File name:WAA Episode 15 Mixdown 2

Audio Length:0:45:15

Date transcribed:20 November 2020

[Jingle 0:00:00 - 0:00:13] 

Erika: Well, hello everyone and welcome back to Words and Actions. Our regular listeners already know, but for those who are here for the first time, Words and Actions looks at the world through the language lens.

This time, we focus on entrepreneurship. Last week, we talked about how and why language matters when people talk about entrepreneurs. In this episode now, we focus on how entrepreneurs use language in business-critical situations and how that language is perceived.

The podcast is normally hosted by three hosts. Myself, Erika Darics from Aston University, Veronika Koller from Lancaster University

Veronika: Hello everyone. 

Erika: and Bernard de Clerck from Ghent University. Bernard couldn't join us on this occasion but we will back to our regular number for our next episode. 

Veronika: Yeah. We'll miss Bernard today, really. Our listeners will miss his humour and his great examples. But as we said, he'll be back for the next episode.

But what we do have today is two guests. As we promised at the beginning of our second season, we have two fascinating interviews with people who know entrepreneurship both from study but also as practitioners really, from the inside out.

We should also mention that, for this particular episode, we're really grateful to BSEEN for sponsoring us. BSEEN is a start-up support programme that works with students and graduate entrepreneurs in Birmingham in the United Kingdom. 

Erika: We'll make sure that we put the link to BSEEN on our blog and website as well. 

Veronika: Absolutely we will. So, let's look at when do entrepreneurs need to use language when they set up a business? Who do they use language with? There's a lot to think about there. 

Erika: Right. The first obvious example that comes to mind is that they need to ask for permissions and permits. They need to talk to official stakeholders. City councils, for example. 

Veronika: Yeah, depending on what they do. For instance, if you set up a café, I'm sure you need all sorts of licenses. Whether you can sell alcohol or not, for instance. Although then, who would set up a café at this point? But there you go. (Laughter) You get the idea. You still need permissions. You also want to talk to get employees. 

Erika: Yeah. Let's not dismiss the idea of a nice café just yet, Veronika!

Veronika: Okay!

Erika: We all need our regular dose of caffeine. Talking about caffeine, they need suppliers. They need to talk to suppliers and negotiate contracts. 

Veronika: Absolutely. If it's not supposed to be a one-person business, they also need employees. And they need to keep an eye on the competition, obviously. "What are others doing and how do we position ourselves with regards to the competition?"

Erika: Then, once you have your employees, your great coffee and all the licenses are ready, you now have to start talking to your customers. 

Veronika: And get customers in the first place. 

Erika: That's right. 

Veronika: Identify your customer base and advertise yourself. But you know, Erika, I think we've actually forgotten one important thing that maybe comes first. That is, where do you get the money from?

Erika: Right. Of course. Entrepreneurship, especially at the beginning of the business, is all about finding funding, right?

Veronika: Yeah. You need to talk to your bank and perhaps you need to talk to investors and business angels. That is, in fact, what we'll be focusing on in this episode. We'll look at the investor pitch in the second part of our mini-series on language and entrepreneurship.

We can say that language is really everywhere, including when you set up your own business. It communicates every aspect of your business, really. 

Erika: Right. It reminds me of a quote by James Champy. He was an American business consultant and organisational theorist. He said this: "People like to think that businesses are built from numbers, as in the bottom line; or forces, as in market forces; or things, the product; or even flesh and blood, our people. But this is wrong. Businesses are made of ideas, ideas expressed as words.” 

Veronika: You know, that's really an appropriate quote for a new business situation. It's a point we make repeatedly on this podcast but it's really important here.

We talked about this notion of how you talk a venture into being. How you express your ideas for a business as words. It's no surprise, really, that for entrepreneurs the investor pitch is another central way of using language to express their ideas and make them become reality. 

Erika: Yes. This idea of pitching is a very complex thing. It's a very odd text type as well. If we consider the classical pitch where would-be entrepreneurs walk up to a panel of possible investors and they present the pitch... In the first stage, this text has to be extremely well crafted, well prepared, written down. But then it also has to be delivered in speaking and should sound engaging and relatable.

If you want to rock that pitch, you really need to be mindful of these two stages and the difference between the two types of texts [so as] not to mix up the two. (Laughter)

Veronika: Yeah. You really need to write for the ear, as it were. You need to write it down. You want to be well prepared. But you don't want to come across as stilted.

