Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘zynga’

Here is a SF gate story that talks about high-tech growth.

“The technology industry is playing the white knight of San Francisco’s struggling office market, as startups and growing companies ink deals and scour the market for space emptied out by the financial meltdown.

Many of the tenants are swelling homegrown businesses like Twitter, while others are relocating from Silicon Valley or outside the Bay Area. As of June 15, 83 technology companies were in the market, seeking 1.5 million square feet of space, up 51 percent since the financial crash in fall 2008, according to brokerage firm Jones Lang LaSalle, which regularly tracks the market.

To be sure, that demand alone won’t turn around a market facing more than 13 million square feet of total vacancy, according to a first-quarter research report from Cassidy Turley BT Commercial. But it’s a big step in the right direction for San Francisco’s office market and employment.

“The greatest areas of job growth in San Francisco and the drivers for economic activity across a whole host of related sectors will come from those innovative industries,” said Michael Cohen, director of the mayor’s office of economic development.

One of the largest potential deals in the market is Zynga, the maker of popular social-networking games like FarmVille and Mafia Wars. The company is looking for anywhere from 150,000 square feet to 300,000 square feet of space, according to various industry sources, who asked to remain anonymous because disclosure of such information could affect their business.

Zynga was on the verge of signing a lease for approximately 140,000 square feet last fall, but that deal fell apart.

“Zynga doesn’t have an update on our expansion plans right now,” a spokeswoman said in an e-mail response to a Chronicle inquiry.

Expansion

Twitter, the popular microblogging service, expanded its San Francisco space by nearly six times in the past year. It had been looking for still more space, as much as an additional 100,000 square feet, but that effort seems to have gone quiet, sources say.

An especially encouraging trend for San Francisco business boosters, who have long lamented the exodus of companies to surrounding regions, is the relocation of a handful of Silicon Valley firms to the city in recent months.

Industry blog TechCrunch and video-streaming site MetaCafe moved up from Palo Alto, while Webcasting service Ustream and tech-consulting firm Encover Inc. arrived from Mountain View. Mobile application company Booyah Inc., also of Palo Alto, recently signed a lease to shift its headquarters to San Francisco.

In addition, gaming companies like Playdom Inc. and Playfish opened satellite offices in San Francisco, and Yammer Inc. moved to the city from Los Angeles. Meanwhile, there are a handful of out-of-state, and even out-of-country, companies touring space in the market right now, sources say.

Real estate and technology observers believe San Francisco is becoming a more attractive place to start a company or move to for a variety of reasons, including: South of Market rents that are about half of Palo Alto’s right now, the desire to cluster near success stories like Zynga and Twitter and the broader shift to the Web 2.0 world.

As Internet companies become as focused on social media and entertainment as they are on underlying technology, they want to locate near a different set of partners, customers and talent pools, several executives said.

It’s all about layering

“Tech is still the core of what we do, but you’ve got to add layers on top of this,” said David Rice, chief operating officer of MetaCafe Inc.

The company’s new address, at 128 King St., with exposed brick and a view of AT&T Park that puts their previous business-park space to shame, made it easier to tap into marketing, media and advertising expertise in the city, he said.

Other companies’ leaders say they opted for San Francisco because that’s where today’s engineering talent wants to be as well.

When David Sacks, chief executive of Yammer, asked his developers whether they should relocate the microblogging service for businesses to Palo Alto or San Francisco, the latter won hands down. This represents a distinct shift from a decade earlier when he was chief operating officer of PayPal in Palo Alto.

“There’s a lot more engineering talent living in San Francisco now,” he said. “The balance of power may have shifted.”

Web 2.0 firms also don’t need the massive research and development facilities required by the computer manufacturers and chipmakers that gave rise to Silicon Valley.

“Companies like Twitter can have incredible reach with a relatively small workforce,” said Kelly Pretzer, director of new media for the mayor’s office of economic development. “San Francisco has been able to complement that development in the industry nicely.”

Read more here.

Read Full Post »

Here is a very thought provoking article in regards to Yahoo and its future. Very readworthy.

“A source close to Yahoo’s strategic planning recently complained to us that Yahoo has “a fundamental innovator’s dilemma.”

What he meant is that while Yahoo has flat traffic, flat revenues, and increasingly limited growth opportunities, it can’t innovate it’s way out of the problem with bold new products because it has to fund, protect, and iterate on “a big existing business that is, let’s face it, very profitable” — display advertising on Yahoo.com and the company’s other media sites.

So while there is, at Yahoo, “a core group of people who still want [and] believe that Yahoo can change things,” these product directors and line engineers increasingly find themselves working not for a tech company, but for a media company content to serve ad impressions against an already huge Web audience.

Right now, this “innovator’s dilemma” is mostly a mild inconvenience that makes Yahoo a less fun place for Silicon Valley engineers and executives to work (which is why so many are quitting). But someday soon, it could kill the company.

That’s because Yahoo’s entire big, existing, profitable business is dependent on consumers continuing to use the Internet and the “Web” the way they are right now for the foreseeable future. That may be a bad bet.

Just ask Google, which is cranking out $25 billion a year on desktop search, but is scrambling to develop a mobile business anyway. Ask Apple, which used to just make Macs, but now calls itself a mobile devices maker. Or ask our source close to Yahoo who believes “the Web is on a verge of a tectonic shift” and that “the [Web] page as a dominate paradigm is going away.”

Our source believes this upcoming “tectonic shift” presents an opportunity for Yahoo to “leverage and benefit from the next disruption.” We agree. But first Yahoo has to solve its “innovator’s dilemma.”

Here are four possible solutions Yahoo CEO Carol Bartz and Yahoo’s historically inept board of directors could pursue:

Seek a leveraged buyout lead by a large private equity firm such as KKR or Blackstone. In theory, this would allow Yahoo to ignore the quarter-by-quarter scrutiny that forces it to protect its display business above all else and re-invest in innovation. To do it it, a PE firm would have to borrow about $30 billion. The problem is PE firms typically buy a company because they believe they can “strip mine” it down to a single, healthy business and then sell it back to the public as a more efficient machine. That doesn’t sound a like a recipe for innovation to us. Finally, remember when Terra Firma acquired record label EMI in hopes of figuring out the Internet? That was a big nasty old bust.

Sell 20% or more of the company to a mid-stage private equity firm, such as Digital Sky Technologies, Elevation Partners, or whomever else Quincy Smith and CODE Advisers could con into the gig. The new part-owners could kick Carol upstairs into the chairmanship and bring in a product-oriented chief executive, who, unlike the last one (cofounder Jerry Yang) is also able to make decisions. The problem with this option is that it requires co-operation from Carol and the board. Also, it assumes shareholders will provide Yahoo some leash after the deal. The other problem is that the model to follow here is Palm, which brought on a ton of Apple execs after Elevation Partners invested. That experiment failed.

Read Full Post »

Here is an Article worth reading from Ajax World Magazine.

“As we start this year, hope is mounting on a vibrant IPO market, better than last couple of years. This article lists 20 companies that are hot candidates for IPO. The list has some well-known names like Facebook, Skype, LinkedIn, Twitter, Digg, Yelp, LiveOps, and Tesla Motors. The less known names are – Associated Content, Brightcove, Chegg, Demand Media Etsy, Exact Target, Gilt Group, Glam Media, Rearden Commerce, Workday, and Zynga.

Workday is the new company founded by Peoplesoft founder David Duffield. It’s a SaaS-based HR and ERP company. Zynga is a hot company in the virtual gaming space on the Internet. It’s famous game Farmville is raking in good revenue from Facebook users. I hear the game is quite addictive.

Twitter is rumored to be valued at billion plus dollars, that with very little revenue. It has the publish-subscribe model where conversations-by-subject can be tracked. That should be a bonanza for marketers,  seeking specific target audiences.

Most of the companies in the list are addressing “content” either the discovery or the publishing of. We don’t see the old-fashioned enterprise applications anywhere, a reflection of the changing times. Workday is in that category, but purely cloud-based offering just like SalesForce.com few years back.

Companies like LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, and Skype brag huge number of eyeballs (users), bringing back memories of the dot.com days. Jeff Bezos in the height of the boom had said, “I spell profit as prophet”.

Let us get back to some crazy wealth-creation via IPOs. It’s about time.”

