Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Gerbsman Partners’

Article from SFGate.

High School Memories, an application on Facebook, lets people share recollections of their teenage years. It might surprise those users to learn that the app’s creator isn’t old enough for high school himself.

Cyrus Pishevar, a 13-year-old from Palo Alto, developed High School Memories after seeing how popular it was for his friends to “tag” photos of one another on the social network.

“The big idea is to make memories a social thing to do,” said Cyrus, who learned entrepreneurship from his dad, the founder of five startups. “When you type in your memories, it speaks more than just pictures can, especially when your friends help you through.”

Cyrus is part of Silicon Valley’s second generation of Web innovators – teenagers who grew up with the Internet and witnessed the rapid ascent of Facebook Inc. and other nearby companies. Raised by technology workers and introduced to computers and business early on, many local youngsters have chosen to build their own apps or start whole companies in lieu of after-school sports or summer camps.

“I was surrounded by tech everyday for so long that I gained a natural interest for it,” said Daniel Brusilovsky, an 18-year-old from San Mateo, whose upbringing by a software-manager father and Oracle Corp. veteran mother led him to found two startups before he was old enough to vote.

Fewer skills needed

It’s easier for teens to become Web entrepreneurs these days because writing software is cheaper and simpler, said Daniel Gross, the 19-year-old founder of Internet-search startup Greplin Inc., based in San Francisco.

“The tools require less expert knowledge,” Gross said. “Building a Facebook app doesn’t require you to have four years of computer science.”

Mentoring programs also have sprung up to help young entrepreneurs build their companies. In September, Facebook investor Peter Thiel pledged to make 20 grants of as much as $100,000 apiece to teenagers with startup ideas. He says he wants teens to pursue their dreams, rather than college, because traditional education steers them away from entrepreneurship and into steady jobs.

“We need to encourage young Americans to take more risks,” Thiel, who co-founded PayPal Inc. and now runs the investment firm Clarium Capital Management, said at the time.

‘Child soldiers’

Such efforts have drawn criticism for encouraging students to drop out, in the same way that a dream of playing in the NBA might prevent some kids from staying in school.

Pursuing entrepreneurship shouldn’t come before an education, said Vivek Wadhwa, a visiting scholar at UC Berkeley’s School of Information.

“These are Silicon Valley’s child soldiers,” he said. “The vast majority of them will fail miserably. Then they’ve screwed up their careers.”

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg didn’t drop out of Harvard until his company was gaining traction, when he was 20. That’s a model that young people should heed, Wadhwa said.

“If by any chance you happen to achieve the success that Zuckerberg did, then drop out of school,” he said. “But don’t screw up your education until you’ve done that.”

Board meetings

For Cyrus, who was present at his dad’s company meetings since he was a toddler, inspiration came well before he had to make decisions about college.

“He used to crawl between board members’ legs when I had meetings at home,” said Pishevar, who helped found Web development software maker WebOS Inc., mobile-app startup Social Gaming Network and three other companies, all since 1997.

By the time he was 6, Cyrus was learning how to use a computer and giving feedback to his dad on apps. Last year, Pishevar introduced him to Zuckerberg, now 26, at a movie screening in Palo Alto. Around that time, the preteen was coming up with his idea for a Facebook app.

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

Article from Fenwick and West.

“In 2002, Fenwick & West began publishing its Silicon Valley Venture Capital Survey. The survey was published in response to dramatic changes in the venture capital financing environment resulting from the bursting of the “dot-com bubble”, and our belief that there was a need for an objective analysis of how the venture capital environment had changed. The survey was well received and we have continued to publish it – a copy of the most recent survey is available here.
We believe that in recent years there has been a significant change in the angel/seed financing environment primarily in the internet/digital media and software industries. We believe these changes are due to the following factors:

The nature of these industries is such that products can be developed and introduced to the market quicker and with less resources than other industries. The development of new technologies has further accelerated the speed, and reduced the resources needed, to introduce new products in these industries.

These industries have now been around for at least a decade, if not longer, and as such a generation of successful entrepreneurs having the expertise, financial resources and interest is now available to assist and finance the current generation of entrepreneurs.
Venture capital has become harder to obtain, with venture capital investment in the U.S. overall declining from $29.9 billion in 2007 to $26.2 billion in 2010, and with investment in venture funds by limited partners declining even more precipitously, with $11.6 billion invested in 2010, the lowest amount since 2003, according to Dow Jones VentureSource.

As a result of these factors we believe that there have been the following changes in the angel/seed financing environment:

  • There has been a shift in the composition of investors, from largely friends and family, wealthy individuals and a few organized groups, to a larger percentage of professional angels, seed funds and venture capital funds willing to invest smaller amounts of capital.
  • The amounts raised in angel/seed financings have increased, and can exceed $1 million. Investors in these financings also have deeper pockets with the ability to participate in later rounds.
  • The terms of these financings have become more sophisticated and arms length, as investors are more likely to be true third parties investing larger sums, with an interest in being more active in the oversight of their investment.

In light of the increasing importance of angel/seed financings, and a desire to make objective information about such financings available to the community at large, we undertook a survey of 52 internet/digital media and software industry companies that obtained angel/seed financing[1] in 2010 in the Silicon Valley and Seattle markets.”

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

Article from SFGate.

“Here’s how effortless it is to move your digital music collection from Apple’s iTunes software to Amazon’s new Cloud Drive music service:

1. Visit Amazon.com, enter your user name and password, and find the link that says “upload files.”

2. Agree to the terms of service and solve a Captcha, one of those tricky image-recognition puzzles that prove you’re an human being.

3. Download Amazon’s MP3 uploader software, which scans the music on your hard drive.

4. Select about 1,000 of the gazillion songs you own and mark them for upload.

5. Wait around six hours for the upload to finish.

6. Download Amazon’s separate Cloud Player app for Android to stream that music to your phone, or use a Web browser to listen to it from any PC.

Sounds easy, right?

Welcome to the awkward stage of the digital music revolution. Online song sales have stagnated, depriving the endangered music industry of one of its last remaining lifelines. Yet digital music continues to be a vital battleground for Google, Apple and Amazon to try to lure users to their other devices and online offerings.

Now, Jeff Bezos & Co. have boldly tried to leapfrog Google and Apple in the quest to liberate people from the decade-old practice of buying and downloading digital songs to a computer and then manually transferring them between devices.

The idea behind “cloud music” is to let people stream their music collections from the Web to any computer or device. Analysts believe such services are inevitable – even if Amazon stumbles.

“Having access to your music on all your devices has to be the starting point of any next-generation music service and product,” said Mark Mulligan, an analyst at Forrester Research.

That’s the vision, but right now, the convoluted uploading process is the result of key trade-offs Amazon made to get to the cloud music market before its rivals.

Licensing deals

First, major labels want new licensing arrangements for cloud services and a bigger cut of the online music pie. Their demands have slowed down the introduction of cloud music features, and Amazon designed its service without their permission, instigating a wave of complaints from Sony Music Entertainment and Warner Music Group.

“We’re disappointed by their decision to launch without a license,” said Brian Garrity, a spokesman for Sony.

Bill Carr, Amazon’s vice president for music and movies, claims Amazon “highly values” its relationship with the labels, but compares uploading songs to the legally harmless practice of attaching a hard drive to your PC and transferring music files to it.

Amazon primarily designed a service to comply with copyright laws – not to make shifting music to the cloud seamless. Amazon requires users to upload their own copies of songs that it could more easily supply from its digital store. Services like MyPlay and Mp3tunes have tried the same basic approach over the years. None attracted many users.

Amazon, which controls only about 13 percent of the digital music market despite four years of battling iTunes, apparently believes it has unique advantages in the coming cloud music battle.

Thanks to the massive server capacity backing its successful cloud computing business, in which it rents computing power to other companies, Amazon can offer its streaming music users 5 gigabytes of music storage for free, or 20 GB if they buy just one album from Amazon. The company is also prominently advertising the service on its home page.

“We observed from our other digital media businesses that buy-once, play-anywhere really resonates with consumers,” Carr said.

The service Amazon released last week has been criticized for being difficult to use and incompatible with Apple iPads and iPhones.

Not social

“There’s nothing social about it. How can you launch anything on the Web today that doesn’t integrate social?” said David Pakman, the former chief executive of eMusic and a partner at Palo Alto venture capital firm Venrock.

David Hyman, founder of Berkeley music subscription service Mog, says of Amazon’s cloud offering: “It’s a stepping-stone. This is Amazon putting its feet in and testing the waters.”

So what does the future of cloud music look like? Google, Apple or Amazon might finally get the major-label licenses that will allow them to make storing music collections in the cloud seamless for users. (Instead of uploading each song, the service could simply scan the names of songs in a collection and reproduce them in the cloud.) Or subscription music services such as Mog, Rdio and Rhapsody that offer unlimited access to a broad catalog of Web-based music for a monthly fee may find the mainstream success that has long eluded them.

Such an unlimited cloud music offering may be Amazon’s ultimate goal; Carr doesn’t rule out developing a music subscription service and offering it for free to members of Amazon Prime.

“This is an exciting Day One,” he said of Cloud Drive. “We always have an open mind.”

Read original post here.

Read Full Post »

Article from Techcrunch.

“No, Conduit was not acquired for a billion dollars or more by Google or Microsoft … yet (although one executive suggested to me in a phone call this week that the company should, in fact, be worth about half of Facebook’s valuation on the private market – meaning about $35 billion at present day – because they reach about half of the social network’s audience).

We’ll see about that.

Either way, what’s really happening, according to solid sources close to the company, Conduit is in fact acquiring another Israeli startup in the Web app publishing and distribution space, namely Wibiya, and they added that the deal could close as early as next Monday or Tuesday.

According to those people, who are familiar with the negotiations, the transaction hasn’t been signed off yet and the deal could still fall through, although multiple sources I’ve spoken with are confident the acquisition will close soon.

I hear that the purchase price is roughly $45 million, which means the deal would give a solid return to both Wibiya’s founders and investors, who have pumped about $2.6 million into the company. Backers include Primera Capital, Yossi Vardi, Oded Vardi and Jeff Pulver.

If the acquisition closes, all 17 Wibiya employees are expected to join Conduit.

Wibiya essentially enables publishers to add a social layer to their websites, rendering said sites interactive, free of charge, in order to grow their audience organically.

It is similar to what Conduit does, although Conduit is mostly known for its Web toolbars and web application marketplace. Complementarity seems to be the key word, here.

From what I’ve gathered about the company, Wibiya currently partners with publishers of about 120,000 websites, many of which are small ones, although its customer base also includes the likes of TheStreet.com, Playboy.com and Glam.com. In total, Wibiya is said to reach 200 million unique users, although that is to be taken with a grain of salt in my opinion (even Twitter reportedly boasts less active users than that).

Conduit partners with companies like Zynga, Fox, MLB and Time Warner Cable to reach about 230 million unique users, according to its own count. I should note that the company does seem to do extremely well even though those numbers seem to be inflated: it has raised less than $10 million since its founding in 2005 and boasts about 250 employees today.”

Read original posting here.

Read Full Post »

Article from TechCrunch.

“$41 million. From Sequoia Capital, Bain Capital, and Silicon Valley Bank. Pre-launch.

That’s how much a brand new startup called Color has to work with. Your eyebrows should already be raised, and here’s something to keep them fixed there: this is the most money Sequoia has ever invested in a pre-launch startup. Or, as the Color team put it, “That’s more than they gave Google.”

But the founding team goes a long way toward explaining it. Headed by Bill Nguyen — who sold Lala to Apple in late 2009 — the company has attracted a wealth of talent. It has seven founders including Nguyen and company president Peter Pham, who previously founded BillShrink. And its chief of product is DJ Patil, who was previously LinkedIn’s chief scientist.

So what exactly is Color?

Update: The application is now available for the iPhone at Color.com. Android is coming.

At first glance, it looks like another mobile photo app, like Path, Instagram, or PicPlz. You take snapshots with your mobile phone (the app supports both Android and iOS at launch) and they appear in a stream of photos. And there aren’t even any of those trendy lenses to spruce up your images. Sounds pretty basic, right?

But the beauty of Color stems from what it’s doing differently. Unlike Instagram and Path, there isn’t an explicit friend or following system — you don’t browse through lists of contacts and start following their photo stream. Instead, all social connections in the application are dynamic and established on-the-fly depending on whom you’re hanging out with. And your photos are shared with everyone in the vicinity. In some senses this is the Twitter of photo apps — it’s all public, all the time (I’m ignoring Twitter’s protected tweets, since most people don’t use them). Another way to look at it: it’s almost the complete opposite of Path, which is built around sharing photos with an intimate group of friends.

It’s difficult to explain what Color does with a bullet list of features, so I’ll try painting an example that hopefully demonstrates how it works.

Say you walk into a restaurant with twenty people in it. You sit down at a table with four friends, and start chatting. Then one of your friends pulls out their phone, fires up Color, and takes a snapshot of you and your buddies.

That photo is now public to anyone within around 100 feet of the place it was taken. So if anyone else in the restaurant fires up Color, they’ll see the photograph listed in a stream alongside other photos that have recently been taken in the vicinity.

In a crowded area these streams of photos will get noisy, so Color also has some grouping features. Tell it which four people you’re eating with, and Color will create a temporal group with a stream of just the photos you and your buddies have taken. But here’s the twist: because everything on the service is public, you can also swipe to view other groups, to see what the tables next to you are snapping photos of. And you can always jump to the main stream, which shows a mishmash of photos taken by everyone.

It takes some time to wrap your head around, and my time with the app was limited, so I can’t really vouch for how well it works. But there’s some very interesting technology that’s working behind the scenes to make Color more than just a simple group photo app.

First are the social connections, called your Elastic Network. All of your contacts are presented in a list of thumbnails ordered by how strong your connection is to that user. Whenever Color detects that you’re physically near another user (in other words, that you’re hanging out), your bond on the app gets a little stronger. So when you fire up the app and jump to your list of contacts, you’ll probably see your close friends and family members listed first. But if you don’t see a friend for a long time, they’ll gradually flow down the list, and eventually their photos will fade from color to black-and-white.

These social connections are important because they’re the only way to view a stream of photos beyond those have been taken near you. If you fired up Color in that restaurant example from earlier, you’d only be able to see photos that had been taken by friends and strangers within 100 feet of that restaurant. That is, unless you jump to your social connections. Tap on your best friend’s profile photo, and you’ll then be able to see all of the photos that have recently been taken within 100 feet of them. In other words, Color is trying to give you a way to see everything that’s going on around you, and everything that’s going on around the people you care about.

The Groups feature also makes use of this elastic network. In the restaurant example above, the application would likely already know who your friends were based on your previous interactions and would automatically place them in the same group — you wouldn’t have to manually do it yourself.

Color is also making use of every phone sensor it can access. The application was demoed to me in the basement of Color’s office — where there was no cell signal or GPS reception. But the app still managed to work normally, automatically placing the people who were sitting around me in the same group. It does this using a variety of tricks: it uses the camera to check for lighting conditions, and even uses the phone’s microphone to ‘listen’ to the ambient surroundings. If two phones are capturing similar audio, then they’re probably close to each other.

So far I’ve described a compelling and unique photo app with some neat tricks. But how exactly is Color going to make “wheelbarrows of cash”, as Nguyen says?

At this point the company is still very early on, but it eventually plans to offer businesses a self-serve platform for running deals and ads as part of the Color experience (you fire up the app to see the photos being taken around you, and you also see the special of the day, for example).

But that’s just the start. Nguyen has visions of fundamentally changing some aspects of social interaction and local discovery with the app, which he considers part of the so-called Post-PC movement. Using all of the data being collected (remember, the app is taking advantage of all of your phone’s sensors), Color hopes to eventually start recommending nearby points of interest, and maybe even interesting people.

There are still plenty of questions, even about the existing service. This kind of voyeurism — you’re sharing photos with the world and looking at photos from strangers — could take a while to get used to. People may reject it entirely. Or it may be completely addictive. There’s really no way to tell until people start using the app in the wild.

The future is unclear, but promising. And with this much money in the bank and a staff of 27, Color has plenty of time to hone in on what works.”

Read original post here.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »