Internal Documentation

One month into 2025

February 7, 2025 (Review of Week 6)

Hi, everyone! Thanks for tuning in last week as Erika starts getting us all smarter about managing our runway. It’s important that all of us understand where we are as a company, what risks we’re taking together, and why. And thanks, Erika, for helping us up the learning curve.

It’s been hard for me to sit down and write anything lately, both because my head is in the NYC Accelerator RFP, which would be a great boon for us to win, and because of the general sense of bewilderment and chaos in the political front.

I feel like we need to be open about what effect all of that will have on our work, so here are my current off-the-cuff thoughts on it:

Despite the over-all anti-progressive (and some literally illegal) bent of the stuff in the news, there are some confusing signs about what’s going on with housing specifically. The housers seem to be disposed to attempt to work with the new HUD secretary and there is a bi-partisan effort to make some of the tax credits permanent that used to require periodic reauthorization; on the other hand, of course, the executive order to stop payments on all federal grants is a huge deal for affordable housing developers, so it’s a mixed bag. I believe that on the whole, it probably tends toward shittiness for our sector, but possibly slowly. For climate tech, on the other hand…. The hardware folks who got a boost over the past 4 years of federal innovation money are all having some difficult days – I just spoke with one who had just received a $2M grant, which they may never see. Hard tech VCs are probably about now finding out which side of the vote their economic interest was really aligned on, if they were confused on that front.

As for us: prior to the election, Marc and I said that our core business will go on, both because cities and states like New York that have been building climate action muscle over 20 years are going to carry right on, and because renovation is core real estate business. I think that is still right. New York State and New York City both have strong climate laws in place and no political groundswell to undo them. Utility-related decisions are by nature long-lived, and it’s been more than 10 years already that NY PSC has been aggressive on climate. So if our jobs didn’t get easier, they’re no harder than on January 19. For now.

That said, our eggs are now very much in the govtech basket. As Marc has been saying, it’s time now to really pay attention to our actual users – the consultants and building owner/managers. We’ve won a measure of stability thanks to the government work, but if we don’t figure out the end-user value add really well, we will be vulnerable in no time flat!

One other passing (and happier!) thought: this time last year, many of us were together in NYC and meeting each other in person for the first time! Working with you all is like being able to hole up in a nice warm cottage while there’s a crazy snowstorm going on outside. Thank you!

Metrics

  • Unique Buildings: 5,998 (January, +56 MoM)
  • Annual Run Rate: $1.28M
  • Monthly net burn (accrual basis): $111,027 (3-month avg through January)
  • Year-to-Last Month net burn (cash basis): $178,403 (January only)
  • 2025 Transaction fees to date: $0
  • Outstanding invoices as of today: $186,822 (no change WoW)

Last Week’s Highlights

  • NYSERData is nearly landed. The (hopefully) final edits were sent back to NYSERDA last week and hopefully we will have a signed contract shortly. This will give us a nice shot in the arm to spend on the database, as well as the ability to say that we are official building data platform for the State.
  • NYC Accelerator RFP is finally in a state that I feel good about. It’s take a lot of work to get it here, but one silver lining is that our relationship with KC3 and SWA are solid and we’re super aligned for this work.
  • ConEd / Willdan renewal is also nearly there. We have their requested scope of work and it signals that they want to use Momentum more than they ever have before. Specifically, they want Projects and RFPs. There are still details to work out, but revenue from this source looks to be flat for this year, and we’ll have the contract mod within this month.
  • Shout out to Sentry and to the work the team has done to clear out the noise so we can pay better attention to it. It quickly flagged a critical user issue (they were unable to get into Momentum), and the team put out a patch within 30 mins. (JB)
  • Constructive and well documented re-engagement meetings with NYC engineering service provider EN-POWER and our close partner KC3. With EN-POWER, we spent about half of the time better understanding their existing (non tech enabled) business proceseses and then got initial feedback on the generic project click thru. With KC3 we examined what has been working well and what needs improvement in our joint projects together. And we identified concrete next steps to reset our partnership. A point I tried to make at the outset is that given all the changes in the industry both locally and nationally, business as usual is not going to cut it (MZ)
  • SOC 2 Type II Report We have the final report from KirkpatrickPrice, and are officially SOC 2 compliant (until the next audit!). SOC 2 compliance affirms the security of your services and gives your organization the ability to provide clients with evidence from an auditor who has seen your internal controls in place

Any missing highlights? Please share in Slack comments.

Crow’s Nest

Looking out for icebergs: What are the risks on the horizon that we’re watching for and navigating around?

Bomee’s List

  • Cash management. We’re doing pretty OK, but given the uncertainties, we need to keep being frugal.
  • ConEd 2026-29 re-bid. We’re gonna have to win this work again with Willdan. It’s a big deal and we’ll need to start working on it soon.
  • Momentum prod motion. I feel much better about our development process than I have in a long time, but we still need to land a couple big things this quarter!

Jason’s List

All the same from last week:

  • Still waiting on RFP news…
  • What do Service Providers want to do, and how do they see Momentum helping them?
  • We made some great progress de-duplicating team_buildings, but what other time bombs are lurking in the code? Is it time for a round of minesweeper?
  • Figuring out a sustainable sprint planning routine that allows us to reliably ship on time and to know what will be in the release–and move faster. We’re a month into the new year, and just really getting going on the new UI stuff.

Erika’s List

  • There aren’t a lot of levers to pull on our expenses, to decrease net burn, but we can make sure we get the money we are due (I’m already on that!) and see where we can readjust income expectations.
  • I’ve outlined a number of HR processes and explanations on onboarding, terminations, worldwide work, etc. that needs to be shared in the handbook. This is a to-do for me, but feedback and clarity on these topics is important for all.

Marc’s List

Same ones as last week:

  • We need more and better feedback from users and potential users
  • The Con Ed (2026) RFP is not going to be a copy and paste of the last 3 years – how do we best position ourselves?

François’ List

Same as last week:

  • Schrödinger’s RFPs
  • Keeping momentum on AI why tackling large new challenges

On Deck for This Week

  • NYC Accelerator RFP. We’re past the first draft, so it should be less up-hill from here! Due March 7. (BJ)
  • My 360 and Bomee’s 360 (JB)
  • More listening meetings with service providers (JB)
  • BD call with Franklin Energy, the “Willdan of Chicago” who is interested in seeing if our tech can help them differentiate to retain their contract working with Chicago utilities (MZ)
  • Reporting, compliance and insurance focus this week (EP)

  • Here’s what’s on the Company Radar

Please Leave Feedback

Please note your reaction to this update in the Slack channel. It helps us to know what is resonating, what is unclear, etc. Thanks!

  • What are your highlights / lowlights?
  • Did we miss a highlight? Something else you want to react to?

Robin :house: Wednesday at 8:18 AM

Who named it NYSERDATA? I thought it was called Building Data Platform (BDP). I want to make sure we don’t cause internal or external confusion.

Naina (Generalist) Wednesday at 8:44 AM

I appreciated Erika going through the definitions last week, it’s made all of the numbers and metrics make a lot more sense!

François (HOE) Wednesday at 1:50 PM

Sorry, NYSERDAta is my proposal for a portmanteau word for the NYSERDA Data RFP. I’m all for standardization, so should Building Data Platform be it? I’d prefer not go to an acronym if possible.

Jeremy (Coder) Wednesday at 4:39 PM

I’ve seen a bunch of attention on trying “to know what will be in the release” and I don’t get it. There was one time at a previous gig where it mattered a lot because someone asked me when I thought something would be done and I offhand said “like two weeks?”. The marketing team organized about $50k in ad spending around the new feature banking on the feature being out in two weeks - but nobody told me. So at the water cooler one day it happened to come up and I learned that my offhand comment had become a hard deadline! We ended up getting the thing built and shipped on time, but only by the skin of our teeth! Generally, I’m used to sprint goals being useful for planning, but knowing what will be released to the public on a given date doesn’t have value. Do we need to be putting effort into knowing what will be in the next release? If so, I have no objection. I just want to make sure we’re stying focused on the things that add value.

Bomee :house: Wednesday at 9:37 PM

@Jeremy (Coder) I don’t know what you’re reacting to, but your note led me on this train of thought: we’ve sort of painted ourselves into a corner of playing catch-up with existing customers because we so woefully underdelivered last year. It’s not the same as a situation where no one knows what’s coming – people are waiting for things that they know are coming, but don’t know when. Also, because we have been forced to build-rebuild stuff multiple times, we’re not able to deliver the full set of features that users actually need to be able to get a job done (instead of steadily building on what came before, we’re spending time tearing it out and redoing), and that means that we can’t get the utilization we need to work up traction. We started out with quite a lead on the market, and now every day, there are more players nipping at our heels. A random OEM just launched a LL97 chatbot that provides the stuff we give in the building data. box, for example. There are 5 new players that applied to Clean Fight that describe their features in largely the same terms we do. Last year was expensive in more ways than one. (edited)

Jeremy (Coder) Wednesday at 9:41 PM

So I think you’re saying when we accurately tell our customers when features are coming, we’re adding value. So it’s worth putting some portion of our effort into making those forecasts. Is that right? (edited)

Bomee :house: Wednesday at 9:43 PM

I think once we are able to make forecasts generally, we can actually schedule in user features (like we used to be able to do) between new builds