Read the original post here.

Read Full Post »

Here is a good article written by Chris O’Brien, San Jose Mercury News.

“Last week, I reviewed my predictions for 2009. And by grading myself generously, I got 3.5 out of 9. So now it’s on to 2010, when hopefully my foresight, and the valley’s economy, will improve.

It’s tempting to pick some easy targets to inflate my score. But instead, I’m going to make some daring picks, again, because when it comes to punditry, it’s always better to wrong than boring. Or something like that.

So, onward:

1. Palm will be sold.

Sad to say, but it’s inevitable. This will be the year this valley icon ceases to be an independent company. The launch of the Palm Pre and Pixi were valiant efforts. They created an exciting mobile platform and should be valuable to someone else. But sales of the Pre are already stalling. And so is cash flow.

There are plenty of potential buyers out there, from other mobile companies like Motorola and Nokia to other tech biggies like Hewlett-Packard and Dell, which need to get deeper into the mobile space.

2. There will be at least four valley-based green-tech IPOs.

Everyone is predicting a big comeback for the IPO this year. I don’t think that will happen for Silicon Valley. But I think green-tech will be the exception. I had started writing this before Solyndra filed for its IPO. So I’ve only got three to go! Who are the other candidates? Tesla and Silver Springs Networks seem to be increasingly good bets. The fourth will be a dark horse.

3. Intel settles

everything.

The deal with AMD was the first step to putting Intel’s long-running legal feuds in the past. Yes, the legal thicket seem to be getting worse with the filing of the Federal Trade Commission’s case against Intel. But the economy is warming back up, and so are computer and chip sales. Intel will make the smart move by settling these cases so it can focus on reaping the benefits of an improving economy.

4. The mythical beasts will arrive: the Apple Tablet and the Google Phone.

My colleague, Troy Wolverton, says nay, the Google phone will remain a mirage. Indeed, the existence of these two products has been long rumored and much denied. But the increasing chatter about both leads me to believe we’ll see them in 2010.

The intriguing question is: How much will they cost? Apple has recently overcharged for new products like the iPhone, and then brought the price down. I wouldn’t be surprised if the same happens with the tablet.

For Google, there’s a radical notion making its way around the valley: What if Google gave away its phone for free, hoping to make money off mobile advertising? Now, that would be truly disruptive. It has the billions in the bank to underwrite such a plan for several years. But does it have the guts?

5. Facebook and LinkedIn won’t go public.

These social networking companies are in no hurry. Facebook is still tweaking its revenue model, as is LinkedIn. When their revenues pick up steam, they’ll eventually bump into some federal rules that require certain financial disclosures, just as Google did early last decade. But they’ve got at least another year before they have to worry about that. In the meantime, their founders are in no rush to give up the control they would lose by going public.

Indeed, I think that sentiment is widespread among many tech startups. Why rush into an IPO? And this is part of the reason why I don’t expect tech IPOs to come roaring back this year. Even Zynga, the social gaming company and long-rumored IPO candidate, recently took a big investment from a Russian firm so it could reduce pressures to go public. Don’t expect to party like it’s 1999.

6. Jobs will post a slight gain.

As a guide, let’s look at the last two recessions in Silicon Valley. The one in the early 1990s was relatively shallow. The number of jobs peaked in August 1990 and then declined for 18 months, before beginning a rebound that lasted the rest of the decade.

Following the dot-com bust, we hit a job peak in December 2000, and then hit bottom 37 months later, in January 2004.

This current downturn falls in between at the moment. Jobs in Silicon Valley peaked in December 2007, so we’ve been headed down for about 23 months. Though that’s complicated, because in recent months, the job numbers have bounced up and down. Still, this downturn feels less severe in the valley than the dot-com bust. So I expect that 2010 is the year we see a net gain in jobs for Santa Clara and San Mateo counties.

7. Twitter.

Can I do a predictions list and not say something about Twitter? Probably not, so here goes. Twitter’s traffic will decline this year. We’ve seen it stall already in the U.S. and it’s begun to flatten around the globe. I say this, though I remain completely obsessed with Twitter and consider it indispensable at this point.

