Random Post

Sunday, February 23, 2014
no image
'normandy'

Microsoft is in the advanced stages of closing its acquisition of Nokia’s handset business, but in the meantime Nokia is reportedly working on Android devices. How does Microsoft feel about that? “They’ll do some things we’re excited about, and some things we’re less excited about,” said senior executive Joe Belfiore, to a room of chuckling journalists and analysts.


“We have a terrific engineering relationship with Nokia,” he noted. “We’ve done a bunch of excellent collaboration [on] products…We’re proud of the work we do together.”


Nevertheless, as many have rumored, bolstered by some apparently leaked images (such as the ones here), Nokia has also been spinning other plates, with the WSJ reporting that the so-called Normandy device coming as soon as later this month.


Why? As Natasha pointed out the other day, this wouldn’t be an official Android device but a forked version, along the lines of what Amazon and many Asian handset makers have created. The idea here would be that it could use the device to target specifically lower-end users who are not reachable at the lowest price points of Nokia’s Lumia devices, but are looking for a “smarter” device than the Asha line from Nokia. The handset, the WSJ reports, has been in the works from before the deal with Microsoft was set, and points to how, with with many engineers and others leaving Nokia through layoffs, there are still some wildcards in the pack.


Image: Evleaks





5:24 AM

Microsoft is in the advanced stages of closing its acquisition of Nokia’s handset business, but in the meantime Nokia is reportedly working ...

Read more »
no image
unnamed-8

Despite saying it was ‘doubling down’ to become a ‘mainly Series A’ VC in Europe, Balderton Capital’s latest investment is at the seed stage. The London-based VC has led a $1.3 million round in UK car buying platform carwow. Episode 1 Ventures, and Samos Investments also participated, along with angel investors Alex Chesterman (founder of Zoopla Property Group), Simon Murdoch, and Doug Monro.


Aiming to reduce the friction involved in buying a new car, London-based carwow allows consumers to compare offers online and buy directly from “trusted” dealers that are registered with the platform, specifically avoiding the arduous but otherwise necessary requirement to haggle over price.


It does this with what is essentially a reverse marketplace: users “build” the car they would like to buy — specifying make and model/features etc. — and then receive offers direct from dealers. They can then quickly compare offers by price, location of the dealer, reviews of the dealer and what’s actually in stock. It’s then up to the buyer to decide whether to contact a dealer based on their offer, either by anonymous messaging through the carwow platform or by giving the dealer a call.


Carwow says it’s seen “rapid growth” since launching in May last year, citing £30m worth of cars being bought via the platform to-date. Founder James Hind says funding will be used to help establish the brand in the UK, but also to “accelerate” its international expansion.


Rob Moffat, who led the investment for Balderton Capital, will join carwow’s board. In a statement he comments: “We were impressed by both the universally positive feedback from users but also from dealers who use carwow and benefit from a new marketing channel, generating large volumes of sales. We believe carwow’s powerful online platform will revitalise the new-car market which, to date, has experienced very little innovation.”


Most recently, Balderton Capital itself has made headlines mainly for its recruitment of two new partners, and speculation over when it might close a new fund. In October last year, Daniel Waterhouse left Wellington Partners to join Balderton as a General Partner, and in January this year Suranga Chandratillake, founder of IPO’d internet media company blinkx, also joined as a General Partner, returning home after a 10-year stint mostly based in the Valley.





5:24 AM

Despite saying it was ‘doubling down’ to become a ‘mainly Series A’ VC in Europe, Balderton Capital’s latest investment is at the seed stag...

Read more »
no image
joe belfiore

Today at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Joe Belfiore, head of platform at Microsoft, confirmed that the Windows 8.1 update coming this spring will be shifting its focus to be more accessible on non-touch devices, a wider range of hardware, and customizations that will be more friendly to the education and enterprise sectors. But don’t call this a recall of touch: “None of the work we are doing has a negative effect on the touch experience at all,” Belfiore said. “We love touch.”


He said that the update will be coming “this spring”, with no more specific shipping date.


Also included, as people have reported, will be a return of a “start” button and screen along with discoverable search and power, and more mouse and key-board friendly features.


Belfiore noted that while Windows 8 was, in the words of Belfiore, a “significant” update for Microsoft (with its touch UI, new folder architecture and so on), 8.1 will be a return to some of the older features that preceded it.


“Some of these things leak and you can imagine how it feels to see people writing and speculating, so I want to set the record straight,” Belfiore said. “We love touch.”


Since Windows 8 launched, Microsoft says that it has seen 200 million Windows 8 licenses sold, with Windows 8 / 8.1 has a larger market share than all versions of OSX; 40% of windows 8 devices sold in the US are touch enabled, and over 4 million app downloads.


More to come.





4:24 AM

Today at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Joe Belfiore, head of platform at Microsoft, confirmed that the Windows 8.1 update coming this ...

Read more »
Saturday, February 22, 2014
no image
money tub

Editor’s Note: Nir Eyal is the author of Hooked: A Guide to Building Habit Forming Products and blogs at NirAndFar.com.


Wednesday was my birthday. It should have been a great day. My wife and daughter had prepared a delicious breakfast, I had lunch with close friends, and I finished up some writing and client work. At the end of the day I headed to San Francisco to enjoy a swanky scotch tasting at a friend’s house.


Then I heard the news. WhatsApp had been purchased by Facebook for $19 billion. When I read about the deal I blurted out the words, “Holy Crap!” so loudly that a stranger nearby gave me a disapproving look.


I was having a fantastic day just minutes before but suddenly I felt crummy, like something unjust had happened. The malaise lingered as my mind began to rationalize the news. Was the deal justified? Why had Facebook paid so much? What did the deal mean for the future of the tech industry?


However, the question that most disturbed me was why hadn’t I built WhatsApp? The simplicity of the app made it look easy. Perhaps, I thought, I should get back to starting companies instead of writing books about them.


Then I remembered one of my favorite monkey studies. A bit of primate psychology helped me regain my sanity.


Frans de Waal, a primatologist at Emory University, wanted to know if capuchin monkeys felt jealousy in the same way humans do. His study began by training two monkeys with identical cucumber slices. Whenever they completed a task, in this case retrieving a rock and handing it to a researcher, they each received a slice of cucumber. When both monkeys were offered the same reward, they completed the task as prescribed.


Then things got interesting — as they often do when researchers start messing with monkeys. De Waal knew his capuchin monkeys adored grapes, almost as much as we entrepreneurs lust for “liquidity events.” This time the researcher gives one monkey a grape while giving the other a slice of cucumber.


After giving his rock to the researcher, the stiffed monkey glances over at his lucky comrade, who by this time is wolfing down the juicy grape. He then looks down into his little monkey paws where only a measly pale green cucumber slice awaits him.


Seconds earlier, this monkey was perfectly content with his reward but now it’s clear he isn’t happy. The cucumber pieces had suited him fine as long as the other monkey got the same. However, now that the other monkey got something much better, monkey hell breaks loose. The monkey stages an emotionally charged protest. He shrieks, throws his cucumber at the researcher, bares his teeth, thrashes in his cage, and slaps the table.


Clearly, we aren’t the only primates who value the ideal of equal pay for equal work. As a two-time entrepreneur who never got close to a billion dollar buy-out, I empathize with that raging monkey. My team and I had worked hard for our reward and did just fine, and yet, we’d never had a WhatsApp-sized payday. It’s hard not to ask, “Where’s my grape?”


And that’s the source of the problem. I loved being an entrepreneur and I love what I do today, just as the capuchin monkey enjoyed his cucumber before the other monkey got something better. It is only when we become cognizant that others have more that we feel unsatisfied with what we have.


As another example, think sex. Researchers have known for some time that, “frequency of sexual activity is shown to be positively associated with happiness,” — no big surprise there. However, what is less well understood is how our happiness is affected by the amount of sex we think other people are having. According to a study at the University of Colorado at Boulder, believing that other people are having more sex than you makes you less happy, even if you are having plenty of it.


It appears we are hardwired for jealousy. Perhaps there is an evolutionary benefit to the dissatisfaction that comes from wanting what others have. However, unlike lower primates, we humans have the ability to consciously self-reflect. Perhaps we can’t help feeling like the monkey in De Waal’s experiment when we see others getting more. However, our tendency to compare ourselves to others does not have to make us unhappy. We have a choice.


When I arrived at the scotch tasting the night of my birthday, my friend Andrew Warner proposed a toast. “On Nir’s birthday, I want to share something that has stuck with me from the first time I met him.” Andrew held up his glass of whiskey, “We were sitting around a dinner table a few years ago when someone brought up the topic of how to relate to wildly successful people.” I vaguely recalled the conversation and I wasn’t sure what Andrew would say next. “That’s when Nir said that once you find the thing you love doing, nothing else matters. You just can’t ask for anything more than that.” We clinked glasses and I was thankful for the timely reminder of our conversation.


Image by Flickr user Carsten Schertzer under a CC BY 2.0 license


Note: For more, check out Hooked: A Guide to Building Habit-Forming Products. Nir will be speaking at the upcoming Habit Summit at Stanford. TechCrunch readers get $50 off when using this link.





9:09 PM

Editor’s Note: Nir Eyal is the author of Hooked: A Guide to Building Habit Forming Products and blogs at NirAndFar.com . Wednesday was my...

Read more »
no image
Oren Zeev

You probably have not heard of Oren Zeev, and he would prefer it that way.


There’s a small breed of early investors in Silicon Valley who primarily invest their own money, but who want to have an active role in building a company. This model isn’t for everyone. It’s a hybrid of a traditional VC with a dash of the early-stage angel investor, and it requires getting your hands dirty. They aren’t writing checks in the six figures. They’re putting in seven figures, and, in turn, own more of a startup than the average angel investor. This isn’t about scaling. It’s about building. And this is what Oren Zeev excels at.


The results speak for themselves. Zeev, the early investor behind Chegg, Houzz, Audible, Tipalti and others, has quietly seen a 100 percent IRR each year on his collective investments.


Institutional To Angel


Zeev’s career in investing began at Apax Partners in Israel. As he recalls, he was fresh out of business school and he saw the industry as nascent. There were only a handful of funds, each of which only had around $20 million in capital. While at Apax, Zeev focused on creating a private-equity business for the firm in Israel. In 2002, Zeev had an opportunity to move to the U.S. to work on Apax’s VC business in Silicon Valley. While moving away from his family across the world with his wife and two young kids was a risk, Zeev had always dreamed of “coming to the mecca of technology and venture.”


But Silicon Valley was still reeling from the bubble bursting. Zeev was focused on Internet investing, and people thought he was crazy for even making the move. Most VCs weren’t in the mood to do new deals because they had portfolios full of problems. But Zeev took a wait and see approach, and stumbled upon Audible, an online audio technology company that had gone public in 1999 but hadn’t seen any traction on the public markets.


“It was a total penny stock and the entire company was worth $30 million. People did not think it would make it but I thought the company may have gone public too early and I saw value,” he says. Apax’s $11 million investment bought 40 percent of the company. And a month after investment, Audible signed an exclusive deal with Apple to provide books on iTunes. In 2008, Amazon bought Audible for $300 million.


“There was an advantage of being an outsider and looking in to Silicon Valley,” he adds.


Don Katz, the CEO of Audible, explains to me that many of the VCs at that time came out of the MBA mold more so than the operator mold. “Their core competency was founder removal. Whenever things got tough that was their first instinct,” Katz says. “Oren was so different. He was a partner and was supportive of the founder as well as the company. He could have judged us through the eyes of a financial investor, a number cruncher, but that wasn’t helpful at the time. And he knew that.”


Zeev continued to work for Apax until 2006, but when the firm moved away from investing to concentrate on mega buyouts, Zeev knew he needed to move on. He was burnt out and, while his time at Apax had been lucrative, he needed a change. He started to teach middle school math at a school in Los Altos and took a few graduate courses at Stanford.


On the side, he started investing his own money. “Back then angel investing was less common. Most angel investors would write small checks but people weren’t really doing it for the money. These investors actually liked the company-building part of it,” says Zeev.


He also started to pool his money with three other investors in a consortium of sorts called Primera Capital. There were four equal partners, but Zeev was the only one sourcing deals full-time.


In 2008, Zeev was introduced to the co-founders of then textbook rentals startup Chegg. At the time, the company was looking for a Series B investment, and Zeev, along with his consortium, invested $3.5 million into the company (a quarter of which was Zeev’s own money), and Zeev joined the board. The entity put another $4.5 million in the Series C round when Kleiner Perkins came in. And Zeev helped recruit Dan Rosensweig to join the company as CEO.


