to making advancements in this space?

Labor Day: Thanks to the utility workforce

Labor Day: Thanks to the utility workforce

There are 540,000 employees tagged to the US utility industry. According to NAICS this definition includes:

  • Electric Power Generation, Transmission and Distribution: NAICS 2211
  • Natural Gas Distribution: NAICS 2212
  • Water, Sewage and Other Systems: NAICS 2213

The composition of this workforce is actually down by ~3% over the past decade. While I am uncertain on the future employment growth in the industry, I am certain that the underlying types of jobs (wind technicians, battery engineers) are going to change.

The majority of the current workers are front-line, either for installation, repair or meter reading. At times these workers have thankless jobs and are asked to work at all hours in response to storms and other difficult situations. There are many reasons to be thankful on Labor Day, but here is another to add to your list: if you see a utility worker, be sure to say thanks.

Sunday Sales Series – Retail Energy Contracts

Sunday Sales Series – Retail Energy Contracts

Today’s sales topics are going to cover the commissions that retailer energy providers, rooftop solar installers, and community solar firms are willing to pay to acquire residential and commercial customers:

I co-wrote this post with Jonathan Crowder. And before getting to the numbers, w need to define a few key terms:

Originators: In the energy space the main forms of customer acquisition remain offline brokers. These brokers operate through door-to-door sales, outbound phone sales, and other traditional sales techniques. Online origination through state sites, comparison sites, energy websites and connected home /clean energy brands are the fastest growing form of customer acquisition

Upfront: the amount that an energy firm is willing to pay upon confirmation of a customer’s enrollment. The energy firm usually pays this spiff upon receiving the customer’s payment information – or upon the the payment of the first month’s energy bill.

Residual: the % of the supply portion of the energy bill that an energy firm is willing to pay the originator for as long as the customer stays with the energy firm. This payment option is more specific to retail energy and is meant to incentivize the originator to not keep flipping the customer to another provider every time the customer contract comes up for renewal. These payments are done monthly, in arrears, and are usually tied to the size of the customer’s energy bill.

A “mil”: In the energy compensation narrative, a mil refers to Is 1/1,000th of a US dollar, or 1/10th of a cent. This is important to know because the “mils” are how energy providers create business alignment with originators. The mil is used to calculate how much an originator earns in monthly commissions. For example, if a small business uses 10,0000 kWh of energy per month, and the originator agreed to a “5 mils” contract, then the originator gets paid a monthly amount of (10,000 kWh * $0.005 dollars per kWh)= $50 per month of commission.

Contract Term: Like a cable bill or your phone plan, many energy contracts can range from prepaid monthly plans to 3, 6, 12 or 24+ month contracts. Some community solar contracts are 5 years, or more! And a rooftop solar contract is ultimately tied to the house (vs the homeowner) and can be 20+ years long. Like with other home services products, terminating a contract early likely results in a pre-payment penalty.

Renewal: At the end of a contract, customer’s can either roll over into a new plan with their existing energy supplier or search for a new firm.

Rate: The amount, usually charged per kWh (just like your utility bill), that you pay for energy. It is important to note that there are different prices, depending on the portion of the energy bill you are covering. Some firms (retail energy providers, community solar) may just be substituting out the supply portion of your energy bill. Other offerings, like rooftop solar, may include both supply and broader distribution charges as part of their rate.

SALES CONTRACTS

Since we are talking about a commodity here any additional margin paid to a broker is very simply added to the underlying rate. If a retailer is pricing energy at 10 cents and you want to make a penny of margin as an originator, they will simply allow you to Mark the rate as 11 cents in your reseller agreement. The problem with this structure is that the least informed customers can pay very non-standard rates if they are sold hard by a broker. I have heard horror stories where offline brokers charges a 50% premium to the underlying commodity.

Thankfully, digitall experiences are bringing better experiences. And there is greater consistency to what online brokers are able to charge, and therefore able to pass along to the consumer. Here they are:

Residential consumer, Texas: $125 upfront 2-3 mils. The average texas home consumes around 15,000 kWh so the retailer is willing to pay up to $175 for the first year of contract and about $50-75 per year thereafter.

Residential consumer, non-Texas: $75 upfront and 2-3 mils. The average US home outside of Texas consumes about 10,000 kWh so these accounts are smaller and usually less profitable. This results in about a $100 first year payment and $30-40 annual value thereafter.

One of the most ludicrous part of this energy experience is the equivalent “rake”. At best, a customer can expect to save around $50-75 a year by choosing a retail supplier that isn’t their own utility. And the retailers pay nearly double that to acquire a customer. The cost to educate and acquire a customer is at least 2x the savings – so the system is mostly broken.

Commercial consumer: standards are variable but usually ranges from 3 to 10 mils depending on the size of the account. At Choose we had a lot of small accounts (restaurants) who were around 30,000 kWh per year so they would pay us about $150 per year at 5 mils. Once we had a huge warehouse in the Port of NJ sign up through our site at 10 million kWh+ annually and we made tens of thousands of dollars each year on one meter. This range shows how variable the commercial market can be in the supply arena. It is these big accounts where offline brokers focus and try to add large broker fees to make mega-commissions and a lot of the “fat” still lives in the system.

Bill Gurley famously covered the different “rakes” of online platforms. Online sites commissions range from ~3-30%. In retail energy, if the average rate is 10 cents supply, then the originators are taking about a 5% take- pretty low. However, if you take into account that this is a commodity with lower margins, at these commissions the originators capture as much as 50% of the profit. And that is the real apples-apples comparison here.

Next week we will cover “green retail plans”, community solar and rooftop solar origination figures. I will also cover how retail suppliers coordinate to monetize on the broader connected home opportunity.