Unfortunately for Twitter, I never actually visit its site. Rather, I use one of the many third-party applications to write, view and filter tweets. That’s good for me. Bad for Twitter, because it will make it harder for them to make money from me. There’s mumblings recently that not only is Twitter getting revenue, but it may be nearly profitable. But the upside may be limited if Twitter’s traffic is flattening.

8. Google gets hit with an antitrust suit.

The company narrowly skirted a federal anti-trust action in 2008 when it scuttled a search deal with Yahoo. But even though it’s doing its best to cozy up to the Obama administration, and trying to play up it’s “do no evil” motto, there’s some indication that federal antitrust regulators have Google in their cross hairs. Maybe it will be over the controversial Google Book settlement. Maybe it will be over its acquisition of mobile advertising leader AdMob. Or with Google going on an acquisition binge, it could be over some other deal on the horizon. But expect Google and the feds to lock horns in 2010.

9. The number of public companies in Silicon Valley continues to fall.

It’s been falling since 2000. And I see no reason that it will stop this year. That means that acquisitions will rise and consolidation will continue. And while IPOs will reappear, they won’t be enough to make up for the number of public companies that are acquired or go bankrupt.

10. And finally, I’ll end by going way out on a limb: Cisco Systems will buy Dell.

Think about it. Hewlett Packard has been gearing up in recent years to invade Cisco’s turf by moving into the networking space. This is Cisco’s greatest challenge in almost a decade. Cisco will need to respond by buying a PC company both to achieve greater scale and to match the range of products it can offer customers. Cisco has about five times as much market value as Dell, which has been struggling for years to regain its leadership in the PC business, which it lost to HP.

Put Cisco’s line of networking equipment and annual revenue of $36 billion with Dell’s PCs and $61 billion in annual revenue, and you still have a company a bit smaller than HP and its $118 million in annual revenue. But it gets them close.

Cisco’s Chambers has also recently ruled out launching or buying a mobile computing device. But, never say never in the tech world. This an area where both HP, Cisco and Dell need to be in the coming decade.”

This article was posted originally in American Chronicle.

Read Full Post »

Here is some IPO news from Marketwatch.

After recent optimistic comments about an upcoming rebound in technology initial public offerings by several Silicon Valley venture capitalists and investment bankers, I decided to see if the reality lived up to the hype — and hope — and trolled through several regulatory filings to see what technology companies are in the queue to go public.

Last week, wheeler dealers at the Venture Summit Silicon Valley conference said there were a slew of technology companies working on S1 filings, the core regulatory document for an IPO. At least 50 venture-backed companies could seek to go public next year, possibly as high as 100, dealmakers said. See column on venture capitalists’ optimism here.

“It’s certainly going to start a lot more robust than 2009, which was completely dead,” said Scott Sweet, senior managing partner of the IPO Boutique. “The last three months of 2009, though, have been quite busy.”

Currently, though, it’s a rather motley crew of tech companies that have filed S1s to go public, and nothing yet that might have the buzz — or shall we say hype — of some of the widely-anticipated Silicon Valley names like Facebook, Zynga, or Tesla Motors.

That said, many look to be solid citizens, with revenue growth and earnings, but some firms are still losing money, not exactly an example of the new, improved IPO. Sweet said two tech IPO names that have the most chatter in this batch are Calix Networks Inc. and Fabrinet, both of which were founded during — and survived — the dot-com bubble and bust.

Calix Networks develops broadband access equipment for network service providers. Revenue jumped in 2008 to $250.5 million, up from $193.8 million in 2007. It’s still losing money and lost $17 million in 2008, an improvement from its loss of $26 million in 2007. Founded during the boom in August, 1999, Calix is based in Petaluma, Calif., a farming area north of San Francisco, dubbed Telecom Valley, a once fertile area for telecom startups as well. Earlier this year, it raised $100 million in additional venture.

Fabrinet was also founded in August 1999 and started operating in January 2000. Its corporate headquarters are in the Cayman Islands. It offers contract manufacturing services for developers of optical communications components, one of the most-hyped hardware areas of the late ’90s. Fabrinet designs and makes products like application-specific crystals, prisms, mirrors and laser components for six of the ten largest optical communications components companies worldwide.”

Read the full article here.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »