Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘internet’ Category

Article from BusinessInsider

“You’re walking around blind without a cane, pal. A fool and his money are lucky enough to get together in the first place.” – Gordon Gekko in “Wall Street”

A week before Groupon’s initial public offering, Henry Blodget was telling readers he wouldn’t touch it with a 50-foot pole for reasons that amounted to, “It’s an insider’s game.”

As Blodget expected, insiders were indeed the big winners. Investors who bought at the peak that opening day are now down about 20 percent since then. The only good news for investors: at least they’re not in the territory of Demand Media, which now trades about 70 percent below its first day of trading back in January.

Investing in IPOs today screams “caveat emptor.” But do we listen? The prospect of investing in something that all our friends are using seems to be as irresistible as super-sizing a fast-food meal — and can be equally bad for our (fiscal) health.

There’s also the view that if people are buying things they don’t understand, they should lose their money. It’s called capitalism, redeploying money to smarter people so it can be invested more intelligently.

Better Ways To Invest?

I agree that capitalism should not reward stupidity but we also should make it a little safer for non-insiders to invest. Why not increase transparency and let outsiders see what’s really going on in a company?

Perhaps it’s time for the equivalent of nutritional content labels on investments that outline, in plain language, just how much risk we’re taking. And maybe it’s time we also start asking if there are better ways to invest, not just for us but the health of our planet. That’s happening now with a growing trend called “impact investing,” defined as for-profit investment made to solve social and environment problems.

TonyGreenbergImg“Impact investing will need to scale to an enormous level for these solutions to be achievable,” said Eric Kessler, founder and principal at Arabella Philanthropic Investment Advisors, which advises philanthropies like Gates Foundation and Rockefeller Foundation and touches nearly $1 billion in grant and impact investment portfolios a year for. “Profitable, socially-driven businesses are the only sustainable solution. Philanthropists are awakening to that now and transforming themselves into impact investors.”

As things currently stand, it’s turned into a bit of the Wild West for investors. In an era of Occupy Wall Street and too many investing scandals, the impulse is to blame fraud or at least insiders who take liberties at the expense of the rest of us.

True, neither Groupon nor its underwriters held a gun to anyone’s head to buy a single share. Key information, from insiders taking money out to decelerating revenue growth, was thoroughly and publicly documented, as per all SEC regulations and rules.

But months before Groupon went public, breathless news stories were estimating a $25 billion valuation for the site. By the time the IPO put real numbers on those estimates, Groupon was valued at $13 billion instead, but even that seems optimistic for an unprofitable company founded three years ago.

Sky-High Valuations

Groupon is not the only example of misplaced “IPO-ptimism.” Zynga, the online game company, was reportedly seeking a $20 billion valuation. It now expects to go public with an estimated value of about $14 billion, though some seasoned analysts think $5 billion is more realistic. Facebook valuations currently range from $60 billion to $80 billion, up from $500 million just four years ago, though the social media behemoth has yet to announce when in 2012 it may actually go public.

tonygreenbergimage

Ask a venture capitalist about these sky-high valuations and their response ranges from a shrug of their shoulders to a gleam in their eye. The bottom line, though, is they don’t know what to think. This is uncharted territory, with companies only a few years old riding huge valuations to ridiculous riches, at least for a few.

“The biggest risk I see in today’s extraordinary Internet company valuations is the short length of time these companies have been in business,” said William Edward Quigley, co-founder and managing director of Clearstone Venture Partners.  “The longer a company has been operating, the more secure its competitive position in the market and the more predictable its revenues.  Predictability is a core ingredient in successful public companies.”

Quigley points to LinkedIn, which went public after a full decade of operations, with a seasoned executive team, strong internal and financial systems and a proven business model. Groupon, by contrast, has had none of those advantages.

“A pubic investor should be more cautious when investing in companies that are still figuring out their business.” Quigley says.

IPOs Hit The Skids

This brings us back to what we are investing in and whether those investments are wise. One recent report looked at the dismal performance of new companies in the IPO market. During the past 15 years, the number of young companies entering capital markets through IPOs has plummeted relative to historic patterns, hobbling job creation.

The report, “Rebuilding the IPO On-Ramp,” also had a number of recommendations, including the need “to improve the availability and flow of information for investors.”

tonygreenbergimage

Regulations have driven up costs for young companies looking to go public, the report says. At the same time, institutional investors are leery of buying stock in startups because their risk levels are much higher.

“Right now, there is very little capital available to these emerging companies,” said Wall Street investor Terren Peizer, chairman of Socius Capital Group. Peizer said more than 4,000 publicly traded companies have market capitalizations of less than $300 million each. Companies that small just aren’t attractive to choosy institutional investors.

“These companies are unable to attract capital on viable terms, if at all,” said Peizer. “Increased regulatory pressure has had the unintended consequence of choking off capital access for the small companies.”

“In today’s regulatory environment, it’s virtually impossible to violate rules … and this is something that the public really doesn’t understand. It’s impossible for a violation to go undetected.” – Bernard Madoff

All of this leads me to hope there will be a greater emphasis on impact investing, which may be help resolve these problems.

The Rockefeller Foundation started looking at these issues in 2008 when it developed a set of guidelines for “Impact Investing and Investment Standards,” or IRIS. As part of the process, the foundation developed a common reporting language for impact-related terms and metrics.

Out of IRIS came the Global Impact Investing Network Investors’ Council. GIIN was set up to identify how investor funds define, track, and report the social and environmental performance of their capital, in a way that’s transparent and credible.

In my company, which deals with similar issues of managing risk in an opaque environment, I’ve learned that it’s not about making a single right decision. Instead, it’s about hedging, diversifying, and understanding your risk vs. reward. It’s also about doing what’s right.

So much of what’s wrong with the investing picture today stems from the basic human impulses of fear and greed. People are afraid they will miss out on something big, which is the attitude that helped puff up the housing bubble. And that fear leads to greed, as people pay big bucks now, hoping to reap huge returns later.

Perhaps it’s time we put fear and greed back into the bottle and focus on how to invest for a better tomorrow that makes all of us winners.”

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

Article from SFGate.

In recent years, LinkedIn, Groupon and Demand Media all suggested they were profitable while privately held. But when the businesses were forced to file audited financial statements as they prepared to go public, those years or quarters in the black mysteriously vanished.

That’s just one of many reasons why it’s disturbing to see legislators hard at work on laws that would actually make it easier for companies to seek investments without also providing thorough and transparent financial data. And it’s why the proposals demand serious scrutiny.

This week, Sens. Pat Toomey, R-Pa., and Tom Carper, D-Del., introduced a bill that would raise the number of shareholders that companies are allowed to have before being forced to routinely disclose finances. Under the proposal, the threshold would rise from 500 to 2,000, minus employees.

Companies often feel compelled to go public when they near the 500 mark, because the disclosure requirements are nearly the same as those for a public company. Observers were quick to note that the law could ease IPO pressure on businesses like Facebook, which is bumping up against that threshold, further inflating private trading markets without adding any financial clarity.

“Lots of companies with fairly substantial market capitalizations would avoid the transparency of being reporting companies,” said John Coffee, a law professor at Columbia University.

Crowd funding

Separately this week, the House approved legislation proposed by Rep. Patrick McHenry, R-N.C., that would allow small businesses to raise capital through what is called crowd funding. That would mean startups could solicit investments from a pool of small investors, not just high-net-worth investors.

Individuals could invest the lesser of $10,000 or 10 percent of their annual income. As long as the firms raise less than $1 million a year, they could provide scant if any financial disclosures (though they would have to highlight the risky nature of the offerings).

Meanwhile, the private-equity and investment-banking industries are pushing for even bigger changes. Last month, a group calling itself the IPO Task Force – including representatives from Hummer Winblad Venture Partners and the law firm Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati – submitted an audacious wish list for policymakers.

Complaining about the paucity of IPOs in recent years, it recommended a looser set of rules for “emerging growth companies” with less than $1 billion in annual gross revenue.