Erika, do you remember when we wrote the textbook, "Language in Business, Language at Work", we had this example of two entrepreneurs who were pitching a product and it sounded as if they were...? Well, they were probably reading out a text. It was very obvious. Do you remember?

Erika: Yes. Yes, I do remember. That pitch actually features in the top five most disastrous Dragon's Den pitches. 

Veronika: Oh dear. 

Erika: Did you know that?

Veronika: No, I didn't! (Laughter) But I can see why. 

Erika: The actual product itself was a symbol that single people should wear as a necklace or as a bracelet which would signal to the outside world that they are single. 

Veronika: Right. Cute idea, I suppose. And why not? It might help. It was on YouTube but it's unfortunately been taken down. What we'll do is put parts of that pitch on the blog.

I'll also read it out now. Okay? Just a bit from it. This is what these two entrepreneurs said: "We are here today to introduce Tingatang and ask for an investment of £100,000 for a 20% share in our business. Looking for love is a big business in the UK. By the year 2010, it is estimated that 45% of the UK's adult population will be single. Today, 75% of singletons are actively dating, spending a whopping £8 billion per year in the search for someone special.

“And so Tingatang was born to provide a unique and distinctive symbol for single people. Just a wearing a wedding ring shows that you're in a partnership, now you can wear a Tingatang to reveal your single status."

Erika: Yeah... (Laughter) I'm sorry. I find the idea of this product ridiculous. But I can see why this was also a disastrous pitch with the way it's written. 

Veronika: Yeah. Why does it sound so odd? What makes it sound so odd, slightly stilted and something that just doesn't go down well, really?

Erika: It sounds odd because this is clearly not written to be performed. 

Veronika: Yeah. We can pick it apart a bit if we look at the grammar and how they've constructed their sentences. The second sentence, for instance, is, "Looking for love is a big business in the UK." They're starting the sentence with a verb form that ends in, "-ing", something we call a gerund. That's very typical of written language. We really don't do that so much when we speak spontaneously. 

Erika: Not really. And we don't do what they did in their next sentence when they start, "By the year 2010 it is estimated that 45% of the UK's population..." This sentence starts with what we call an adverbial. This is additional information. In speech, this causes difficulty in processing what's spoken. 

Veronika: Yeah. Also, they have this adverbial, "By the year 2010" and then they follow up with what we call an agentless passive. A passive construction, "It is estimated", and nobody does the estimating. Again, that is very much written language. On the whole, they use an awful lot of hypotaxis, as well. 

Erika: What is hypotaxis?

Veronika: Hypotaxis is, again, to do with how you construct sentences. It's a way of constructing sentences where you have a main clause and usually quite a few sub-clauses. We'll put that in the glossary if our listeners didn't catch that.

But it is what they do a lot. They say, "Today, 75% of singletons are actively dating, comma, spending so much a year..." They combine main and sub-clauses where perhaps, in spoken language, we would rather have one main clause after the other. 

Erika: Yeah. It's much harder to process, right? You don't get what the main information is. 

Veronika: You need to focus an awful lot more when you listen to that. 

Erika: Right. 

Veronika: Also, what we have... And I need to come in here with my metaphors, obviously. (Laughter) That special interest of mine. What they have is a very conventional metaphor. They say, "And so Tingatang was born to provide..." And then they go on with the sentence again. That's very conventional. I'm not quite sure what that metaphor is doing there, to be honest. 

Erika: Yes. Perhaps the confusion comes from the fact that they start this bit by saying, "And so". This is how you kind of lead into a story. But what is the story here? They give lots of numbers about singletons and adult population but where is the story about this product being born?

Veronika: Yeah. When you say, "And so", you expect that this is perhaps the last event and something led up to it. But what comes before is just numbers. So, they probably were advised... There is lots of advice online, "If you do an investor pitch, absolutely tell a story." They're clearly trying that but there actually isn't really a story. 

Erika: Yeah. (Laughter)

Veronika: I just wanted to remind our listeners that in episode 7, we looked in quite a bit of detail at storytelling for business. 

Erika: Right. Instead of maybe reading advice that's not scientifically grounded, maybe listeners can go to sources where there is a lot of science. Do you know one? This podcast itself, right?

Veronika: This podcast itself. That's true. So, we've looked at what makes this pitch sound like written language. Perhaps could we see how it could sound more like spoken language. How do you do this thing, writing for the ear?

Erika: Okay. Linguistics can help here if we understand how grammar works. But spoken grammar- 

Veronika: Yeah. Spoken grammar. What are some of the features, then, of spoken grammar?

Erika: Something that we call discourse markers. These are words and phrases that mark the boundaries for topics, new topics, openings, closings. Things like, "You know?" I've just used one. But things like, "Well, anyway, anyhow, right."

Veronika: Yeah. "Okay then". That sort of thing. Anything, one or two words, that signals to the listener that we're moving on to something else now. "There's another bit coming, now." That is very typical.

Currently, we're all teaching online, right? I routinely sit up and go through the captions, the auto-captioning, of my lectures. I seem to say, "Okay" and "So" just all the time. It's really embarrassing. But you know, it's spoken language and I put in a lot of these discourse markers, you know? I did it again! (Laughter)

Okay, another thing that people use that is typical of spoken grammar is colloquial expressions. Informal words or phrases. Instead of saying, "And so Tingatang was born" you could say something like, "Right, so that's why we had this idea to start Tingatang."

Erika: Great example. This also has something that's called deixis or a deictic expression. That's also typical of spoken grammar because, in spoken language, we use words that point to something in a situational context. Either physically, "here" or "that", or something that is known to all participants, in this case if you say, "We had this idea", the dragons listening and the viewers on TV would know that they're talking about their product. 

Veronika: But here it's clear that “this idea” is this idea for this product. What we've also done in reformulating the sentence is we've put in one of these discourse markers.

We said, "Right. So, that's why we had this idea..." We put in the, "We". We don't have this passive like something “is born” or “is estimated”. It's "we", the entrepreneurs, here. And we don't use this somewhat hackneyed metaphor of being born, we just said, "We had this idea to start Tingatang."

Perhaps it's time, now, for a myth-buster again. Especially perhaps to the teachers amongst our audience. Very often, in our culture, we have this idea that written grammar is the only proper or correct grammar. I'm afraid that's a bit of a myth. What we want is not the one and only correct grammar, what we want is a grammar that's appropriate in the context.

In spoken language, we have a spoken grammar. You have standalone sub-clauses. You have incomplete sentences etc. Where do you use it? It's about being flexible and adapting it to the context.

Going back to this inappropriate investor pitch, where they don't use the right kind of grammar, they use written grammar but they actually speak [it]. Let's go back again. They say, "And so Tingatang was born to provide a unique and distinctive symbol for single people." We could reformulate that and say, "And so we started Tingatang. Which means that single people can now have a special symbol."

Erika: Yeah. Much better. 

Veronika: Well, thank you! (Laughter) We've started the second sentence with "which", which is a subordinate conjunction. But it sounds, we think, completely natural in spoken language to do that. In fact, it sounds odd not to do it when you speak. 

Erika: Yeah. Still a bad idea, though, Veronika, the Tingatang. (Laughter) But this was a great exercise, I think. I hope the listeners enjoyed it as well, looking at the difference between written and spoken grammar. When we think about pitches, there is another way of looking at public speaking. That is rhetoric. Our first interview guest happens to know quite a bit about that. 

[Jingle 0:14:17 - 0:14:22] 

Erika: So, Dennis Davy works as associate professor at EDHEC Business School in France. I hope I pronounced it right. He is teaching a course called "Brand Yourself", on the executive MBA at Lille and Paris.

Research interests include business communication, innovation in language pedagogy, discourse analysis in professional contexts and, of course, entrepreneurial pitches. He has a very impressive list of publications. Because I know Dennis from academic conferences, I also know that he has a great passion of sharing how language matters in these pitches. Welcome!

Dennis: Thank you very much, Erika. It's lovely to be with you today. Thank you. 

Erika: Dennis, what made you interested in the genre of investor pitches?

Dennis: Well, when I started working at EDHEC Business School, there was already a course in operation to try to help students, budding entrepreneurs, to master the skill. It was very successful. It was running well. They were using Dragon's Den.

With my colleague Peter Daly, we realised that there was no actual research into Dragon's Den to have a look at what was special about entrepreneurial pitches which were shown on reality TV. And how this could help French people when they were going to make their pitches in English.

So, we decided to carry out some research studies into the entrepreneurial pitch, first from reality TV and then from the pitches that our own students made themselves. 

Veronika: When you looked at the Dragon's Den pitches, what did you find? Was there a typical structure or pattern that you could observe?

Dennis: There was. In our 2016 study, we analysed 16 successful pitches from Dragon's Den. We wanted to have a look at what was particular about this genre, this type of persuasive text type.

