Did We Just Witness Another Marketing Masterclass From America's New Felon-In-Chief?
Entrepreneur Office Hours - Issue #234
I swear, the following thoughts are apolitical. Yes, they’re about Donald Trump, but I’m not here to tell you what I think about Donald Trump the politician, or what you should think about him. Instead, these comments are about Donald Trump the marketer. And Donald Trump the marketer — and his entire marketing team — is really impressive.
Unless you’ve been living under a rock buried deep in the ocean of one of Jupiter’s ice moons, you’ve surely heard the news that Donald Trump was just convicted in his New York State hush money trial. More importantly, if you’re like me — and millions of other people — you didn’t find out from CNN or FoxNews or even social media. You found out because you received a marketing text from the Trump campaign using the conviction as an opportunity to raise money.
The one I received arrived at 5:33 ET — minutes after the verdict was announced — and it said:
BREAKING: TRUMP CONVICTED IN SHAME TRIAL
This is the biggest moment EVER to rally around President Trump - stand with us now!!! [fundraising link]
-House GOP
Think about that for a second. It’s 2024, and the way millions of people found out about one of the most unique and newsworthy moments in recent memory was via a marketing text on behalf of the guy who was convicted of a felony… how weird is that?
Objectively — again, no matter what you think about the man himself — it’s a wildly savvy move. The Trump team immediately began spinning the outcome of the trial before most people had even learned of it, and that gives them better control of the response.
If that weren’t interesting enough, an hour-and-a-half later, I received a second text. It read:
WOW! The MAGA backlash to the sham Trump verdict broke out fundraising platform!
BUT IT’S BACK NOW - stand w/House GOP & Trump here: [fundraising link]
-House GOP
If I had to guess, that second text was the byproduct of a mistake in the first text. In other words, I’m pretty sure the response to the first text didn’t “break the fundraising platform.” I assume, in Team Trump’s haste to send the text message, someone, somewhere, made a mistake, and the campaign needed to correct it ASAP. But, Trump Inc., being the savvy marketing team it is, spun yet-another misfortune into an opportunity by implying the response was so big the fundraising platform broke.
It’s an impressive pattern of turning problems into opportunities. Whatever you think of Donald Trump the man, let’s forget that for a moment and marvel at the Trump communications org. Those people deserve every penny they’ve earned — even any extra pennies they’ve been given to offset taxes on off-the-books payments.
-Aaron
This week’s new articles…
A Founder Who Just Raised a $3 Million Seed Round Showed Me the New Way Startups Are Pitching VCs
Heads up: This is one of the most important articles I’ve written in a long time. If you’re currently raising capital or thinking about it in the next few years, you need to understand how fundraising pitches are changing.
Can Good Investors Spot Great Startups Even When the Founders Aren’t Great at Pitching?
What if a perfectly executed fundraising pitch doesn’t matter nearly as much as most entrepreneurs think?
A note about “3 Things to Consider in Tech & Startups”…
Thanks, everyone, who gave your opinions on whether I should add a section related to startup news and current events. I’m going to spend the next few weeks doing some more work trying to understand the feasibility and value of making it a permanent addition.
Office Hours Q&A
———————
QUESTION:
Hi Dr. Dinin –
When people talk about fundraising, they generally talk about targeting angels for early, pre-seed rounds, and then, once you have good traction, raise money from venture capitalists.
Is it ever OK to raise money from angel investors at a later stage in the fundraising process? Or, vice-versa, is it OK to find institutional investors earlier on?
Thank you,
Merk
----------
Best not to try and put this answer into terms like “OK” or “not OK” because, quite frankly, it’s not a good or bad scenario. The standards for what types of investors invest at each stage mostly a case of necessity.
Simply put, angel investors are more likely to invest early, at the pre-seed stage. This is because angels are more likely to A) believe in a vision without seeing traction; B) be willing to invest more to support entrepreneurs than to generate a huge return; and, C) have complete control of their funds.
In contrast, professional investors – like VCs – don’t exist to support entrepreneurs. They exist to support themselves.
For what it’s worth, I don’t mean this in a “good” or “bad” way. They’re not inherently more selfish than angels. It’s just business. Venture capitalists are investing other people’s money, and they have a fiduciary duty to focus on generating a return.
Since professional investors are running businesses, they’re much more likely to follow an investing thesis that focuses on investing in more proven companies.
But, if the reverse were to happen, should you run from it? Should you not let angels invest in later rounds and not let institutional investors invest first?
Honestly, it’s a decision you should make based on the specific circumstance of who is trying to invest, why, and what kinds of additional value you think they might bring. But there’s no glaring reason why you couldn’t take money from investors at unusual times so long as the fundamentals of the deal make sense.
Got startup questions of your own? Reply to this email with whatever you want to know, and I’ll do my best to answer!