Rosensweig cites Zeev’s network as being one of the defining factors that differentiates him as an investor. As Rosensweig recalls, when he joined, the company was at a turning point when it was trying to figure out its business model. “It was a tense, difficult situation and Oren was calm, and positive throughout the experience.”


While Rosensweig and the company were focused on making the transition from print to digital, Zeev was helping him source talent to help develop for mobile platforms and made the introduction to the 3D3R team in Israel, which, via an acquisition, became Chegg’s R&D and mobile team.


Along the way Zeev also invested in Cramster, a community to help students do their homework. When Chegg was looking to acquire compatible technologies and talent, Zeev made the intro to Cramster but recused himself from any discussions, and told Rosensweig that there was no pressure from his end on making the acquisition. Chegg ended up acquiring the company, which became the foundation for Chegg Study.


While there are a sea of angel investors, there aren’t many individuals who can grow with a startup that it matures into a late-stage company, and then a public company. Zeev is one of these unicorns, Rosensweig says. “It’s rare to have an investor and board member that can be useful at multiple stages of a company.”


“Oren is not the guy who will pound his fist on the table and demand answers. He’s thoughtful and asks the right questions,” Rosensweig explains. While Zeev is no longer on the board, Rosensweig still asks him to be in board meetings because his enthusiasm continues to help the company as it encounters new goals and challenges. “He’s really a jack of all trades and works tirelessly on behalf of his companies” Rosensweig says of Zeev.


Even when it came down to the money, Zeev didn’t sell much of the stock before Chegg’s IPO last fall. He sold 20 percent after the company’s Series E round and still owns 8 percent. The fact that he still holds stock (which is a rarity for early investors, and even some VCs) is a testament to his long-term vision for Chegg.


Oren 2.0


In Zeev’s subsequent deals after Chegg, he started to pull in different people in his network to participate in certain deals. As Katz tells me, he became “Oren 2.0.”


In perhaps the earliest, offline version of AngelList Syndicates, Zeev chooses these syndications very carefully, and says generally there is more demand than supply. And he never charges people to be part of the syndicate. While Zeev is responsible for the investment and the company-building aspect of things with the founder, members of the syndicate can get involved, as well.


Some are CEOs he has backed in the past like Rosensweig and Katz, and others are key individuals in his network who could be of help to startups, including Richard Sarnoff, an adviser to private-equity giant KKR and a former chairman of Bertelsmann, or former News Corp. exec Gary Ginsberg.


For the past few years, Zeev has been averaging around one to two deals per year. He’s also been investing primarily with Israeli entrepreneur Oren Dobronsky, the owner of Palo Alto restaurant Oren’s Hummus. Dobronsky and Zeev share an office in Palo Alto and Zeev has also backed Dobronsky’s current startup Mallpad. In total, Zeev has pulled in 40 to 50 different partners for his investments.


In 2009, Zeev backed social browser toolbar startup Wibiya with $2.5 million, which was eventually sold to Conduit for $45 million. In 2010, he backed DudaMobile, a mobile website maker, which has seen success after partnerships with Google and others. Other investments include Crossrider (acquired by Market.com for 19X the total money raised), Tipalti, Gogobot, Infolinks, Webflakes, Bonobos, Streamonce (acquired by Jive), and Preen.Me.


In late 2010, Zeev was introduced to Adi Tatarko and eBay engineer Alon Cohen, a married couple who had created a network around sharing photos and information around home remodeling and building. There was something about the startup, called Houzz, that struck Zeev as being a massive opportunity. As Tatarko recalls, Zeev went to her and Cohen’s home and saw what they were working on. Within days, the money was wired. Zeev invested the first million in Houzz for a sizeable portion of the company.


As Zeev promised Tatarko and Cohen, “I’m not going to make your life harder, I’m going to make it easier.” And Zeev stayed true to his word. He’s been a constant protector, she explains. “He’s never asked us to do anything, and he’s always there to help us, and we have leaned on him more than any other investor.” Zeev has been so involved with the development of Houzz that Tatarko compares him more to a co-founder than an investor. Zeev has taken on the task of recruiting many of the company’s strategic hires, as well as helping form deals and partnerships, and his track record helps him make inroads with investors.


When Tatarko and Cohen considered taking another round of funding in 2011, Zeev knew that he wanted to connect Houzz with Sequoia’s Michael Moritz. Tatarko and Cohen maintained that they didn’t want to visit VC offices and go through the traditional pitch process. Zeev didn’t know Moritz himself but his old friend Katz did (who Zeev had brought in on the seed round a year earlier), and he asked for an intro. Zeev pitched Houzz to Moritz over email at 9 p.m. on a Sunday night, and by Monday morning Moritz was visiting the Houzz office. Along with the Moritz email, Zeev also pitched four or five other Sand Hill VCs.


Moritz, fellow Sequoia partner Alfred Lin, Zeev, Tatarko and Cohen met and within two hours. Moritz told them that as long as terms could be agreed on, Sequoia would back the company. By the time other VCs had their assistants schedule meetings for Tatarko and Cohen, the ink had already dried on Sequoia’s first funding round in Houzz.


In the case of one of Zeev’s more recent investments, gifting service Loopt Commerce, he helped bring in PayPal as an investor, one of the few startup investments the payments giant has made. Zeev had seen PayPal CEO David Marcus at an event and was telling him about Loopt — the company actually wasn’t raising more money, but Marcus, and PayPal as an investor, is a key partnership and hard to turn down for a startup in the gifting space.


While Zeev’s network is vast, he’s also not afraid to put some old-fashioned hustle into his company building. “Everyone in the Valley is reachable within one degree of separation, thanks to LinkedIn. Recently, a portfolio company wanted to speak to someone at NetSuite and Zeev was able to connect with someone via LinkedIn.


Another element of Zeev’s network worth calling attention to is the Israeli connection — many of the entrepreneurs he backs are from Israel. Zeev acknowledges that a disproportionate part of his portfolio are startups from Israeli entrepreneurs, but he says part of his network involves founders and investors from his home country.


As I mentioned above, looking at the numbers, Zeev’s track record speaks for itself. He’s invested $20 million personally since 2008, and is responsible for around $60 million invested with other partners included. Zeev has seen his money return 100 percent annually since 2008. Good VC funds return around 20 to 30 percent per year, on average. The current value of Zeev’s portfolio is several hundred million (much of which is attributed to his 10 percent ownership in Houzz).


What is clear about Zeev is that he can’t scale, and he’s never going to be able to compete with some of the established seed and early-stage funds with larger funds. And it’s worth noting he doesn’t have a WhatsApp in his portfolio. Yet.


“What drives me is I really feel that my job is to work for founders and serve them. I like that I don’t have any other constituencies, like LPs or partners,” he says. That comes with some sacrifices as well, he adds. Zeev says he has no interest in building a firm, and acknowledges that what he does is not scalable.


But in a sea of early-stage capital and investors, Zeev offers a commitment and thoughtfulness that typically doesn’t come with scale.





11:09 AM

You probably have not heard of Oren Zeev, and he would prefer it that way. There’s a small breed of early investors in Silicon Valley who pr...

Read more »
no image

10:09 AM

The Gillmor Gang — John Borthwick, Dan Farber, Robert Scoble, Kevin Marks, John Taschek, and Steve Gillmor — bask in the afterglow of the 1...

Read more »
no image
MQ-1_Predator_unmanned_aircraft

It’s been a hell of a week worldwide. Caracas, Venezuela: “What had been a slow-motion unravelling that had stretched out over many years went kinetic all of a sudden.” Kiev, Ukraine: “Dozens dead as protesters regain territory from police.” Bangkok, Thailand: “Four people have been killed and more than 60 injured after a gun battle erupted between police and anti-government protesters.” Sarajevo, Bosnia: “Thousands of protesters took to the streets, setting fire to the presidency building and hurling rocks and stones at police.”


The weird thing is that this is nothing new: just a few more entries in the long list of protests erupting into violent fury around the world. The Arab Spring. Brazil. Turkey.



There have been periods in history when large numbers of people rebelled about the way things were, demanding change — 1848, 1917 or 1968. Today we are experiencing another period of rising outrage and discontent, and some of the largest protests in world history. Our analysis of 843 protest events reflects a steady increase in the overall number of protests every year, from 2006 (59 protests) to mid-2013 (112 protests events in only half a year)


A profile of demonstrators reveals that not only traditional protesters (eg. activists, unions) are demonstrating; on the contrary, middle classes, youth, older persons and other social groups are actively protesting in most countries because of lack of trust and disillusionment with the current political and economic system.



(source (PDF))


What’s going on here? And what happens next?


Researchers at the New England Complex Systems Institute in Cambridge have one simple answer to the first question, at least: hunger. Back in 2011 they predicted, based on rising food prices, that social unrest would sweep across the planet by, er, August 2013. OK, they were a little off, and their theory doesn’t explain those countries where food prices have risen without riots — but that does seem to be a significant factor.


I propose that another one is just as important, though: technology. Specifically, social media.



To some extent, social media accelerates protest simply by getting the word out. It’s no longer possible for authoritarian governments to control what their citizens see and hear by clamping their iron fists down on newspapers and television/radio stations, unless they want to shut down the Internet and phone services entirely…and not even tyrants want to time-travel back to the 20th century that badly, unless they absolutely have to. As Mathew Ingram points out in a great post on GigaOm, “For those inside and outside of Ukraine and Venezuela, social media is the only media that matters.”


More subtly, smartphones and social media enable what John Robb named “open source insurgencies,” wherein many small groups work towards a common goal, without formal coordination or organization, while adopting, adapting, and evolving each others’ tactics and strategies on the fly. In Ukraine, for instance:



The crisis in Ukraine has spiralled rapidly out of control outside of the capital, Kiev, as anti-government protesters stormed buildings, seized weapons and staged demonstrations across the western part of the country … Although the protests were initially confined to the capital and west, in recent days they have spread quickly to the largely Russian speaking east, most notably Kharkiv.




Could this conceivably have happened without the Internet and ubiquitous phones? Of course. Can modern technology also be used to intensify and perpetuate government oppression? You bet, and how. But as creepy and Orwellian as modern surveillance states can be, their panopticons become pretty irrelevant when a million angry people are marching on the presidential compound with pitchforks, torches, and Androids in hand.


And it seems painfully obvious that modern technology makes open-source insurgencies orders of magnitude less difficult, and therefore, more likely to happen. Or, as Marc Andreessen recently put it:



Woo-hoo! Techno-democratic utopia! Internet FTW amirite?


…Not so fast.


First of all, ongoing protests and insurgencies against authoritarian governments are one thing; actually winning is quite another. Ask the Syrian rebels. Ask Egypt, which, if you haven’t been paying attention, was not exactly liberated after all in the aftermath of the Arab Spring. A million angry protestors do change the game, but that’s by no means a guarantee of eventual victory.


Second, while technology giveth to the masses today, it will bestow its riches upon the authoritarian thugs in the presidential palaces soon enough. I refer, of course, to tomorrow’s antipersonnel/anti-protest drones.


Have you seen what people are doing with drones of late? It’s pretty awesome. Massive mining drones in the desert. Autonomous farmer drones. Tiny quadrupeds that run at 120mph. Drones that sail around the world. And my favorite thing this week:



until this came along:



All very cool — until you imagine these machines militarized, weaponized, mass-produced by the thousand, and turned on the protestors in Kiev, or elsewhere.


My favorite thing on TechCrunch, not counting my own column — OK, fine, even counting my own column — is John Biggs’s occasional series “Today In Dystopian War Robots That Will Harvest Us For Our Organs.” What can I say, I love black comedy. But it’s always tinged, at least for me, with a little genuine terror — because I have written fiction for a living, so it’s especially easy for me to imagine, in vivid gory detail, exactly what will happen on the day a million angry protestors run up against tomorrow’s tyrant armed with ten thousand military drones and a tiny staff of engineers a la the Syrian Electronic Army.


Hint: it ain’t pretty.


The Internet and smartphones disperse power; but drones concentrate power in the hands of those who control them. It won’t be too many more years before that stark disparity will be all too obvious to anyone and everyone.


Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons





6:09 AM

It’s been a hell of a week worldwide. Caracas, Venezuela : “What had been a slow-motion unravelling that had stretched out over many years w...

Read more »
 
Google Analytics Alternative