What was special about the organisational structure? Which features were salient? What were the component parts? Typical language functions? Vocabulary? Grammar? Who were the participants? How long it was? What was the medium? And so forth. 

Veronika: What were your headline findings for that?

Dennis: We found that there was basically a common structure to all of the pitches that we looked at. There was a kind of canonical structure.

We identified a 10-stage discourse model. Inside this discourse model, some of the stages seemed to be obligatory and some were optional. The ones that were obligatory were, obviously, identifying yourself and your product, announcing how much money you need, explaining your product, giving the history of your company or the founders and describing your plans for the future.

Optional ones seemed to be things like greeting the audience, presenting your target customers, recapitulating, thanking the audience and expressing willingness to answer questions. 

Veronika: Right. Okay. So, that's for the reality TV, right? That's for the Dragon's Den?

Dennis: That's right. Yeah. 

Veronika: Okay. 

Dennis: We also found that some of the stages could appear in different positions. For example, not everyone was up-front about how much money they required. Some people gave this towards the end of the pitch. Some gave it very early. We also had a look at typical language that was found in the different stages of the pitch as well.

Erika: We looked at a disastrous pitch earlier in the podcast, where we looked at language very closely and how it's a really bad idea to read out your written text. 

Dennis: A big problem. And I think lots of people go through a written phase or several drafts. But if they attempt to learn it by heart or to speak what is essentially written language, there are going to be some problems. 

Veronika: Yeah. We looked at one where they really read it out, basically. We talked a bit about the grammar of spoken language and how it differs from the grammar of written language. What did you observe in terms of good practice and bad practice with spoken or written language?

Dennis: We found that, again, according to the stage of the pitch, the language was typical of spoken language or typical of written language. When pitchers were presenting their life story, giving a narrative or telling anecdotes about how they set up the company, they were very much into spoken language with incomplete utterances, quite simple syntax, avoiding passives, avoiding complex compound nouns and compound adjectives.

But the parts where they described the product or where they described the money that they required, then they went into a more formal mode where the language was much more complex and much closer to written language. So, there was a real difference there. 

Veronika: We also mentioned rhetorical devices earlier on. Rhetorical features. Is there anything that you could observe there?

Dennis: Yes. When we looked at Dragon's Den, and also some Spanish colleagues that we have at the University of Alcalá as well, we had a look at how Aristotle's three rhetorical appeals—ethos, pathos and logos—could be applied to the analysis of pitches.

We found that successful pitches actually created credibility, ethos, by showing their technical expertise. They created emotion as well, by pathos, by good storytelling and using personal anecdotes. 

Veronika: And eliciting emotion, I suppose. Or seeking to elicit emotion. 

Dennis: Exactly. We never know what's going on inside the head of the investor but we can see this on the face, sometimes, of how much they got involved at certain points.

We also saw how they used convincing arguments—logos—when they provided relevant financial details to show that they knew what they were talking about. We also found other things like rhetorical questions, it- and wh-clefts. 

Veronika: So, typical rhetorical features, really. 

Dennis: Typical things like the rhythm of three, as well. Giving parallelism, as well. 

Erika: You mention your colleagues in Spain and you work with French students. You also look at English data. Do you see any cultural differences in pitching?

Dennis: It’s interesting because the English pitches produced by French entrepreneurs seem to have the same stages that we found in the native speaker pitches on Dragon's Den. But the language that they used wasn't quite as formulaic or natural, for obvious reasons, as the language a native speaker would use.

We also had a group of French entrepreneurs who were preparing to go to the US to present to American investors. We felt that they would have to make changes in the way they presented things. They were a little bit too humble as well. We felt that there was a cultural difference. That they would have to sell themselves more in an American context than they would pitching here in France. 

Veronika:A bit more of a hard sell, really. Yes. 

Dennis: Absolutely. And that was important. 

Veronika: Right. Interesting. 

Erika: It's interesting, this genre knowledge and the students or entrepreneurs' understanding of how a pitch is made up of different moves and different functions. That understanding differs from culture to culture but entrepreneurs need to be mindful of the audience they are talking to because they might expect different functions. 

Dennis: Absolutely. I think there are certain things... The compulsory, obligatory moves that I mentioned have to appear in a pitch in whatever language or whatever culture it is. But I think some of the other things, the opening and the closing, the way... Many of the Dragon's Den pitchers didn't say, "Good morning" or "Hello" or anything. Whereas, in some cultures, that would be essential. 

Veronika: Indeed. And then to perhaps have a bit of what we call phatic communication, even, depending on the culture. A bit of establishing rapport before you go into the sell. 

Dennis: Absolutely. It's difficult to know with reality television. Perhaps that was there at the beginning and it got edited out. We can never be quite sure. But we know how important those introductions and closings are.

The one thing we found with French speakers is that, again, the first impression is very important. Sometimes they would drop the, "H". Instead of saying, "hello" or "hi", they would say, "'ello" or "'i". Which, of course, is the archetypal French accent. So, it could make the pitchers- it might actually damage the credibility from the very beginning. 

Veronika: Yeah, it depends. Again, it depends who you're talking to. Depending on who you are, you might find this annoying or charming. 

Dennis: Absolutely! (Laughter)

Veronika: Which brings me to another point... You didn't just observe what would-be entrepreneurs do in their pitches, be they on reality television or in real life. You also looked a bit at how pitches are perceived by investors. What exactly did you look at there, Dennis? 

Dennis: It's extremely difficult to get inside the mind of the catcher, of the venture capitalist or business angel. What we did was, in our study of French people pitching in English, we recorded the pitches. Then we played them to different kinds of judges, some of whom were language teachers. Native speakers of English. Native speakers of French. And some of whom were professional business people who didn't speak any French.

We got them to identify the errors that they heard or noticed and then to grade the relative importance or gravity of the errors. It was very interesting to see that native-speaker business people react in a very different way as compared to teachers. 

Veronika: Are they more or less forgiving of mistakes?

Dennis: They're much more forgiving about nuts-and-bolts mistakes of grammar and pronunciation. But they're not forgiving at all when they can't understand something. When someone says the name of a company or a website or a person very quickly, or if they mumble something. They were very upset about this. In fact, quite irritated.

Also, they were very concerned about errors with numbers, for obvious reasons. When someone said, "206" when they meant, "2006", the year. Or when they mistook... So, certain things were important.

But everybody, surprisingly, was much more irritated by fillers, hedges, "ums” and "ahs” than we imagined. Yes! I know lots of research says that doesn't matter too much. Of course, native speakers do it all the time. But they did find this was quite frustrating, to listen to too many of those. 

Erika: That's an excellent learning point. If you had to give one piece of advice to budding entrepreneurs who are preparing for their first pitch, what would you say to them? 

Dennis: I would say be prepared. Make sure that you practice, you structure your pitch carefully, you practice it, you clearly enunciate the names of products, you rehearse the content and the form. And that you walk the tightrope between spontaneity and formality.

To be perfect... If it's not your mother tongue, that's not realistic. But try to be comfortably intelligible. 

Erika: That's brilliant advice. 

Dennis: I know there's more than one point in there but it's all linked to, "be prepared."

Veronika: Yeah. They're all important, really. Yes. 

Erika: Thank you so much for being here, Dennis. It was a fascinating interview and I'm sure our listeners have learned a lot about the best pitch. 

Dennis: I'm going to say one more thing. We probably won't have time. But there has been research into Dragon's Den versions in English and Spanish. But there are lots of other versions in Portuguese, in Arabic, in Russian.

If any of your listeners might be interested in having a look at Dragon's Den or the equivalent in their home country, that would be an interesting research project. 

Veronika: So, there's still lots of scope for research. Okay. 

Dennis: Absolutely. 

Veronika: I hope our audience takes note. 

Dennis: Thank you. 

Erika: Yes. And they can get in touch with you through our website because we will post your short bio there, as we always do with all our guests. Thank you so much, Dennis, for being here. 

Dennis: You're very welcome. Thank you. It was a pleasure to take part. 

Veronika: Thanks a lot. 

[Jingle 0:26:41 - 0:26:46] 

Veronika: Good. So, we've heard from Dennis Davy about what entrepreneurs do, or should do, perhaps, in their pitches. Also about investor perception, especially of mistakes, fillers, that sort of thing. Let's focus on that second aspect, now. What do investors make of the pitches they hear?

Erika: We're very glad to have here with us Alex Toft, who is the head of Minerva Business Angels, which is a forum for private investors to invest in emerging technology businesses.

Alex has a wide range of experience in commercial and board positions in various sectors. He's been the principal inventor of 10 patents. He works with companies, now, as part of the Minerva Business Angels group, of which he is going to talk a bit more later. Welcome, Alex. 

Alex: Hi. 

Veronika: Hello. Our first question is... Your company, Minerva Business Angels. How does your company get entrepreneurs and investors together? What's the process?

Alex: Okay. Well, Minerva Business Angels is actually part of the University of Warwick's science park. We originally started to find money for our tenants. Then we formed our first Minerva investment group. We now have ten throughout the country before Covid, but now we're obviously virtual.

In terms of getting investors, we traditionally depend on word of mouth. But what we noticed and what we found is [that] one of the challenges we have is also the cultural element associated with investors.

If we look at the South East, we know that the South East... There's a greater culture. For example, if we look at some statistics such as those published by HMRC [the English tax authority] in terms of investment made in early-stage growth companies, we know that of the £2.1 billion, less than 2% in the East Midlands and less than 2.5% in the West Midlands go into these early start-ups.

One of the things we have to do is to work extra hard in getting people to think about investing in these early companies as a possibility for their portfolio. Not only their portfolio, but also to spend time and energy to help these companies to grow. 

Veronika: Right. Those are very stark figures, really. But in the process of helping them, what do entrepreneurs have to do? When they say, "Oh, I'm listening to this podcast episode. There is Minerva Business Angels. Maybe they can help me getting my business off the ground." What will they have to do?

Alex: Well, in terms of the simple process, it's obviously [to] apply. We have a portal to apply. But more importantly, they have to look at what stage they are and where they are in the development.

One of the major challenges for early start-ups is have they validated their proposition? That means have they proven there is a need? So, an idea is no longer good enough. You have to find some mechanism for validating it.

Of course, the easiest way to validate it is to have sales. Sales is a prime example. What you find is that companies with a turnover of less than half a million do struggle to raise. The reason for that is because they're in the high-risk sector and they haven't got any validation that their proposition is really required.

That's where we kind of come in because we come in and say, "Well, we know this sector. We know these people. We can find out about this team. Can we add any value? Can we help build this company through our expertise?" That's what our investors do. That's what they look at.

When you're coming to look for finance, first of all you've got to look at what you're trying to do. Look at the market. Make sure you understand the market. Make sure you understand the competition. And make sure that you can prove that there is an actual need for what you propose. Because, as Mark Twain said, "There's no such thing as something new."

Veronika: Yeah. I guess at this point there really isn't! But what they have to do is apply to you, obviously. They have to persuade you and your colleagues. But then in a second step, if they're successful, they also have to persuade the investors with the actual pitch.

For that, you advise them on your website. Once they have successfully applied, you say, "In your pitch, you should assume that you're speaking to an intelligent 16-year-old. It should be simple."

Alex: Yeah. 

Veronika: What is simplicity for you? Is it the topic or is it technical terms? Is it the complexity of the language? What makes it simple?

Alex: Well, the way to address "simple" is basically... If somebody who isn't from the sector you're in or from the area you're trying to cover, or doesn't  understand your explanation who is not from that sector, then that's what simplicity is.

Some say, "Could your mother understand what you're doing? Could your grandparents understand what you're doing?" Simplicity is... don't assume naturally that people will understand it like you understand it. Because, basically, you're immersed in it. You're immersed in the technology. You're immersed in the opportunity.

Now, invariably, people do. But basically, you have a very short time to impress people. The message has to be simple, straight, punchy and direct. Simplicity is basically can you get somebody who isn't from your area, has never come across the area, can you explain it to them? Because if you can explain it to them, then you understand it well. You've thought about it well and your able to explain it in its simplest terms.

Of course, over time people get into depth with it and, of course, people do understand it. But people forget that, when you have a limited exposure to people who make a rapid decision, it has to be very punchy, very simple, very straightforward. The other terminology... Keep it simple. Keep it stupid. (Laughter)

Erika: Okay. You said that entrepreneurs have a very short period of time to impress you and then the potential investors, right? Is there anything that, when you or the investors hear it in a pitch, you decide not to go ahead? What's the biggest issue that you can pick up?

Alex: Firstly, if they don't know their numbers. They don't know their own numbers. If they come up with a hockey stick. They're quizzed on the numbers. "How have you got that?" They don't know how they've got there. They've made them up. They've guessed.

The next one is competition. They don't understand the competition. I mean, everybody has a product that nobody else has thought of or it's the best thing since sliced bread, but that's never true. So, probing them about the competition, you quickly ascertain how much they understand the market.

Invariably, when they're dealing with a gatekeeper—which is what I am—we see a lot of, potentially, what they have done before. So, we know. And it's easy to check. You can go on all sorts of different databases to check the information that people tell you. In terms of the easy trip-ups, it's lack of knowledge of the numbers, lack of knowledge of the competition. It's all indicative of lack of knowledge of the market itself.

Then, thirdly, the lack of a team. Now, you don't have to form a board when you start up a thing. But doing it by yourself is going to be very, very difficult. Because you need a team around yourself to succeed.

Then lastly, the other thing that people don't realise, and sadly it's true... We watch out for lifestyle businesses. If it's a lifestyle, you're never going to exit. You just want the money because you want a nice lifestyle. So, if you've got a couple who are doing a business, if you've got a family doing a business, that can create its own challenges.

Although there are some very successful businesses out there which are families, one thing they haven't done is they've never exited. Because the other thing you have to think about [is that] your investors want a return. Because they want their money back so they can invest in other business. 

Veronika: Yeah. So, have a team but perhaps not your immediate family. Is there anything that people say or a particular way that they speak that either goes down very well or very poorly with investors?

Alex: First of all, you have to be enthusiastic. You have to be passionate. You have to be convinced. You've got to convey that very, very well. That's a big tick in the box. If you are dull, boring, even if you're shy—which happens, unfortunately—then get somebody else to speak for you.

This is really a people's business. Although I've spoken about what you must know, the reason it is [that] it's a people's business. There is very little due diligence you can do on these early companies. So, it's all the feel and the confidence in the person.

If you cannot convey that confidence, if you cannot listen or if you're too arrogant, then those will be killers in terms of your ability. And it does happen. People can sometimes just be too aggressive.

We don't follow the American model where you've got to walk in a room and tell them you're going to conquer the world. But you do have to be confident and you do have to be able to impress your audience. 

Veronika: I think that's actually a good piece of advice, perhaps, to finish on. Be prepared, know your numbers, know the market, know the competition, have a team. Don't be arrogant but do be confident and enthusiastic. Can we wrap it up like that, do you think?

Erika: I think that's excellent advice. Thank you, Alex. 

Veronika: Thank you so much. Thank you. 

Alex: Thank you. 

[Jingle 0:35:58 - 0:36:05] 

Erika: Finding sources of finance for new ventures can happen in ways other than pitching. 

Veronika: And you know what? You just made the same mistake we pointed out earlier. You're speaking and you've started your spoken sentence with a gerund. (Laughter) "Finding sources". 

Erika: I did!

Veronika: Yes, you did! Go again. 

Erika: Okay. Let me re-start. Would-be entrepreneurs have other ways of finding money. For instance, through crowdfunding. 

Veronika: Oh yes. But crowdfunding, Erika, is that things like Kickstarter or Patreon?

Erika: Yeah. 

Veronika: Okay. 

Erika: These are very hard arenas to navigate because entrepreneurs need to have a persuasive text, they need to have a video and they also need to engage in an ongoing way through social media with their existing and prospective supporters. It's a very complex communicative arena.

You won't be surprised to learn that there are many people who try to understand how to make this a success. From a language point of view, there exist studies where they look at the correlation between success and language.

Sometimes those studies use methodologies like sentiment analysis, where they collate all the words from a crowdfunding pitch and then show which words occur in higher numbers in successful pitches and which words occur in lower numbers. Or higher numbers in unsuccessful pitches. 

Veronika:But again, it's the same thing we say all the time. You have to look at that in context, really. There aren't just ten words that you use and then you'll get funded. It just doesn't work like that, right?

It's who you are talking to, if it's spoken language, what does your voice actually sound like, do you use, for instance, the social medium appropriately? There is a lot more to consider than, "Get these words in and you're fine."

Erika, you've actually done some work on crowdfunding and the language of it, haven't you?

Erika: Yes. I work with a colleague who is a professor in alternative finance. We wanted to understand what makes a crowdfunding pitch persuasive. One of the texts we looked at was a social crowdfunding campaign.

We were very interested to see differences in commercial and social crowdfunding campaigns. The example I brought today is from a campaign called, "Let's clean up Canada." Our approach to this text was different to the one that I explained earlier about sentiment analysis and counting words. We wanted to understand the building blocks in that text.

We did a kind of genre analysis. We looked at moves and how those moves achieve a certain communicative function. 

Veronika: Okay. We'll make sure, of course, that you get the transcript that we have put on the blog. We also put a link in the blog and a transcript of the video that Erika and her colleague looked at and where they identified rhetorical moves.

So, what are people doing in this video that they had on their campaign website? What are that doing in what order? And how do they use language?

Erika: Do you want to just have a go at this? I can read out short sections from the... This is a transcript from the video, actually. It's not even the written text. So, let's see if you can identify what they are trying to do in this text. 

Veronika: Okay, let's have a look then. 

Erika: The first bit sounds like this: "For the past year, our team has delivered high quality, independent, ad-free journalism to hundreds of thousands of Canadians month to month."

Veronika: That's how they start. Well, they introduce themselves and they introduce themselves in a positive way. The good things that they're doing and the impact that they have. It's about, "Who are we and what are our credentials?" 

Erika: Exactly. We also saw this across all sorts of campaigns. This move of establishing credentials is a reoccurring feature in many videos. 

Veronika: And they do it through evaluation. So, "High quality, independent, ad-free". Three positive markers. Then they say, "Hundreds of thousands of Canadians", which is a vague number but a very big number. 

Erika: Right. Now, how about this one? "Our job is to go beyond the headlines and tell the stories that really matter to Canadians."

Veronika: Well, that's what they do. That's their raison d'être. That's their purpose. 

Erika: Right. And not just that, they also established their key audience. 

Veronika: Yeah. Canadians. They've done that before with their credentials. They said "hundreds of thousands of Canadians", but now they mention it again. It's again about this particular country and the people in it.

They say explicitly what their job is. And they say that they tell the stories that really matter to Canadians. So, they make an assumption here that they know what matters to Canadians. 

Erika: Right. "There are, importantly, organisations like us pushing back to promote rational dialogue and informed discussions about Canada's future."

Veronika: Canada, again. They really, really emphasise that. 

Erika: Yeah. 

Veronika: So, wait a minute... "There are important organisations like us pushing back to promote rational dialogue." That's comparing themselves to other similar organisations. It's an environmental campaign, isn't it? So, they say, "We're not the only ones", really. Perhaps they then go on to say what's special about them, maybe?

Erika: Yes. Or in business terms, you can call this the USP. Their unique selling point. 

Veronika: It's not there yet, right? They just acknowledge here that there are others but then, I guess, they follow it up with, "What makes us special. What makes us unique."

Erika: Right. Then they go: "Oil companies have millions of dollars to spend on advertising but we are relying on you to help us tell these important stories. We are here today to ask you to help us continue."

Veronika: That's interesting in terms of social actors. I mean, in terms of the move, it's about the purpose and also asking somebody to do something. A sort of call for action, if you will.

In terms of social actors, there's three social actors, here. There's "we", the campaigners. Then there's "you", the potential investors. They are directly related. "We are here to ask you to help us..." In the grammar, you have a relationship between "we" and "you". Then you have the third party. Or not party but another social actor, like, "oil companies".

They contrast themselves with oil companies. They say, "They are the big people. They have lots of dollars." And then they have "but": "but we..." So, "we" is set in contrast to big business, really. 

Erika: Yes. That's great. Well spotted. It's a call for action. It's an interesting distinction between the various people.

You know, what's interesting is that this call for action... Oftentimes, pitchers forget about this. They talk about their products, they explain why it's good, they identify the unique selling points, they provide their credentials and then they stop and don't say why they're there. What do they really want?

Veronika: Yeah. So, "This is it but now what do you want me to do?", from the point of view of an investor. That's interesting that they do it all in that video. As I said, we'll put the link to that on our blog post. 

Erika: Perhaps this little reminder is useful for anyone who is thinking about creating a crowdfunding pitch. To remember to put in that call for action. Is there anything else we can sum up as key learning points from the podcast?

Veronika: Well, I think the big point was, if you write speeches or indeed prepare a pitch, remember the difference between written and spoken language. You want to write it down. You want to craft it. But you want to write for the ear. It needs to sound like spoken language when the speech is delivered or the pitch is given. 

Erika: On that note, maybe it's a useful reminder for teachers or grammar pedants among us that there is not only one correct grammar. There are different grammars with different rules. 

Veronika: Yeah, that apply in different contexts. Indeed. As ever, be wary of following, "10 tips" or "The 10 words that every successful entrepreneur needs to put in their pitch" etc. If it sounds too good to be true, it usually is. Because there really is no magic bullet, unfortunately. Language and language use it a bit more complex than that. 

Erika: Right. Well, thank you for listening and we will be back soon with our next episode. 

Veronika: All three of us. Okay. Until then, bye-bye. 

Erika: Bye. 

[Jingle 0:44:08 - 0:44:41] 

[Silence 0:44:41 - 0:45:15]

END OF AUDIO

www.transcriptioncentre.co.uk