5 Questions with Ninja Metrics CEO Dmitri Williams -- My Exclusive Q&A

I met data analytics startup Ninja Metrics in February at the inaugural Digital Entertainment World (DEW) conference in LA -- where I served as a judge for the start-up pitch-fest -- a pitch-fest that Ninja Metrics won.  That alone is impressive.  So is the the team of PhD’s -- assembled and led by fellow PhD CEO Dmitri Williams -- whose mission is to optimize overall marketing dollars in social games and apps by targeting the “influencers” (whom Dmitri calls the “social whales”).   They have spent 10 years developing deep technology to do it -- and take a unique approach.

In a sea of ad-tech data-focused companies, and with its deep proprietary technology platform, Ninja Metrics is worth watching.  That’s why we at Manatt Digital Media recently invested (by the way check out our portfolio of investments).

Here’s more about the company in Dmitri’s own words:

(1)  What is the reason your company exists?

We exist to help businesses with Social Value. That’s the amount that someone is worth not based on their spending, but in the spending they generate among their friends. It’s influence, fully provable.

We spot the whales in any industry, but because we have the ability to follow actions through networks, we can also spot the Social Whales. These are customers who may or may not spend, but are responsible for up to 40% of most companies’ revenues. This is the product of 10 years of scientific research, and we’re in business to get it into everyone’s hands—from the tiny startup to the Fortune 50 company. This tech can help in any sector where people influence each other—gaming, ecommerce, video, music, investment, and on and on.

(2)  How are you different from your competitors? 

One the first things you learn in social science is that talk is not as important as action—and every other approach to finding those mythical influencers has been based on people talking. People who talk a lot, are listened to, and those who talk about certain things—those are all proxies for who’s important, but they are ultimately just guesses. They don’t yield any proof of actual actions like spending. We offer direct, testable, transparent evidence of who is influential. Rather than being in an abstract score, our results are in actions like dollars spent, shows viewed, time spent, etc. Our team, myself included, comes out of academic research. Everything we do is based on scientific methods and proof. As a result, we really don’t care what you say—we care what you do.

(3)  Why will you succeed (and what is your single most important ingredient for success)?

If I say a customer is worth $24 this year, and another $36 in the Social Value they generate across their network of friends, you don’t have to trust me. Our scores are verifiable because we constantly show what we estimated vs. what then actually happened. We get it right 80-90% of the time, and we always show that % as a confidence number. That builds trust, so companies can rely on the scores, budget based on them, and get constant affirmation.

Another way of answering this is the old joke “50% of advertising works, but no one knows which 50%.” We do. Our science will tell you it was that 50%, on those 6 people, which generated $54, and then another $78 across their friends. And by the way, here’s your actual ROI.

(4)  What makes you unique? (And what do you enjoy most outside of building your business?)

We’re a flat-out weird group. First, we come out of university labs and we’re not 22 years old. We’re a bunch of PhDs and engineers, but what makes us really unique is that we understand the value of both social and computer science. Social scientists are excellent at asking the right questions, but aren’t aces with Big Data. Computer scientists are those aces, but don’t have a clue why their results matter, or what to build. That kind of left-brain/right-brain division is the reason why most companies don’t create tech that both works well and addresses a real business problem. Bringing those two halves together is really hard, too. We decided a decade ago to force our teams to have each component. The result is a tough process, but one that yields superior IP that’s not just stable, but also truly useful.

But hey, if you meant me, the answer is that I happen to love understanding people, and the most entertaining place to do that is within groups and competitions. So, it’s no surprise that I’m a die-hard video game player, as well as a true degenerate poker player. So when I come to work and am tackling big data applications around people and groups, I’m a kid in a candy store. Also, I like pina coladas and getting caught in the rain.

(5)  What digital media trend is most interesting to you (and what is the least)? 

The most interesting is the boom in DIY tools like 3D printing. Unleashing the creativity that’s out there outside of labs and big businesses is really exciting. Harnessing that while lowering costs is a clear recipe for innovation.

Possibly the least interesting is the hype around wearable tech and VR. Nothing is more important to people than other people. In the end, we’re social monkeys. So when I see VR headsets or cool watches, all I really care about is whether that tech is going to make people better able to communicate, share, interact and grow. Tech for tech’s sake never lasts, never diffuses. Take something as cool as Oculus. Whether that’s an awesome product will come down to whether people use it to have better experiences with other people. I’m keen to see whether developers grok that part of the human condition, or just think that better graphics and immersion are good enough. Let’s see if Facebook can leverage the overlap between the tech and the human element.