These companies would be able to take advantage of a five-year “on-ramp” period that would reduce requirements for disclosures of historical financial data. The bill would also exempt companies from regulations concerning shareholder voting rights on executive compensation and loosen rules regarding analyst conflicts of interests.

Some corporate governance experts think the very premise of an on-ramp is flawed.

The first five years “is exactly when you would need to have the best disclosures,” said Charles Elson, director of the center for corporate governance at the University of Delaware.

The argument in favor of these proposals is that freeing companies from onerous regulations put in place in recent years would allow them to more easily build capital, accelerate innovation and create jobs.

Advocates for the task force recommendations contend that the rules are directly responsible for the decline in IPOs in recent years. Without that potential payday, venture capitalists and other investors have less incentive to take chances on young companies.

“Given the urgency to get America back on the path to economic growth, we need to get capital back in the hands of companies that create jobs,” said Kate Mitchell, chair of the task force and managing director of Scale Venture Partners, in a statement.

These are all tantalizing promises in the current economic climate. But we’ve seen again and again why transparent information is critical for the investing public..

Shareholders of Enron lost $11 billion and employees saw their life savings evaporate when it turned out the company was hiding billions in shell firms and fudging its balance sheet.

More recently, Lehman Bros., Bear Stearns and AIG crashed and nearly took the global financial system with them after losing highly leveraged, complicated and opaque bets on toxic mortgages.

These economic crises prompted laws like the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, which required more thorough disclosures of things like off-balance-sheet transitions. Similarly, the Dodd-Frank Act, passed in the aftermath of the 2008 economic collapse, granted greater oversight of complex instruments like credit default swaps.

Watering down

But political memories are short, and the instinct to enact reforms to prevent future catastrophes fades as constituents shift their frustrations to stubborn unemployment rates. And so now, we see proposals to water down the protections that were just passed.

From the moments these rules went into effect, industry has lamented how the burdensome and expensive regulations harm business and discourage IPOs. But maybe these things should be burdensome and expensive.

There’s a great responsibility that goes along with accepting millions of dollars from college endowments, pension funds, mom-and-pop stock pickers and, yes, even accredited investors.

I’d submit that the decline in IPOs had at least as much to do with the market crashes brought about by dot-com pump-and-dump schemes and the subprime mortgage and derivatives fiasco.

In other words, the private-equity and investment-banking industries haven’t exactly proven themselves worthy of lighter regulations. On the contrary, they’ve repeatedly demonstrated an unconscionable eagerness to get away with exactly as much as they can, even at immense cost to the broader economy.

Obviously, this isn’t universally true, and not all startups, venture capitalists or investment banks should be tarnished by the acts of a few. But the best way for the rest of us to know the difference is through crystal-clear transparency.”

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

Article from SFGate.

“Facebook members have listened to more than 1.5 billion songs in the six weeks since the social network rolled out its latest Open Graph applications platform.

And the online music services that have hitched their wagon to Facebook are flourishing, according to stats posted on the company’s developers blog.

“As a result, some of our biggest music developers have more than doubled their active users, while earlier-stage startups and services starting with a smaller base have seen anywhere between a 2-10x increase in active users,” Facebook’s Casey Maloney Rosales Muller wrote. “It’s still early, but these results show that the Open Graph can be a powerful discovery mechanism for users and drive significant growth for developers.”

One big winner so far is Spotify, the online music service that just expanded to the United States in the summer. Since announcing it was plugging into the beta Open Graph protocol at the F8 developers’ conference Sept. 22, Spotify has gained more than 4 million new users.

And Earbits, the company that also powers SFGate Radio, has recorded a 1,350 percent increase in the number of users who become fans of bands they’re hearing, he said.

Meanwhile, MOG has grown 246 percent, Rdio has seen a 30-fold increase, Slacker reports an 11-fold increase and Deezer has added 10,000 users.

Ticketing sites Eventbrite, Ticketmaster and Ticketfly have also reported $2 to $6 in direct ticket sales for each link shared within Facebook.

And all this has happened before Facebook has had a chance to roll out Open Graph and new Timeline user profiles to a wider portion of its audience of 800 million users. The Palo Alto company says those rollouts are coming soon.”

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

Article from SFGate.

“The solar power system Facebook Inc. plans for its new Menlo Park headquarters won’t just supply electricity. It’ll heat water for the showers, too. And maybe help clean dishes in the cafe.

The system will be designed and installed by Cogenra Solar, a Mountain View startup that uses the sun’s energy to produce electricity and hot water at the same time. The collection of solar cells, mirrors and pipes will sit atop Facebook’s 10,000-square-foot fitness center, powering the exercise equipment and churning out steaming water for the locker rooms.

The technology’s dual use makes it far more cost-effective than conventional solar systems that provide electricity alone, said Cogenra CEO Gilad Almogy. And while neither company will say how much the array will cost Facebook, Almogy said the social networking giant will recoup its investment in less than five years.

“It’ll be a shorter payback than any other form of renewable energy,” Almogy said.

Planting solar panels on the office or warehouse roof has become de rigueur for many Bay Area companies. By those standards, Facebook’s solar array will be relatively modest, generating 60 kw of electricity and thermal output, combined. A typical home solar system produces about 3 kilowatts of electricity.

The array will cover only one roof on the nine-building campus, which used to house Sun Microsystems. But Facebook could expand the system if it performs as advertised, possibly using the hot water in the existing cafe and another planned for the campus. John Tenanes, Facebook’s director of global facilities, said his company is taking the same approach to solar that it takes to its Web service – checking out a promising new idea to assess its potential.

“We try stuff and see if it works,” he said. “And that’s what this is. Cogenra is really our initial investment (in solar power), and we’re going to see how well it works.”

Cogenra’s technology is designed to use energy that other solar set-ups waste.

Photovoltaic panels absorb a small fraction of the energy the sun throws at them, typically 15 to 20 percent. The rest is wasted as heat.

Cogenra arrays, however, run fluid-filled tubes behind the solar cells, with the fluid absorbing some of the heat cast off by the cells. The fluid – a chemical compound kept in a sealed loop – then transfers the heat to water. Curved troughs of mirrors concentrate sunlight on the cells, while motors keep the troughs pointed at the sun as it arcs across the sky.

Cogenra has already installed a 272-kilowatt system at a Sonoma winery, which uses the hot water to clean barrels. The Sonoma Wine Co. array, however, is mounted on the ground. The Facebook array will rest on the rooftop and will weigh far less. The company also plans to install a rooftop version of its technology on a University of Arizona dormitory.

“Not all customers who need significant amounts of hot water have nearby land to use,” Almogy said.

Backed by Khosla Ventures, Cogenra also tries to keep costs down by using solar cells, inverters, mirrors and tracking equipment made by other companies. The company’s ability to take off-the-shelf gear and turn it into something new impressed Facebook.

“They mashed together all these different things, and it seems to work well together,” Tenanes said.”

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

Article from GigaOm.

“Huawei is planning to boost its cloud computing offerings on the software side through acquisitions, but thanks to the uncertain politics related to the Chinese government, U.S. startups may not be in the running. The Chinese telecom gear maker has had its eye on the data center market for some time, and cloud computing is a hot opportunity in China(sub req’d) where the client-server computing paradigm didn’t have much chance to become entrenched.

Reuters reports that Li Sanqi, chief technology officer of Huawei’s IT hardware product line, said:

“I feel that we will have acquisitions in the cloud and ICT (information and communications technology) arenas. We are searching, but we’ll be careful in the United States for political reasons.”

His caution is well founded, as the United States has taken steps recently to prevent Huawei from selling gear that could be used in public safety equipment, and in February blocked it from acquiring the assets of a networking hardware startup called 3Leaf systems. The government prevented the deal at the recommendation of The Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), which exists to prevent sensitive technology from being acquired by foreign companies. The U.S. government has long been suspicious of Huawei’s ties to the Chinese government.

Huawei has repeatedly denied or downplayed those ties. However, fears of China’s hacking skills and technological advancements remain a large concern in the United States. For this reason, Huawei says it will look for startup companies in Canada, China and Israel, which means the myriad U.S. cloud software startups will have to find buyers a little closer to home.”

Read original post here.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »