Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘boic’

Article from NYTimes.

Apple fired the executives in charge of the company’s mobile software efforts and retail stores, in a management shake-up aimed at making the company’s divisions work more harmoniously together.

The biggest of the changes involved the departure of Scott Forstall, an Apple veteran who for several years ran software development for Apple’s iPad and iPhone products. Mr. Forstall was an important executive at the company and the one who, in many respects, seemed to most closely embody the technology vision of Steven P. Jobs, the former chief executive of Apple who died a year ago.

But Mr. Forstall was also known as ambitious and divisive, qualities that generated more friction within Apple after the death of Mr. Jobs, who had kept the dueling egos of his senior executives largely in check. Mr. Forstall’s responsibilities will be divided among a few other Apple executives.

While tensions between Mr. Forstall and other executives had been mounting for some time, a recent incident appeared to play a major role in his dismissal. After an outcry among iPhone customers about bugs in the company’s new mobile maps service, Mr. Forstall refused to sign a public apology over the matter, dismissing the problems as exaggerated, according to people with knowledge of the situation who declined to be named discussing confidential matters.

Instead, Timothy D. Cook, Apple’s chief executive, in September signed the apology letter to Apple customers over maps.

Apple said in a news release on Monday that the management changes would “encourage even more collaboration” at the company. But people briefed on Apple’s moves, who declined to be identified talking about confidential decisions at the company, said Mr. Forstall and John Browett were fired.

Steve Dowling, an Apple spokesman, said neither executive was available for an interview. Mr. Forstall did not respond to interview requests over e-mail and Facebook.

Mr. Browett, who took over as head of the company’s retail operations in April, will also leave the company after a number of missteps. Apple said that a search for a new head of retail was under way and that the retail team would report directly to Mr. Cook in the meantime.

Mr. Forstall will leave Apple next year and serve as an adviser to Mr. Cook until then.

Eddy Cue, who oversees Apple’s Internet services, will take over development of Apple maps and Siri, the voice-activated virtual assistant in the iPhone. Both technologies have been widely criticized by some who say they fall short of the usual polish of Apple products.

Jonathan Ive, the influential head of industrial design at Apple, will take on more software responsibilities at the company by providing more “leadership and direction for Human Interface,” Apple said. Craig Federighi, who was previously in charge of Apple’s Mac software development, will also lead development of iOS, the software for iPads and iPhones.

Apple said Bob Mansfield, an executive who previously ran hardware engineering and was planning to retire from Apple, will lead a new group, Technologies. That group will combine Apple’s wireless and semiconductor teams. Apple in a statement said the semiconductor teams had “ambitious plans for the future.”

Recently, Mr. Mansfield had been working on his own projects at the company, operating without anyone reporting to him directly. One of the areas of interest Mr. Mansfield had been exploring is health-related accessories and applications for Apple’s mobile products, said an Apple partner who declined to be named discussing unannounced products.

Mr. Forstall was a staunch believer in a type of user interface, skeuomorphic design, which tries to imitate artifacts and textures in real life. Most of Apple’s built-in applications for iOS use skeuomorphic design, including imitating thread of a leather binder in the Game Center application and a wooden bookshelf feel in the newsstand application.

Mr. Jobs was also a proponent of skeuomorphic design; he had a leather texture added to apps that mimicked the seats on his private jet. Yet most other executives, specifically Mr. Ive, have always believed that these artifacts looked outdated and that user interface design on the computer had reached a point where skeuomorph was no longer necessary.

Mr. Forstall, who trained as an actor at a young age, also shared with Mr. Jobs a commanding stage presence at events introducing Apple products, often delivering his speeches with a pensive style that echoed that of Mr. Jobs.

According to two people who have worked with Apple to develop new third-party products for the iPhone, the relationship between Mr. Forstall and Mr. Ive had soured to a point that the two executives would not sit in the same meeting room together.

A senior Apple employee who asked not to be named said Mr. Forstall had also incurred the ire of other executives after inserting himself into product development that went beyond his role at the company. One person in touch with Apple executives said the mood of people at the company was largely positive about Mr. Forstall’s departure.

“This was better than the Giants winning the World Series,” he said. “People are really excited.”

The departure of Mr. Browett was less surprising to outsiders. In August, the company took the unusual step of publicly apologizing for a plan by Mr. Browett to cut back on staffing at its stores. Charlie Wolf, an analyst at Needham & Company, said he was never convinced that Mr. Browett was a good choice to join Apple because he had previously run Dixons, a British retailer that is viewed as being more downmarket than Apple’s retail operations.

Read Full Post »

Article from PEHub.

If there is good news to be had in private equity these days, it is that limited partners seem to want to put new money to work.

Several recent studies have pointed in this direction, including one from Preqin, which found that a large number of endowments, public pensions, family offices, sovereign wealth funds and foundations want to invest in the coming year.

The top area of interest is buyouts. Second on the list is venture capital. Almost half of potential investors name venture as an asset class they will consider, Preqin says in a report issued this month.

This is welcome news to the industry. That’s because there is no shortage of funds out looking for cash. Preqin, in its study, finds 372 venture capital funds on the road, or nearly a fifth of all private equity funds on the fundraising trail. Together they seek $47.2 billion in commitments.

Many GPs will argue that consistency is their forte. But only some can truly make that claim, the study finds. Preqin assembled a list of the most consistent performers in venture based on IRR, fund year, strategy and geography. Only active managers that have three or more funds with a similar strategy are included and still formative 2010, 2011 and 2012 funds are not included.

Tied at the top of the list are Benchmark Capital, GGV Capital, Pittsford Ventures Management and Sequoia Capital, with the strongest record of top quartile funds. The list from the report is reprinted below.

(Editors note: The average quartile rank in the table is determined by scoring each fund. A top quartile fund gets a “1” and a second quartile fund gets a “2,” etc. The ranking is an average. Photo above courtesy of Shutterstock.)

Read Full Post »

While we often think of small nimble startups as the true innovators in technology, that hasn’t necessarily been the case in network infrastructure for the last few years. A study of venture capital funding from Ovum shows that while overall tech investment has recovered since the dark days of the recession, the vast majority of that spending went to services and applications startups like Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp and Spotify.

Meanwhile, the startup companies that make the gear over which those services traverse have seen investment fall from $796 million in 2009 annually to just $270 million in the 12 months ending in June, Ovum found. According to Ovum principal analyst Matt Walker:

“A funding disconnect has thereby emerged between network builders and network users. Lots of innovation and venture capital is targeting the network users, such as mobile apps and OTT platforms. However, little of it is directly helping the network builders. With a weak start-up pipeline, the industry relies more on incumbent vendors to generate new ideas and products. Their budgets are bigger, but VCs are often better at funding ‘game changing’ ideas ignored by established vendors.”

Admittedly, investing in the next big social network or an app that could generate millions of downloads is a lot sexier than, say, envelope tracking technology or cell site radio frequency filters. But those infrastructure innovations are just as important. The capabilities of many apps and services have already far exceeded the ability of our mobile networks to deliver those apps and services at a reasonable cost (think Netflix on 4G tablet). If we let network innovation slip, we could wind up with a bunch of very powerful services that have nowhere to go.

As Walker points out, the onus for innovation thus falls on the big established telecom vendors, and it’s quite the burden. Ovum estimates that with the falloff in startup investment, big network infrastructure makers’ R&D budgets are now 90 times larger than the investment going into networking startups –- that’s up from 30X two years ago.

Don’t get me wrong — the Ciscos, Ericssons and Huaweis of the world are responsible for some amazing science and innovation. And today they’re building the small cell and heterogeneous networks of the future. But there are limits to what the big vendors can accomplish. The R&D budgets of the big industrial labs have shrunk immensely in the last two decades, and there’s only so much talent and so many resources those vendors can devote to innovation.  The biggest issue, though, is that the big equipment makers innovate in much different ways than small startups.

Big vendors have big ingrained investments

Look around. A lot of the wired and wireline networks we use on a daily basis have been with us for a while. The first 2G networks in the US went up in the late 1990s and they’re largely still in use. A good part of the big vendors’ businesses is maintaining, upgrading and iterating on the networks they’ve already built.

That doesn’t mean the big vendors are merely redesigning the same old equipment, but they’re definitely looking for continuity with their older networks. Alcatel-Lucent’s lightRadio and Nokia Siemens’ Liquid Radio architectures, for instance, are truly mind-blowing approaches to the new heterogeneous network, but they’re still fundamentally the cellular technologies that have been these vendors’ bread and butter since the birth of wireless.

When Wi-Fi came along as a mobile data alternative to cellular, these vendors were resistant if not outright hostile. It took two startups, BelAir Networks and Ruckus Wireless to make the business case to carriers for large-scale outdoor Wi-Fi networks to supplement 3G and 4G networks.

 

The lightRadio Cube, Alcatel-Lucent’s vision for the small cell.

The big vendors are working largely within global standards frameworks. That’s by no means a bad thing. It’s why an iPhone can communicate with a Nokia-built base station, and a Cisco router can be plugged into an Ericsson core network. But standards work is painfully slow. A lot of the innovation work in networking technology works goes on outside of the standards bodies, and if that work proves successful it wind up shaping the standards themselves.

There’s probably no better example in wireless than CDMA. Qualcomm’s upstart cellular interface was initially adopted by a single US carrier, AirTouch, but it eventually became the basis for all global 3G networks.

Innovating between the lines

While the big vendors have focused on the overarching evolution of networks it’s up to infrastructure core technology startups to fill in technology gaps. Companies like NSN and Ericsson will most certainly handle the large-scale rollout of small cells and hetnets in the future, just like Apple and Samsung will be designing our future 4G smartphones and connected tablets.

But it will be startups like Seattle’s still under-the-radar PivotBeam that are developing the critical software defined antennas that will link these millions of small cells back to the network core. And it will be small engineering companies like Nujira and Quantance supplying the power envelope tracking technology giving those 4G phones a tolerable battery life.

I’m not saying all of these specific companies are all going to be the next Qualcomm, and that you should go invest in them. But they’re part of a critical network infrastructure startup scene, and that scene appears to be shrinking. We’re already starting to see the consequences. The industry has started delivering speed in the form of LTE but it has so far failed to deliver us the cheap capacity critical to moving the mobile industry forward. If the investors keep neglecting network startups, that problem is only going to get worse.

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

Article from GigaOm.

SolarCity, which started as a residential solar installer and is planning a $201 million IPO, has now jumped into building solar panel farms for utilities. The company announced on Thursday a deal to build a 12 MW(ac) project for Hawaiian utility Kaua’i Island Utility Cooperative.

The $40 million project is unusual because SolarCity, founded in 2006, has spent most of its resources building up an installation and financing business for residential and business customers (including schools and public agencies). This business has positioned the company as an electric retail service provider who competes with utilities. The Kauai project is the first announced project by SolarCity to build a solar farm for a utility, said Jonathan Bass, SolarCity’s spokesman. (The company previously also lined up a fund from Pacific Gas & Electric‘s investment arm to market solar panels and leasing products to home and business owners).

The engineering and construction contract on Kauai will give SolarCity the experience of working with a new class of customers. More utilities across the country are interested in building their own solar energy projects in order to meet regulatory mandates or because they see it as a good investment opportunities to bet on renewable energy. We have noted in previous posts that SolarCity was going after larger and larger projects, and that placed the company in direct competition with more established players in that segment, such as SunEdison, SunPower and First Solar.

The utility solar market is growing faster than the residential and commercial segments primarily because the projects involved tend to be larger, in tens or hundreds of megawatts, and potentially more lucrative. And many utilities in large states, such as California, need to serve an increasing amount of renewable energy to their customers. Some of the overhead costs also could be lower when it comes to utility-scale projects: you don’t need to send out an army of marketing and sales people to sell consumers systems that are kilowatts in size.

If SolarCity has any ambition to expand beyond the U.S. market, it would do well to gain an expertise in developing and installing utility projects. In many markets overseas, the biggest opportunities lie with working with utilities to boost the amount of renewable energy they serve and taking advantage of government subsidies for that type of projects.

SolarCity is among the first to offer homeowners leases so that they don’t have to pay a high upfront cost of installing solar panels. Instead, homeowners pay a monthly fee via long-term contracts for the electricity from the panels, which are owned by the investors, typically banks, that have set up funds for SolarCity to install and manage the equipment. Solar leases have become popular and are offered by many more companies now, and they accounted for over half of the residential installations in California, the country’s largest solar market. Part of the sales pitch for the leases is a promise  – or at least a strong suggestion – that consumers will end up paying lower electric rates over time than they would with their local utilities.

The California company also has lined up some big-name business customers, including Walmart, eBay and Intel. Nearly a year ago, SolarCity said it had secured a loan to install 300 MW of solar panels in military housing communities across the country.

In recent years, SolarCity entered other types of energy service businesses. It began to offer energy audits and home-improvement services to help homeowners save electricity use and cost. It also now offer energy storage using lithium-ion battery packs from Tesla Motors and install solar powered charging stations for electric cars (such as Tesla’s cars).

For the Kauai project, SolarCity intends to install solar panel on 67 acres that are part of a former sugar plantation. The utility and SolarCity still need to secure local and state permits, but the plan is to start construction in July 2013 and switch on the solar farm in 2014. Electricity from the solar farm will be enough to serve about 6 percent of Kauai’s daily energy demand, the companies said.

Kauai is one of the Hawaiian islands and is home to nearly 68,000 residents. It’s set a goal of generating renewable energy to meet 50 percent of its needs by2023. The project announced Thursday is one of the three solar farms, totaling 30 MW(ac), that are being developed by the Kauai utility.

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

Article from SFGate.

The Knight Capital Group Inc. trading firm said it lost $764.3 million in the third quarter because of a software glitch that flooded the stock market with trades one day in August, causing dozens of stocks to fluctuate wildly.

Knight said Wednesday that the software glitch cost it $461.1 million in financial losses. The company also took a charge of $143 million to reflect its weaker brand and competitive position after the episode.

The problems began for Knight early on Aug. 1, when dozens of stocks started rising and falling sharply for no apparent reason. Wizzard Software, for example, shot up above $14 after closing the night before at $3.50.

Knight takes stock trading orders from big brokers like TD Ameritrade and E-Trade. It routes the orders to exchanges including the New York Stock Exchange.

After Knight acknowledged that a technical glitch in its software had caused the disruption, its stock lost three-fourths of its value in two days. Knight had to cede control of its operations on the New York Stock Exchange and obtain a financial rescue from Wall Street peers.

Knight, based in Jersey City, N.J., managed to eke out a small profit after excluding losses from the trading fiasco. Its stock rose 5 percent in premarket trading.

Knight’s loss amounts to $6.30 per share for the period ended Sept. 30. That compares with net income of $26.9 million, or 29 cents per share, a year ago.

The technology issue accounted for a financial loss of $2.46 per share, plus 76 cents per share for the related impairment charge.

Excluding those and other one-time items, Knight said it earned a penny per share. Analysts had forecast 2 cents per share, according to a FactSet survey.

Chairman and CEO Tom Joyce said that the company was gratified that it managed a small profit on an adjusted basis.

“I believe the recovery to date speaks to the strength of our offering, the dedication of Knight’s client teams and deep client relationships we enjoy,” he said.

Net trading revenue was negative because of the software glitch. Knight Capital’s market making segment was hit the hardest, reporting net negative revenues of $341.2 million.

After the trading losses threatened its survival, Knight received $400 million from an investor group that included Jefferies Group, Blackstone, Getco, Stephens, Stifel Nicolaus and TD Ameritrade. The investors received stock that can be converted into a 73 percent stake in Knight, which means Knight essentially handed over control to the investor group.

Knight also added three directors to its board, increasing its size to 10 members.

Knight’s stock slipped 5 cents to $2.53 in morning trading Wednesday. Its shares fell to a 52-week low of $2.27 in August. They traded as high as $14 per share almost a year ago.

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »