Getting fat on venture capital

Going for big investment dollars could backfire on the founders of startup businesses

“Raising money is like ordering dinner,” says startup founder Geoff McQueen about attracting investors. “If you’re only a little bit hungry, you should only buy an appetizer.”

McQueen was writing about his company, professional services platform Affinity Live, achieving its first round of funding. While the amount raised is a relatively modest two million dollars, the main gain for the company is getting some experienced business people on board.

Unlike many of the high profile billion dollar ‘unicorns’, cash flow positive businesses like Affinity don’t need large swags of cash to grow. As McQueen points out, big investment rounds put pressures on management and risks the company’s culture changing “from one of discipline and taking on the world to one of comfort and entitlement”.

Pushing out the owners

Another risk for founders is they could end up diluting themselves out of the business they’ve built, as venture capital investor Heidi Roizen points out it’s possible for the creators of a billion dollar startup to find themselves broke.

Roizen observes “venture capital is not free money. It’s debt. And then some”, something that’s overlooked by many commentators who think a fund raising – and the resultant valuation  – goes straight into the pockets of a company’s founders.

Unless it’s Google Ventures doing the investment, it’s unlikely the founders will be buying Porsches after a VC round and usually the funding goes into growing the business. For many big name startups those capital needs can be huge as we see with Uber where reports indicate the company is currently losing two dollars for every dollar it earns.

Beating the burn rates

Most businesses though can only dream of burn rates in the hundreds of millions a year and their needs are far more modest illustrating McQueen’s point about excess capital.

As we saw in the dot com bust it was the lean and focused companies that survived the downturn, there’s little to think the next industry shake it will be different. That’s why companies like Affinity Live and founders like Geoff McQueen will probably still be around when the dust and hype settles.

Similar posts:

Is the tech startup sector a boys’ club?

The Ellen Pao sexual discrimination case illustrates the risks in letting an industry be a selective boys club

I’m putting together a story on what the Australian tech community can learn from the Ellen Pao story where an upcoming female associate at iconic Silicon Valley venture capital firm Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers sued the firm for sexual discrimination.

Although Pao lost the case it rightly caused much debate within the US tech community about the lack of gender diversity, particularly given the number of women in the American venture capital industry has collapsed from 10% in 1999 to 6% in 2014

The reason for this seems to be simple, as Lauren Helper pointed out in the Silicon Valley Business Journal back in 2013 the industry is intensely tribal quoting one industry participant, Mark Taguchi, ‘“people operate in tribes,” he said. “They have groups of people that they learn to trust, that they work with, that they like.”’

In some respects this is a strength for the Silicon Valley industry as it means new entrants have to be vouched for by trusted figures but it also risks the sector being insular and dominated by narrow groups based on background, ethnicity or gender.

Once an industry defines its leaders and innovators by their friendships, schools or workplaces it risks becoming irrelevant to the outside world and it’s inevitable an inward focus will blind the group to new trends and developing technologies.

The warning from Pao’s case is Silicon Valley may be becoming too insular, it’s a handy wakeup to remind participants there is a big, diverse world outside the Bay Area.

However the US tech sector might survive without diversifying given its size and access to capital. Forother countries’ developing industries – like Australia’s – it’s a hindering factor few can afford.

In most ecosystems diversity is strength, it’s hard to see how that’s any different for the tech sector. Boys Clubs are relic of last century and have little place in this one; for regions looking at copying Silicon Valley, this is one trait not to pick up.

Similar posts:

Seizing the agricultural technology opportunity

Can a regional city like Fresno become a centre of agricultural technology?

Does the real opportunity for tech entrepreneurs lie in the agriculture sector? An article by James Fallows looking at Fresno’s startup community for the Atlantic Magazine suggests that might be the case.

Fresno, in California’s agricultural Central Valley, doesn’t have the glamor of the global startup centres but offers a focus on neglected sectors as Fallows quotes Jake Soberal of Bitwise Industries.

“My guess is that 5 to 10 percent of the tech need of the farming industry is now being met,” Fallows quotes Soberal as saying. “You could build a technology industry in Fresno based on that alone, not to mention the worldwide need in agriculture.”

While there isn’t a great need for another coffee app, pizza delivery service or online store, there are far more opportunities in other sectors to address unmet needs.

This is probably where the opportunity lies for cities like Fresno that are trying to create their own mini Silicon Valley – build a technology sector to address the needs of your existing industrial base.

In agriculture there’s a plethora of Internet of Things, Big Data, analytics and other technological applications that addresses issues in the industry. Farming is not the only sector which presents these opportunities.

Fresno’s ambitions aren’t unique but as Fallows points out this is not a zero sum game and there’s no reason why dozens of cities shouldn’t be able to build their own niches with new technologies.

Picture of Fresno from David Jordan via WikiPedia

Similar posts:

Copying the Silicon Valley Bubble

Is the Silicon Valley funding model creating a bubble in tech investments

Staying private sucks if you’re a tech company writes Felix Salmon in Fusion magazine.

If you’re giving away stock in lieu of wages to employees or taking early stage funding for equity, then listing, or selling to a larger business, makes sense as staff and investors need to see a return. It’s the unspoken truth of the Silicon Valley funding model.

The Silicon Valley model though doesn’t come without risks, investor Mark Cuban warns a valuation bubble greater than that of the Dot Com Boom has developed as angel investors and early stage venture capital firms have thrown money at startups after Facebook’s massive buyouts of Instagram and WhatsApp.

While Silicon Valley and the US tech market might have plenty of opportunities for buyouts and IPOs, most other places around the world don’t have the deep financial markets and the cashed up software companies to make similar exits possible for local startup businesses.

Again that difficulty in successfully funding exits shows that simply trying to copy the US tech industry model is probably not going to work for most places tying to building their own Silicon Valleys, although it seems China is about to try.

The other message is that the IPO or buyout route is not necessarily the right path for every business, as Salmon says: “Maybe the best solution is not to take any outside funding at all, and not to try to grow too fast.”

“Some family companies have been around for hundreds of years: if you own your own business, and you don’t get greedy, you can build a very pleasant life for yourself. You just won’t end up on any list of young billionaires.”

Similar posts:

Can the tech industry’s unicorns escape extinction?

How will Silicon Valley’s billion dollar startups survive their valuations?

“Today we have herds of unicorns,” Fortune Magazine quotes Jason Green, a partner at venture capital firm Emergence Capital Partners, in its story about startups that have achieved billion dollar capitalisations.

When the ‘unicorn’ label was coined by Aileen Lee in November 2013 it was to highlight the rarity of the beasts – on 39 existed at the time.

Today, just on a year later, there are eighty unicorns and the growth doesn’t seem to be slowing as more companies are raising funds or looking at trade sales or IPOs that will value their business at over a billion dollars.

Betting on the unicorns

Some of the business on the Fortune 80 unicorns list – like Elon Musk’s SpaceX and medical testing venture Theranos – are big, brave bets on future technologies which could prove incredibly profitable if successful. These are to today’s market was Google was at the turn of the Century.

Others, such as Xiaomi, Meituan and Flipkart, are betting on massive growth in emerging markets which China’s AliBaba has shown to be huge opportunity.

Some are already profitable and showing great potential to deliver the multibillion dollar valuations; companies like data analytics firm Palantir, developer tools vendor Atlassian and Uber are in this camp.

Many though are platform based, transaction plays that hope to clip the tickets on fields such as rental accommodation, payment systems and e-commerce. Some will be insanely successful but most have a distinct whiff of irrational exuberance about them.

Frothy exuberance

Driving that irrational exuberance is the money tsunami which has overwhelmed the financial sector since the Global Financial Crisis. As Quantitive Easing has fattened the banks’ and corporate America’s coffers, managers have sought to get their lazy dollars doing some work and the startup sector is an attractive, and sexy, place.

That influx of money has in turn has driven a spiral; as companies like Facebook have found themselves cashed up, they’ve bought more companies – Instagram and WhatsApp are the best examples of this – which in turn has increased valuations and expectations across the board.

Some of the risks in this current mania are obvious, but the question of survival when your business is valued so high becomes a pressing issue as Twitter have found with the company flailing around looking for a revenue stream to justify its fifty billion dollar valuation.

Probably the best, or worst example, of struggling to justify massive valuations is found in one of the original unicorns; Google and its YouTube division.

Monetizing YouTube

Right now YouTube is trying to screw musicians with onerous terms in return for, in the case of most artists, will be a pittance. It’s necessary for YouTube to do this so the service can capture as much value as possible to justify the rates of return demanded from its management, particularly as it’s appearing the online display advertising market is beginning to plateau.

That dash to generate revenue may become more common when investor finance starts to dry up; faced with the need to generate cashflow and satisfy the needs of impatient investors who’ve been denied a profitable exit, many of today’s unicorns could find themselves in a difficult position in a tighter VC climate.

Unicorns were once mythical creatures; now they’re real, at least in Silicon Valley, they’re going to have to learn how to fight for survival.

Similar posts:

Daily links – the future of Google, Silicon Valley’s name and how startups die

The future of Goodle,,how the name ‘Silicon Valley’ came about, why solar power is getting cheaper and how some startups die.

On many measures Google are in trouble, but one analyst thinks we’re panicking and his view is the lead of today’s links of the day. We also look at how the name ‘Silicon Valley’ came about, why solar power is getting cheaper and how some startups die.

Does Google’s future lie in R&D?

“Google is down but it’s not out” is the warning of this analyst’s report on the company’s earnings and strategy. Interestingly Google outspends Apple by $4bn a year on research and development, but both of them are dwarfed by Microsoft’s spending, which indicates R&D investment doesn’t guarantee success.

The origins of the name ‘Silicon Valley’

Last Sunday marked the 44th anniversary of the first time the label ‘Silicon Valley’ appeared in print. The US Computer History Museum looks at how the name came about and no-one will be surprised it was a marketing person who coined it.

Why does solar power keep getting cheaper

A few years ago putting solar cells on a building was expensive, now in many parts of the world the price of PV panels is becoming competitive with mains power. Vox Magazine looks at the factors driving the price drops and finds that economies of scale are now the main factor affecting the falling cost of installed solar power systems.

RIP Urbanspoon

One of the earliest food review platforms was Urbanspoon which was founded on the basis it would only grow as a bootstrapped company. In 2009 the founders sold out to a larger company who have now sold it onto an Indian business who is going to shut the name down.

Startups who’ve fallen off the map

Business Insider lists 17 formerly hot businesses who’ve fallen out of the public view this year, while some of them haven’t disappeared, it’s a list that reminds us that most new businesses, particularly tech startups, fail.

Similar posts:

  • No Related Posts

Daily Links – the poor part of Silicon Valley, Robert Crumb on Charlie Hebdo and life in Managua

The poor part of Silicon Valley, Robert Crumb on Charlie Hebdo and life in Managua

Being a Sunday some long reads; an interview with American cartoonist Robert Crumb on his reaction to the Charlie Hebdo murders, life in the Nicaragua markets and the other side of Silicon Valley.

East of Silicon Valley’s Eden

Silicon Valley is one of the world’s most affluent regions but it has it’s poor areas, across the road from Facebook’s head office sits one of the area’s most disadvantaged neighbourhoods. East of Palo Alto’s Eden tells the story of segregation and disadvantage that has left East Palo Alto behind the rest of Silicon Valley.

Robert Crumb on Charlie Hebdo

‘I thought, I gotta do it. They asked me. I gotta do it…Otherwise, everybody’s going to think: “Where’s Crumb? Why doesn’t he come forward? What the hell’s the matter with him?”’

Legendary US cartoonist Frank Crumb, now resident in France, gives his views on the Charlie Hebdo murders.

How a family survives on $4.50 a day

A good story on the tough life of Nicaraguan market traders who live on half the national minimum wage.

“East Palo Alto PA Airport Moffett Field P1190059” by David.Monniaux – Own work. Licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

Similar posts: