Showing posts with label silicon valley. Show all posts
Showing posts with label silicon valley. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Google's "Brain Drain"

Came across an interesting presentation today on The Business Insider that they posted back in September - "The Google Brain Drain Goes On And On."


Interesting because it augments what I wrote back in June 2008 about Google's Employee Retention. The mental infrastructure of Silicon Valley encourages this behavior to the betterment of the technology, venture capital, and related industries. This trend is what makes Silicon Valley a great place - employees learn that their personal and professional growth becomes limited within a large organization, so they take what they learned and move on to the next big opportunity.

Monday, August 10, 2009

Friendfeed, Facebook (& Google?)

Just saw that Facebook is acquiring FriendFeed. Found this interesting since the Google tree is expanding. Paul Buchheit is one of FriendFeed's founders and the brains behind Gmail. After watching him speak on a panel last Spring, I wrote about Google, employee retention, and entrepreneurship.

FriendFeed is a small shop with only 12 employees according the TechCrunch article. Reminds me a bit on how Yahoo! intergrates new applications through acquisition instead of through internal innovation. Will be interesting to see the financial disclosure on the deal (if ever). Friendfeed was initially funded with $5 million by Benchmark Capital and its own founders.

Some questions pop to mind:

With the "normal" successful exit for VCs at 10x or more, did they get $50 mln for the deal? If so, did Facebook overpay as Yahoo! has been doing? Wonder if they saw an opening to exit for a few bucks less citing lower chances for long-term success and took it to focus on the next venture?

And speaking of Yahoo! and innovation, Steve Rubel has an interesting thought - make FriendFeed the new "Facebook Labs." Why not? Seems the right people are in the place...

Digg!

Monday, June 15, 2009

Even Google is Paranoid!

Given Google's new found paranoia, it gives me a certain amount of comfort to know that the laws of the free market and capitalism are still alive and well, even during a time where government programs and institutions are pushing a more socialist environment on the social side of our country's development.


Back in September, I wrote "Viva Monopoly!" about the importance of monopolies in a free economy. They offer an incentive for free enterprise to efficiently capitalize on a new innovation. Seems Google is noticing that annoying little dog nipping at it's heels:



Digg!

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Recent Commentary on Venture Capital Trends

From PWC's report "Exit slowdown and the new venture capital landscape":

"In the second quarter of 2008 there were zero VC-backed exits - on the heels of five in the previous quarter which raised a thin $283 million. In the first half of 2007, by comparison, 43 VC-backed IPOs collected $6.3 billion."
From the Q3, 2008 report of University of San Francisco Silicon Valley Venture Capitalist Confidence Index™:
The Silicon Valley Venture Capitalist Confidence Index reading "fell from the previous quarter’s reading of 3.07 to a fourth consecutive new low since the Index was originated in Q1 2004 and indicates a continuing downtrend in venture capitalists’ confidence."
From Lawrence Aragon's article on PEWeek.com this week:
"The preliminary numbers indicate that VCs are hunkering down more quickly than they did after the dot-com crash. The data show that U.S.-based venture firms invested in just 250 companies last month, down from 565 companies in September and 518 companies in October 2007. You have to go all the way back to January 2004 (when they invested in 232 companies) to find a lower number. The only other October with fewer deals was in 1993."
Some positive does exist out there. The Q3 2008 MoneyTree Report published by PriceWaterhouseCooper indicates that overall venture capital activity is stable if measured in terms of dollars.
"Despite the turmoil in the global financial markets, US venture capital investing remained within historical norms in the third quarter of 2008. Venture capitalists invested $7.1 billion in 907 deals..."

Digg!

Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Our Fearless Leader on FOXBusiness

Just a quick plug for our work at Altos Research. Mike Simonsen, our CEO, was interviewed on FOXBusiness News this week with a focus on potential bright spots in the US Housing market. Always cool to see our little shop get some national exposure. Here's a link to the video interview. (There's a short commercial as with all videos - just a quick 15 seconds then to the good stuff....)

Digg!

Sunday, August 17, 2008

Venture Capital Trends, Q1 (2008)

Over the last couple of weeks, I've been intending to comment on the recent report released by VCExperts released in June regarding trends in venture funding in Q1, 2008. The graph below illustrates some of the key data from the report. The labels of A, B, etc. refer to the Series Round of Financing.


While recent trends in Series A-D financing have moved around a bit and returned to the same approximate levels from 2006, it's clear that the number of Series E+ fundings are rising over the past year. This may be manifesting a couple of market factors, including the current market constraint of two major VC-funded exit strategies - acquistions and IPOs.

Given the overall volatility of the stock market, perhaps potential suitors are sitting on the sidelines and taking an inward focus to developing operational strength and cash flow rather than seek growth through acquisition. Stock market volatility also appears to affect the number of IPOs filings, with only 13 IPOs filed in Q2, 2008 compared with 56 filed in Q2, 2007 (sourced from the Hoovers IPO Scorecard). Renaissance Capital's IPO Index is showing a -5.2% return over the past 1-year period, with year-to-date returns at -17.8%. It's just not a great time for IPO exits if you're a VC-funded company. (Of course, the DJIA is at about -10% YTD and the NASDAQ is about even so far YTD...)

In December 2007, a National Venture Capital Association (NVCA) press release reflected some bullish sentiments by venture capitalists, with "59 percent of the venture capitalists are predicting further IPO market recovery." I found this optimism particularly interesting given the counterview outlook illustrated by the USF Venture Capital Confidence Index. The most recent update released on July 9, indicates that VC confidence has fallen to an all-time low since establishing the index in 2004. Wish these VCs could make up their mind....

One factor in this trending may be the ongoing movement of venture capital. Data from PWCMoneyTree provides sufficient evidence that venture capital is falling into later stage investments over the long run, as discussed in an article back in March.

I'm guessing the truth is somewhere in between...


Digg!

Friday, July 11, 2008

Venture Capital Trends - Q1, 2008

Found this article on VC Experts (a great source for articles and analysis on a myriad of venture capital topics) a couple weeks ago.

In short, Barry Kramer and Michael Patrick of Fenwich & West LLP analyze the venture funding terms for over 100 companies in the San Francisco Bay Area. For those number-crunchers, this is a great piece to read.

I'll spend some more time analyzing this weekend to infuse my own perspectives, but for now, here's a link to the article.


Digg!

Monday, July 7, 2008

AllAdvantage.com - One Last Hurrah...

Back in late 1990s, I travelled frequently to the Bay Area for work, and during that time, was convinced that I belonged in Silicon Valley working with one of the great new start-ups. It took me until 2001 to finally get here, just a bit past the prime years of gluttony for many-a-startups.

One of those companies that was particularly interesting to me was AllAdvantage.com - a company that paid its users to surf the Internet. A close friend of mine (who shall remain nameless), worked as an analyst there and still tells stories about how the company would announce how many millions of dollars they paid out to its users (generally denominated in millions); followed by an employe cheer on at the recital of how much money was lost that month. Even as a analyst working on the AllAdvantage.com version of TPS reports, something didn't seem right to my friend.

Now in the lore of Silicon Valley start-ups long gone, AllAdvantage.com managed to resurface in a recent piece on The Industry Standard.

Quite ironic how The Industry Standard is doing pieces on failed Internet start-ups. I attended one of their rooftop parties many years ago - they weren't exactly the frugal type themselves....


Digg!

Tuesday, June 24, 2008

Employee Retention at Yahoo!

Things aren't looking terribly rosy at Yahoo! nowadays. It's never a good sign when webpages like this start sprouting up.....

http://yahoorezinr.com/

(Mike - thanks for the link....)

Digg!

Wednesday, April 23, 2008

Is Yahoo! acquiring assets or problems?

Over the last couple of years, Yahoo! has been on a perpetual shopping spree in recent years – acquiring social media and social networking companies to boost its status in the Web 2.0 world.

18 months ago, a Business Week article by Catherine Holahan – “Yahoo’s Strategy: Growth By Acquisition” – supported Yahoo’s strategy, promoting the relatively low cost of these acquisitions. In 2006 for example, Yahoo! acquired Del.icio.us for about $20 million. Smaller acquisitions of maturing start-ups put Yahoo! in the position of a late-stage venture capitalist – pick a portfolio of seemingly good bets and expect that a couple of them will pop. Not a bad idea if you're flush with cash and need some new products.

That was then, this is now. More recent acquisitions are well above venture capital money - Blue Lithium for $300 mln, Zimbra for $350 mln, Maven Networks for $150 mln, and Right Media for $680 mln. As I wrote in a previous article, it seems that Yahoo! gave up cash for a goodwill asset on the balance sheet. More importantly, Yahoo! appears to have become a quilt of media companies, Web 2.0 technologies, and social networking tools that hardly generate revenue.

Back in January on TheDeal.com, David Shabelman suggested that Yahoo! consider more acquisitions - possibly of Monster.com, Expedia, and Shutterfly (among others). At some point, Yahoo! seems almost addicted to acquisitions as if the next one will be their saving grace or missing piece to the puzzle.

Shabelman also suggested that Yahoo! might combine Right Media and BlueLithium and spin out the combined company as an IPO. To break even on the acquisition costs of these two companies, the IPO proceeds would have to exceed $1 billion. To provide some perspective, Vision China’s (VSIN) IPO hit the market at about $544 mln in late 2007 and Digital Domain (DTWO) is scheduled to hit the market at $72-84 mln. This isn’t exactly a thriving IPO market for technology companies.

Corporate finance maneuvers of acquisitions, spin-offs, and juggling won't save the future of Yahoo! I have more thoughts on this, especially when compared to Google’s ability to grow its business more organically through innovation and development. Stay tuned for more….

Digg!

Wednesday, April 9, 2008

University of San Francisco International Business Plan Competition

Quick update on a great event upcoming --

April 24 - 26 - Hotel Kabuki (San Francisco's Japan Town)

The University of San Francisco Contest will feature 20 graduate student entrepreneur teams from around the world (MIT, Hong Kong UST, Cambridge, USF, Stanford, etc.) pitching their new venture proposals to panels of venture capitalists, top executives, and venture attorneys.

The USF Contest has become internationally recognized as a serious venue for launching new technology companies and provides an exceptionally enjoyable and exciting learning experience.

Here's the schedule:

Trade Show Reception and Elevator Pitch Challenge
April 24 (Thursday) 6pm - 9:30pm
Hotel Kabuki
USF Faculty, Staff or Students, free. Alumni ($20 at the door), Other guests ($40 at the door)

Final Round
April 26 (Saturday) 9am - 1pm
Hotel Kabuki
USF Faculty, Staff or Students, free. Alumni ($10 at the door), Other guests ($20 at the door).

Go Entrepreneurial Dons!

The program is organized by Mark V. Cannice, Ph.D.Executive Director and Founder of the USF Entrepreneurship Program.

Digg!


Monday, April 7, 2008

Economic Arguments for Abandoning H1B Visas

Supporters of America’s H1B visa system argue that firms such as Microsoft and Google (both opposed to the existing system) should simply send these jobs overseas by expanding their current operations in places like China and India. The problem with this argument is that it does not follow economic logic.

There are several economic factors that influence the ongoing development of technology-based industries in the United States. These factors further support the position that the H1B Visa system should be significantly restructured (or abandoned altogether).

1. Agglomeration Economics – As firms in related industries (“clusters”) work in relative proximity to each other, several positive effects are felt:

--> The overall cost of production is reduced because of the increased competition of suppliers and the greater number of firms consuming production inputs. This includes such items as laboratory equipment, software, hardware and other necessary production inputs to developing new technologies .

--> There is an increase in the number of innovations through implicitly shared knowledge.

--> Positive externalities develop - that is - the number of “knowledge spillovers” occur.

These economies of scale and externalities cannot be artificially manufactured by establishing a research park in a foreign country. Economic clusters are complicated organisms that have evolved over time. The organic systems resulted from years in response to market dynamics and locational factors.

2. Labor is not the only factor of economic production. Capital – meaning machinery and related technical equipment - is also a major factor. (Together, Capital and Labor compose the basis of the Cobb-Douglas Production Function upon which economists such as Robert Solow, Greg Mankiw, and Paul Romer have based parts of their research.)

Collect a labor pool of scientists with PhDs from the best universities in world and put them together in Siberia with no research and testing equipment. Their output of new innovations will fall to negligible levels. This basic fact creates another significant advantage to economies such as the United States, and more specifically places like Silicon Valley, that have an inherent base of both private, public, and education sector research and development facilities.

3. Enforceable property rights legislation and intellectual property protection in the United States support research and development better than other developing nations. Countries such as China have a well-documented global reputation for poor enforcement of patent and copyright laws. The ability to develop a new technology and maintain a monopoly on their innovation and idea provides the necessary for profit-maximizing firms to operate. Economies that do not protect a firm’s ability to maximize its profit are not adequate environments for technology firms to effectively operate.

4. And finally, the proximity to a market where the developing firm will be likely to sell whatever technologies it develops plays a role. Technological innovations are likely to be adopted and integrated into the world’s most developed economies first, then eventually trickle down to lesser developed economies. Because firms seek to minimize costs and maximize profits, it makes good business sense to develop technologies in countries where these technologies will be purchased and utilized.

The United States’ comparative advantage in technology industries requires that it be supported the best and brightest global minds regardless of the individual’s country of origin. Without such support, our economy runs the risk of unintentionally developing other “technology clusters” manned by scientists and researchers in other countries. The end result could be the loss of our comparative advantage and our leadership position as the world’s innovator.

The single best solution to maintain our technological leadership is to leverage the privilege of living and working in the United States to attract foreign workers. This labor competition will also pressure the domestic workforce to increase its knowledge and capabilities, resulting in a more effective, innovative labor force.


Digg!

Thursday, April 3, 2008

Yahoo!'s Valuation - Goodwill leads to Goodwill

Recent word is that Microsoft has no plans to raise its $44.6 billion bid for Yahoo! Inc. $44.6 billion got me wondering how this matched up to Yahoo's value based on its balance sheet. I found one item to be particularly interesting - "goodwill" - which seems to be indicative of Yahoo! Inc.'s problems, and could be leading the company to Goodwill Industries very soon. How about a new logo?

As defined on Investopedia - "goodwill appears on the balance sheet of the acquirer in the amount by which the purchase price exceeds the net tangible assets of the acquired company." In other words, goodwill is the extra that you pay for after accounting for the actual company assets.

Keep in mind that I don't know what the media industry norms are with regard to the goodwill-to-acquisition price ratios, but looking at the Yahoo! Inc.'s 2007 Annual Report, it seems to me that they're pretty good at throwing cash into the goodwill bucket for acquisitions without getting much of a tangible return.

A few examples from Yahoo! Inc.'s 2007 10-K to illustrate (this info is found around page 70-85 of the report...):

1. Purchase of SOFTBANK, a firm with which Yahoo! had a couple of joint ventures (2005)

Total purchase price = $500 million in cash
Amount of purchase price allocated to Goodwill = $388 million

2. Purchase of Right Media (2007):

Price = $526 million ($246 in cash, $237 in equity)
Amount of purchase price allocated to Goodwill = $440 million

3. Purchase of Zimbra (2007):

Price = $302 million ($290 in cash)
Amount of purchase price allocated to Goodwill = $241 million

4. Purchase of Blue Lithium (2007):

Price = $255 million ($245 in cash)
Amount of purchase price allocated to Goodwill = $221 million

5. Alibaba (2005):

Price of 46% of shares = $1 billion in cash
Amount of purchase price allocated to Goodwill in 2007 = $443 million

Like I said, I don't know what the normal allocation to goodwill as a percentage of total purchase prices in the media business, but when I look at these transactions, I see a significant trend -

Yahoo! likes to take cash from its pockets and exchange it for an accounting asset called "goodwill" that you can't touch or see. These investments are not all-inclusive of all of the deals on Yahoo! Inc.'s books, but just up the cash spent on these five examples and you get nearly $2.3 billion.

I'd like to think that the brain trust at Yahoo! Inc. would like to have that $2.3 billion to spend on projects developed internally to produce organic company and product growth. Perhaps these actions are a microcosm of what's happened to the Yahoo! brand. A company that led the Web 1.0 revolution is now becoming a sideline watcher in the Web 2.0 and Web 3.0 evolution.

To put some perspective Microsoft's $44 billion offer - Yahoo! generated $6.9 billion in revenue in 2007, putting Microsoft's offer at a bit more than 6x revenues. Compare that to Microsoft's valuation of Facebook at $15 billion, estimated to be 500x revenues.

Digg!

Sunday, March 16, 2008

The first Internet IPO "Gold Rush" - in retrospect

I found an interesting spot on the PBS website - dot.con - that was aired and published back in 2002. Now that we're starting to get some perspective on the first Internet rush, reading these pieces in retrospect offers some valuable lessons going forward.


Digg!

Venture Capital Investment Trends since 1995 (Deal Sizes)


Another snapshot of data provided by PWCMoneyTree.showing the size per venture capital per deal in companies of various stages since 1995.

The magnitude of the upward spike for Expansion and Late State companies is rather startling, but not surprising in retrospect, with the quick upslope from 1998 through 2000. Of course, this was the heydey of the first Internet boom, only to be followed by the impending crash in 2000-2001. One can only surmise that this free flow of capital into later stage companies is the 3rd, 4th, 5th round financings to get the original dotcoms to IPO.

To go from $7 mln/deal to nearly $25/mln deal provides some perspective on where the Internet IPOs took the imagination of venture capitalists and Wall Street alike, and where the imagination of venture capitalists and Wall Street took the Internet IPOs.

Digg!

Sunday, March 9, 2008

The Venture Capital Confidence Index

Just a quick mention of the Univeristy of San Francisco's "Venture Capital Confidence Index." This index is maintained by Mark Cannice, head of the Entrpreneurship program at the University of San Francisco.

The Index was recently mentioned in an article by Rebecca Beckman in The Wall Street Journal - "In Silicon Valley, Start-Ups Begin Hitting the Brakes."

Digg!

Friday, March 7, 2008

Launch: Silicon Valley 2008

Well, it's here (or at least it's on coming...) - Launch: Silicon Valley 2008. I attended last year's event and found the event to be a raw look at the start-up world.

At Launch: Silicon Valley, 30 presenting companies make a 10-minute onstage presentation, then receive candid feedback from a panel of venture capitalist and Silicon Valley professionals.

Companies that presented last year included several in the social media space, data security, and Guy Kawasaki's Truemors. Guy is well-known for his presenting ability - worth the price of admission on his own.

For entrepreneurs interesting in seeing companies that have gotten over some initial hurdles - developing a working organization, getting a product to market - but still a ways from getting to the finish line, this a great event. Check it out.

Sunday, March 2, 2008

Venture Capital Investment Trends since 1995 (Deals by Stage)

Doing some research about Venture Capital trends, I came across some interesting data provided by PWCMoneyTree.showing convergence in the number of venture capital deals between Early Stage, Expansion, and Later Stage deals, while the Start-up/Seed Stage dropped considerably over the past 12-13 years:

Reading nothing more than the data presented in these graphs, I'm hypothesizing that this decline was a function of a number of factors:

1. Venture Capital followed itself.

If there were a plethora of start-ups in the mid-1990s at the start of the internet/tech bubble, then it would make sense that targets that received venture capital in the "Start-up/Seed Stage" would then receive subsequent rounds of funding while in their "Early Stage" and "Expansion Stages", then eventually as "Late Stage" investments. Seems there may be some evidence of this effect as you examine the decrease of Start-up/Seed Stage funding with increases (and then decreases) in Early Stage and Expansion targets. These Early Stage and Expansion investment targets then became targets for Late Stage funding.

2. Venture Capital has become more risk averse.

Following the fallout of the last tech bubble in the late 1990's, venture capitalists turned their attention to firms that were past the start-up stage and had a better chance of survival. This would certainly explain the dramatic rise in the percentage of deals in Later Stage companies from approximately 10% to 30% of investments.

3. Venture Capital has become more selective

Certainly there was not a drastic decrease in the number of firms seeking Start-up/Seed Stage funding during the past 12-13 years - just the number of venture capitalists willing and able to fund these start-ups.

4. The ongoing emergence of Angel Capital

As angel capital groups continue their emergence, they may be filling the void - funding Start-up/Seed Stage companies instead of traditional Venture Capital.

I am actively researching these thoughts to support with further evidence, but this certainly provides some interesting fodder for discussion. I'm interested in your feedback on this thought process.

<span class=

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

New Social Network - "Were You There?"

I met Jonathan Hull, founder of "Were You There?" at a recent SVASE event. I just set up a membership and started playing around.

"Were You There?" bases its social networks on events, times, and places. Couple of examples - there are groups around the Kennedy assassination, Elvis Presley, and Venice, Italy.

Cool stuff. Definitely worth checking out for an interesting perspective on developing a new social network.


Digg!

Venture Capital Investment Competition & the University of San Francisco

The Venture Capital Investment Competition (VCIC) is a unique opportunity for university students to act as investors, instead of the standard competition where students present their business plans.

In an obvious attempt to be a homer, I'd like to congratulate the University of San Francisco Graduate Student Team for their outstanding performance at the February 8th event, finishing in 2nd place with universities like USC and UC-Irvine in the field.

Mark Cannice is the Executive Director and Founder of the USF Entrepreneurship Program. Over the past couple of years, Mark and his colleagues have quickly transformed the department from a great little secret to an outstanding program for developing entrepreneurs in the fertile Silicon Valley environment.

Mark compiles the Venture Capital Confidence Index, and reported his most recent findings here.


Digg!