&uot& Silicon Valley Watcher - reporting on the business of technology and media: VC Watch Archives

Main

VC Watch Archives

October 25, 2004

VC Watch: Google share surge could lead to VCs cashing out to avoid huge expiring lockup

By Tom Foremski - SiliconValleyWatcher.com

Wall Street’s delight with Google’s first quarterly financial report late last week led to a big jump in Google’s share price as analysts boosted their earnings estimates. This seemed a little worrying in that it reminded some of the internet bubble years when analysts were accused of hyping dotcoms with large upgrades…and we know the rest of the story.

It’s not quite the same this time around. The Google jump stems more from analysts getting to grips with Google’s business model and understanding the dynamics of the surge in online advertising. Analysts now have more information to make a better judgement on Google’s future performance.

By Tom Foremski - October 25, 2004 | Permalink | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

Continue reading "VC Watch: Google share surge could lead to VCs cashing out to avoid huge expiring lockup" »

November 15, 2004

Silicon Valley is Back, Baby.......Dotcom

by Tom Foremski for SiliconValleyWatcher.com

I've had lots of chats about Silicon Valley lately and I’m of the Bachman Turner opinion that you ain’t seen nothing yet.

When I arrived here November 8, 1984, Silicon Valley was going through the down cycle following the PC boom. A hundred PC companies wanted just 10 per cent of the market, wanting to strike it rich, as rich as the Apple IPO—the Google celebrity IPO of its day.

Hundreds of Apple staff became millionaires, including secretaries and the guy that ran the parking lot. The media coverage was massive. VCs rushed in like a herd and funded a huge number of PC companies and when the bubble popped, the down cycle was harsh. Stories about Silicon Valley’s death were constant and grinding for several years. I’ve seen several business cycles and the same thing happens in each down cycle, endless speculation about Silicon Valley’s future. What future does Silicon Valley have?

I think I can answer that question very easily—and I’ll accept any size bet on this call: when Silicon Valley comes back, it will be bigger than before. (Actually, it’s been back for a while--hence this venture.)

I was chatting with Ron Piovesan, from Cisco on this topic recently, and he says has also seen signs of improvement. He laughed when I said I own the dotcom name: SiliconValleyIsBack.com.

I said I’m serious, I do own it. I also have SiliconValleyisBackBaby.com! I'm going to set them up as headlines--heck, they were only $8 apiece. I bought SiliconValleyGarage.com for $8 too. Maybe I'll set it up as a tribute to HP?

By Tom Foremski - November 15, 2004 | Permalink | Comment on this post | Tech Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

Continue reading "Silicon Valley is Back, Baby.......Dotcom" »

November 22, 2004

Dour VCs lack enthusiasm for anything-- quick takes from Under the Radar conference

by Tom Foremski for SiliconValleyWatcher.com

IBD Network recently put together another one of its popular Under the Radar events, which features hand-picked startups performing in front of a panels of VCs. It was interesting, but not for the reasons you might expect.

The startups are allowed a six-minute pitch and the judging panels are separated into categories, such as security, the digital home, etc. At the end of the day, the VCs give their feedback and highlight which companies they liked. This is part of the pre-cocktail panel called VC Outlook, which featured Neeraj Bharadwaj from Apax Partners, Lara Druyan from Allegis Capital, Robert Simon from Alta Partners, and Chad Waite from OVP Venture Partners.

By Tom Foremski - November 22, 2004 | Permalink | Comment on this post | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

Continue reading "Dour VCs lack enthusiasm for anything-- quick takes from Under the Radar conference" »

December 2, 2004

VCs can’t find the Goldilocks deals--everything is either too small or too big

by Tom Foremski for SiliconValleyWatcher.com

VCs are managing large funds, which means they need to make decent sized investments, much larger than before. The trouble is that there isn’t the type of deal flow that can accommodate those large sized investments and provide decent sized returns.

Most VCs know the IT enterprise sector, chip design, networking, software applications. The largest investment area has traditionally been the IT enterprise sector, but with all the consolidation of recent years, the handful of large dominant IT vendors are formidable competition to startups. They have a large customer base and that customer base is very conservative and reluctant to buy from small private companies--unless they are partnered with a large IT vendor. This means the encumbent IT vendors have great control over valuation since the exit strategy these days is to sell the business to a larger player.

In chip design, with the fabless model, and with offshoring work, some of the chip design deals are too small for many VCs. And in networking and software apps, there is little room for manouvre in those markets. In security, there is way too much competition. And mobile and wireless markets are also overcrowded. So, where do the VCs invest?

There are many other sectors, but there are problems with most of them. VCs generally don’t like pharma because the capital investments are too high and drug development is too risky. Many life sciences investments are also capital intensive and they don't understand those markets. VCs don’t like consumer based businesses because brand building is difficult, extremely expensive and consumers are fickle.

So what’s left? I see a lot of companies being formed, deals being made where the startup capital costs can almost be covered by pooling credit cards. This is also the terrain where angel investors are very active, and where they bring many advantages compared with VC firms. In fact, there are VCs in many of the angel networks, betting their personal money on some of these deals.

And why not? I heard you still get paid generous management fees even if you don't invest the funds. I’d like a job like that. I'm sure I would be very good at it too. I can hack most business plans to pieces, (I've done it many, many times). I would come to work on time and be a team player, and I'd share insightful things. Anybody have any vacancies?!

I should point out that the VCs that I meet are a hard working bunch because they are a self-selected group. The VCs I meet are the ones that are out and about, talking up their investments, working their networks, scouting for deals. I don't know the other guys, but their LPs probably do.

By Tom Foremski - December 2, 2004 | Permalink | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

April 26, 2005

Notes from Software 2005: Lunch with the Swami of the enterprise software sector...

cd 0745
By Tom Foremski for SiliconValleyWatcher M.R. Rangaswami has to be one of the hardest working venture capitalists in the valley. He is constantly on the go, networking and networking and networking.

I saw MR in his element on Tuesday, when I dropped into Software 2005, the second annual enterprise software conference organised by MR and his team at the Sand Hill Group. And judging by the Silicon Valley hack pack and top exec and VC turnout at the VIP lunch, MR's hustling and bustling has been rewarded.

I spent an interesting afternoon at Software 2005, which surprised me because I have found the enterprise software space much less interesting now that consolidation has reduced the sector to a few giants and many smaller software-as-a-feature companies :-)

I sat with MR at lunch, (he is a big SiliconValleyWatcher fan BTW). Here are some notes from my chat with the "swami of the software sector".

M.R. Rangaswami:

By Tom Foremski - April 26, 2005 | Permalink | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

Continue reading "Notes from Software 2005: Lunch with the Swami of the enterprise software sector..." »

May 18, 2005

One of San Francisco's last venture capital firms quietly bets on the next generation of media tech companies

By Tom Foremski for SiliconValleyWatcher

Walden VC.gifI've often discussed how best to fund development of new media technologies - and I've said that I believe many new companies will use private funding, rather than venture capital. So it was interesting to talk recently with Alex Gove and Steve Eskenazi from WaldenVC, one of the last VC firms in San Francisco.

I was delighted to find that these guys "get" this whole thing I'm calling media technologies. WaldenVC has been quietly making some very astute investments in digital media companies, leading rounds for ten companies. They've accumulated an interesting portfolio with a lot of diversity.

By Mike Faden - May 18, 2005 | Permalink | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

Continue reading "One of San Francisco's last venture capital firms quietly bets on the next generation of media tech companies" »

June 1, 2005

Startups on parade at IBD Under the Radar event

By Tom Foremski for SiliconValleyWatcher

Startups-on-Parade.jpgThere was a good turnout at the IBD "Under the Radar" consumer technologies event Tuesday as 32 young startups paraded in front of very skeptical panels of VCs.

The event is partly promoted as one in which startups can potentially raise funds from the exposure to VCs. But at the previous Under the Radar event, VCs told me they would not consider funding any of the startups appearing because they had no exclusivity in the deals.

By Tom Foremski - June 1, 2005 | Permalink | Tech Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

Continue reading "Startups on parade at IBD Under the Radar event" »

June 30, 2005

We're off to the races...the first RSS focused VC fund is announced--$100m

...let freedom reign

By Tom Foremski for SiliconValleyWatcher

At the Races.jpgJim Moore and John Palfrey have launched RSS Investors with $100m of capital. It is the first VC fund with a focus on Really Simple Syndication, (RSS), the syndication technology at the heart of media technologies such as blogging and corporate news communication.


Jim Moore, RSS Investors partner says:

RSS is emerging as the next great tool in the spread of information and ultimately freedom: freedom of expression, freedom of communication and freedom of information.

This reminds me of years ago when Kleiner Perkins launched a $100m Java fund in 1996. It is milestone for RSS and its use.

RSS is very much a core technology for this next phase of the internet. It is a unique animal: neither email or web page, but with characteristics of both. It is opt-in, in that users or applications subscribe to RSS feeds which are pushed out — it is, in fact, a pushme-pullme technology (a nod to Dr Dolittle ;-)

By Tom Foremski - June 30, 2005 | Permalink | Comment on this post | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

Continue reading "We're off to the races...the first RSS focused VC fund is announced--$100m" »

July 22, 2005

Coming Events: Roger McNamee talk with George Zachary about the $100bn new media market

. . . will content finally be king?

