Well, he can embrace and mentor new partners now. That's important, too.
Latch's Lee Odess No Longer Runs Sales And Marketing
3 months ago, Latch announced Lee Odess would take over sales and marketing as part of their layoff of 130 people. Now, quietly, Odess is out of that position as Latch's troubles intensify with more layoffs and an audit committee investigation.
In this note, IPVM examines internal challenges at Latch, most specifically with sales.
On May 20, 2022, Latch announced that:
the Company is announcing the reorganization of the sales and marketing departments under the leadership of Lee Odess
However, at that time, we observed that Odess was a poor fit for this role, saying:
While Latch needs execution (specifically immediate revenue growth), Odess' strengths and focus, as he regularly describes, are in storytelling and networking
We first noticed that Odess changed his position on LinkedIn on August 15th, adding a new role that excluded running sales and marketing, copied below:
No response from Latch corporate nor Odess was provided to IPVM's questions on these moves.
Moreover, Latch did not confirm who is now running sales and marketing at the publicly traded company. This is especially odd since this is commonly material information that must be disclosed to investors.
Latch's stock is down ~90% over the last year:
On the relatively positive side, over the past month, Latch's stock price has been roughly flat:
However, the company's market capitalization (~$170 million) is far less than the cash Latch had in the bank reported in its last quarterly report ($300+ million). Note: its Q2 report was not released because of the ongoing audit committee investigation.
Odess Public Focus History of Access Control
Odess has been publicly busy promoting "The Documented History of Electronic Access Control", a project that aims to "write a book, create a documentary of the process and interviews, and create a public website".
While that has value, it is not highly relevant to what Latch is trying to accomplish which is to change the future of access control or, at least at this point, to not condemn itself to the history books.
Sales Crucial To Latch
While layoffs have been the main news from Latch in the past few months, layoffs alone cannot save Latch. The problem is the gap between its actual real software / recurring revenue and its operational expenses is enormous (we analyzed this in the Research report Latch's Broken Business Model Analyzed). While cutting over 50% of employees helps reduce the gap, the gap is still quite sizeable.
Unless Latch can significantly grow revenue far more than they have been projecting, Latch is likely to need to lay off even more employees, which could foster a vicious cycle for the embattled company.
For Latch's sake, they truly need a strong sales and marketing leader to help right the ship and reduce the company's heavy burn rate.
You could see this coming from a mile away. Lee is a marketing guy. He should stay in his lane and focus on his strengths of storytelling.
Good move by latch.
This brings up John’s old argument about a person marketing the company or themselves. That discussion created a lot of debate and name calling.
Yes, in general, I think there is a big difference between people marketing their companies and themselves.
One can be great at marketing one's companies / employers but not at personal branding and vice versa. I think Lee has clearly shown to be in the latter camp.
I think this is more prevalent with the rise of social media over the last decade or so. Of course there are examples of people and companies like Bill Gates and Microsoft from before social media, or one of the earliest examples in Henry Ford. But generally, outside of the entertainment business and politics, building someone's personal brand is a relatively new thing.
With that being said - maybe Lee can be one of the security industry's first influencers. Maybe he can get paid to put pictures of Axis cameras on his instagram. Or he can do a TikTok video for HID. It works for the Kardashians.
John, what do you think of this: How to communicate why your startup is worth joining | Wasp
In particular the section FOUNDERS — or, the founders are interesting / fun / smart / human / you name it
If they just pinned this list of virtues to their Jobs page, you would never believe them. Instead, Sarah and Andrew show what actions they take, how they work, how they think, how they live — and you make up their own mind about what kind of people Sarah and Andrew are from seeing all that. The difference is enormous.
This might be more of a thing with founders in small startups where the individual and company are much more tied together - as the founder goes so goes the company.
Since I don't know this company, I can't reasonably guess whether it's good or bad.
I do think the principle is whether your personal branding advances one's company.
This was, e.g., a core part of my argument about why Odess failed in podcasting - "Podcasts Saying Literally Nothing For 20 Minutes" Applies Perfectly To Our Industry. You can get to know people but eventually, you need to provide some value that people want to pay for.
Related, new Debate: "It's Not What You Know. It's Who You Know"
Perhaps Elon Musk would be an example. Which is more widely known? Elon with over a million Twitter followers, or:
Tesla
Space-X
Starlink
The Boring Company
Neuralink
in fairness, Elon Musk has over 100 million Twitter followers :)
Also, he has executed, Tesla is a huge success (valuation, etc might be debated but the company has disrupted automobiles).
Would Elon Musk be famous without his companies being successful? That's the point I am trying to make. Or does Elon Musk being famous make Tesla famous? Or did Tesla's success + Elon Musk's wild comments make him personally famous?
Well, he was successful before being famous, Zip2 & PayPal. More notorious when Tesla started with a public divorce threatening Tesla.
From CNN, Americas most trusted news source:
In Musk’s own divorce filing, he acknowledged: “About four months ago, I ran out of cash.”
the real, burning question is: What happened to Group 337?
Lee says that his The Inside - Group 337 was a 'consulting company' that he sold to Latch (when he came on board).
here he is a month ago on some other boring guys podcast talking about it:
from the link I shared above: Lee mentions Lockerbie at the 5:35ish mark
then the podcast host tells Lee that he doesn't know what Lockerbie is/was (6:45 mark)
so then Lee proceeds to completely misstate what happened over Lockerbie.
Lee: "Yeah, tt's well documented...it's sort of a 'hostage take' - and with an airplane crash, and like, around, sort of the security and that side - um, but pretty well documented"
what a clown show Lee is.
Pan Am flight 103 was blown out of the sky by Libyan Nationals who planted the bomb in a suitcase in the hold of the aircraft.
this event changed how passengers are tied to their luggage but has almost nothing to do with Access Control.
HA! A blast from the past...
PPBM - Positive Passenger Baggage Matching. Back in '91 was a member of the Indala Corporation team that conducted a PPBM proof-of-concept on behalf of American Airlines at both DFW and SJC airports. The POC utilized RFID to identify both passengers and baggage. While perhaps not the most cost effective approach, the live test certainly did function as intended.
Note Indala Corporation was founded and later sold to Motorola by Ted Geiszler, a true security and RFID technology visionary. Scott Goldfine at Security Sales and Integration did a nice article on Ted, which can be found here: www.securitysales.com/access/ted-geiszler/.
Ok, I have been a customer of IPVM for a long time and have enjoyed many of the things that have been posted, shared, as well as the reports and tests that are second to none. I am grateful for these items. However, this continuous thread regarding Lee Odess is pure assault of character of a qualified, respected, and competent professional. The commentary and misrepresentations of him, his involvement in Latch, tying him to the financial results of Latch prior to having any potential impact on them, and blaming him for the financial results even after assuming a revenue role in the publicly traded company is unfair, unprofessional, and gross. Any person who has ever worked for a publicly traded company clearly understands this and executives in publicly traded companies understand it even more viscerally. Strategies and financial results take years to implement and even longer to realize the impacts of these decisions. Attributing Lee's involvement with the realities that Latch finds itself in is a gross and incorrect assessment prior to him joining and even since joining.
While other professionals have been attacked on IPVM prior, none have been vilified to this extent.
I know Lee personally as do thousands of other professionals in this industry. Thousands of us have been silent while this vilification has continued. I cannot remain silent on this.
If IPVM would do this to a person like Lee, they would do it to anyone. Remember that and read that sentence again. If the members of IPVM wish to continue to berate and blame professionals who work in our industry without the comprehensive insights of how actual executives and publicly traded companies work, I for one will not choose to be a part of this community.
Please rise above this and stop the assault.
I think there is a group in this industry that want the truth and can handle it. There is a another group that thinks the world is full of bubble gum and unicorns. Some people need thicker skin.
blaming him for the financial results
c'mon, man...
the only representation of such a thing that I remember from the 'continuous thread regarding Lee Odess' was a meme showing the Latch stock price when he started compared to what it was the day the meme was posted like ~7 months later.
which was clearly in jest. a joke. and not posted by John.
I haven't gone back to check, but I remember quite a few clarifiers from John himself that Lee's hiring was not related in any way to the stock price nosedive.
and in my recollection, the very first post in the Lee Odess saga here on IPVM was initiated by Lee himself who felt the need to attack John directly, purportedly in the defense of Janet.
Lee self-describes as an industry thought leader and Latch chose to hire Lee and buy his consulting company at a critical time in it's existence which is why (imo) IPVM reports on that thing.
If IPVM would do this to a person like Lee, they would do it to anyone. Remember that and read that sentence again.
Thanks for the feedback. Can you clarify what the concern is?
Here are the 2 posts in question:
Latch Lays Off 130, Promotes Lee Odess
Latch's Lee Odess No Longer Runs Sales And Marketing
They are literally factual statements.
tying him to the financial results of Latch prior to having any potential impact on them, and blaming him for the financial results even after assuming a revenue role in the publicly traded company is unfair, unprofessional, and gross
Read the 2 articles please and show me how you come to that conclusion. Article 1's thesis was that Odess was a bad fit for what Latch needed to turn things around in May 2022. Article 2 is a factual description of what has happened now.
Latch is a publicly traded company. Odess is an executive at a publicly traded company. I am a public figure. People may criticize such people including myself. I may agree or disagree but I respect the right for people to voice their opinions.
Related to that, last night Odess posted a thread about me saying that I was cyberbullying him and engaging in personal attacks:
Not surprisingly, Odess gives no concrete examples or links, or context outside of the allegation.
No response from Odess though I have followed up to see if he will respond and provide any clarification or examples.
Latch is a publicly traded company. Odess is an executive at a publicly traded company.
I would add that comments and replies to nearly any posts on LinkedIn, like Facebook, have become nearly meaningless and devoid of any critical thinking.
Virtual hugging, consoling, supporting, and complimenting rule the day.
Rarely will a connection or friend be candid enough to tell you online to "grow a pair," or post a contrary reply on a topic.
Hell, even here, look at how many of us post "undisclosed" which, in a way, is related to the same subject--fear that being candid might cost us business to someone reading our replies, or one who has become effective at "marketing" their "plight" and/or do-goodery online.
Hell, even here, look at how many of us post "undisclosed" which, in a way, is related to the same subject--fear that being candid might cost us business to someone reading our replies, ...
the ability to post Undisclosed (not anonymous to IPVM staff) has been discussed a myriad of times before - and even though the underlined part of your comment is correct - in actuality, the ability for all members to post Undisclosed gives anyone making a statement of any kind, the best, unfiltered, responses to those statements.
where else is anyone in our industry challenged to back up their statements?
LinkedIn is a hugfest and Lee (who I am positive is a very nice person) has marketing skills and appears to use virtue signals to continue to try and build his own personal brand.
my primary problem with Lee is that he immediately plays the victim card when challenged on any of his statements.
I mean there was an article in the Washington Post about how he has such a great and cool house....while 25%+ of the company was being laid off at the same time...
I'm sure the IPVM coverage isn't fun but this isn't the most sensitive thing to do either.
The journey to convert a vintage carriage house into a modern classic - The Washington Post
I don't know Lee personally but he seems like a nice guy trying to improve the security field and help others out along the way. I can certainly see why being mentioned on IPVM for this subject would not be a positive experience for him and seems like an attack. If I was Lee or one of his friends, would I be happy with IPVM right now? Of course not.
However, I disagree that John has been personally attacking him in the articles, unless you view the articles themselves as an attack?
A nice guy who also has apparently blocked me on LinkedIn. Interesting........
No idea, I only noticed when I clicked on your Odess posted a thread about me link and that brought me to the "something went wrong" image below, then when I searched for him nothing came up. Logged out and could find him with no problem, logged back in as me, and no dice.
Pretty sure we were connected or I at least followed him at some point.
Btw, a variety of people both inside and outside of IPVM have reached out to me telling me that Odess blocked them without them saying anything to Odess. Normally, that's surprising but here not so.
I don't know Lee either and had never even heard of him before he and Janet told John to stay in his lane in their public video.
Lee entered the lions den of his own accord - he went to battle (for Janet) and now that he has received some pushback, he is the victim? puh-lease.
"I've decided that every time he or one of his employees attacks me publicly with an 'analyst report' I will donate to a security charity"
get over yourself already.
Today Latch became a penny stock hitting a new all-time low.
New report on Monday.
Stock has declined further today. New report: Latch Falls To Penny Stock After Admitting "Material Errors and Possible Irregularities"
Latch is one wild ride, Dallan made $40 on his Latch purchase earlier this month and now lost that $40:
On the plus side, Dallan has made ~$3.50 on his IPVM comment up votes...
Lee Odess seems like a guy who focuses too much how other people are at fault, or what other people did wrong. How about taking responsibility for your actions and holding yourself accountable for a change?