The Portnoy-Shane Smith effect

I answered some of your questions.

Good morning

Some Q+A

1. A few weeks ago, you wrote about founders and their direct involvement in the brands they build. With a company like Barstool Sports or VICE, the brand identity cannot really exist without the direct involvement of a Dave Portnoy or a Shane Smith. Their persona and lifestyle is the cornerstone. However, the…let’s call it “edginess”…of founders like Portnoy or Smith, which is so integral to the brand, can simultaneously hamper the brand’s success  — it’s sort of an open secret that some states are reticent to grant a gambling license for Barstool’s sportsbook because of Portnoy’s perceived involvement. Do you see any way for companies like this to thread the needle? I roll this question around in my head daily. It’s so tempting to use a founder and their personality/personal internet output as ammo for pushing the brand forward. And it often works! I’d say in cases like Barstool… it works. There are so many people who would drop to their knees at the church of Portnoy. Look at the blind defense he got from strangers after his Insider expose! I think the reason a media company like Barstool is successful is because of Portnoy’s outward facing personality, not in spite of it. I am not shy to admit that I thought this was the blueprint — I came up in a work world where Emily Weiss was the face of Glossier, Ty Haney was the face of Outdoor Voices, Audrey Gelman was the face of The Wing. It brought all of their brands down to earth and made them seem more accessible at best. They made me think I could do it too, at worst. I don’t think people warn these public-facing founders enough about how when your personal life goes through some kind of struggle, your business undoubtedly will as well… and the boardroom and VC office isn’t going to call the magazine’s slamming your business with photos of your face to defend you. And I’m not saying having a recognizable face is a bad thing… look at Steve Jobs, look at Miuccia Prada. But when you start sharing who you’re friends with and what your house in Martha’s Vineyard looks like and your controversial political views and where you’re eating breakfast and long Instagram captions about breastfeeding and photos outside the windows of $1200/night hotels and house hunting and fundraising and hiring and firing and every thing happening at your company…. it gives customers more of an opportunity to make purchase decisions based on you rather than if your product is good or not. So to answer your question yes, there is a way to thread the needle, and that’s with vigilance. I’m begging people to start companies that solve problems, and not as an ego play because ultimately if the business fails, founders are fine and all of their employees get fucked. I think Portnoy and Smith both believe they’re doing that, and Vice and Barstool have been successful, culture-altering companies. But there is also a ton of risk involved in how they run their companies… and we know Portnoy likes gambling. Maybe I’ll expand on this later this week in a longer essay.