King_Content.jpgManish Chandra over at TiE, has put together an interesting event Tuesday, July 26 in Santa Clara featuring Roger McNamee. Mr McNamee has had a midas touch over the past five years with investments at SilverLake Partners. And those years have been the toughest ever for Silicon Valley.

Also, Mr McNamee is very interested in new media which, happens to be an interest of mine also.

From the TiE pitch about the event:


The confluence of technology, new delivery mechanisms from podcasting to TV on the cell-phones is creating a revolution that remains only partially understood. It is changing how we create, consume and distribute entertainment. The emphasis on distribution technologies has overlooked the role of creation of content for the new media.

By Tom Foremski - July 22, 2005 | Permalink | Comment on this post | Media Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

Continue reading "Coming Events: Roger McNamee talk with George Zachary about the $100bn new media market" »

November 17, 2005

Moderating at Under the Radar. . .startups face the VCs

By Tom Foremski, Silicon Valley Watcher

I haven't been able to post much because of preparation for moderating at the IDB Under the Radar event. I got to moderate all two tracks of the morning session on enterprise mobile apps and the second session of enterprise RFID (radio chip tags).

What was fascinating was how few companies were able to explain what they do. But, let me backup a second and tell you what the event is about.

The Under the Radar series organized by Debbie Landa and Alison Murdock has become almost an institution. It brings startup companies in front of panels of venture capitalist judges. They get rated on their presentation, their business model, and their strategy.

I've been to several of these Under the Radar events and they are always different. This time around there was a lot more energy in the air, a real feeling the valley is back (again...maybe this time, for sure.)

The overall winner of the event was our old friend Zimbra--the AJAX poster child software company.

And overall, the 32 startups presented and interesting mix. But what continues to puzzle me is how few of the startups can say what they do. At least in less than 30 minutes--which is a problem at Under the Radar, because you only get five minutes (moderators are armed with stun guns to enforce the time limit very strictly:-)

I didn't have to reach under the podium and stun anybody--my lot were very well behaved. A mobile apps company called Soonr won the audience vote but the judges preferred Funambol, an open software middleware stackette for the mobile space.

Soonr, I think, deserved a bit more attention. Because when asked what was their business model, they said we have none. Smirks all around, as you can imagine.

But on later reflection, I think Soonr is on the right track. Yes, they lack a business model but, they are focusing on users And this is precisely the right strategy because if you have users you know you have a useful product. If you don't have a useful product, it doesn't matter how clever your business model is.

- - -

The RFID companies on my second panel were a good contrast to the first lot. Interestingly, most of the senior management of those companies had some connection or background in supply chain management.

And supply chain management is one of the big failures of enterprise software markets...so who is to say that RFID will improve this? But at least the people running thse companies knew what a tough problem it is, and were still working at trying to solve it,


- - -

The Under the Radar event was at the Microsoft Silicon Valley center, which is a couple of stone- throws from Google.

This time, in contrast to past visits over the past few years, the MSFT car park was full, and it was early in the morning and there was bustle about the place. It used to be not very busy at all...

Oh, and I spotted Robert Scoble in the cafeteria, MSFT's second most famous employee!

More under the radar stories later in the day...

PS: I will soon start writing a blog for ZDNet, in addition to here, and lately also AlwaysOn.

By Tom Foremski - November 17, 2005 | Permalink | Comment on this post | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

November 18, 2005

Great ideas do not make for successful startups and VCs need more V....so say survey results

Survey_Says.jpgInteresting survey results from Foley & Lardner on startup companies--things we knew but sometimes forget.

Who was surveyed: "The survey, measuring the attitudes and perspectives of top executives, advisors, outside consultants and investors in the emerging technology industry."

Here are my takeaway points:

-There is a lot of capital wanting to invest in startups but there is a lack of good managers.

-60 per cent said quality of management is single most important factor for success: "Overall market dynamics (18 percent), access to funding (10 percent) and quality of the business plan (eight percent) were distant choices."

-Only 3 per cent said intellectual property was the most important aspect of founding a startup.

My take: This means a good, even great idea for a startup is not enough, you need a great team. If all you have is a great idea you don't really have anything of much value. Many startups I meet won't talk about their "great idea" beyond a certain point but you should be free to talk about your great idea because only you can execute on it. Otherwise, anybody can run with it.

-More than 75 per cent said M&A is most likely exit strategy in next few years.

-IPO is unattractive because of high costs in being a public company and all the other related issues.

-It is very difficult to find directors for startups. "A majority (64 percent) cited “management” as the most important factor—over cash compensation (36 percent) and equity incentives (32 percent) —for attracting qualified directors."

My Take: This is exactly why I have been saying that the next generation of emerging companies, the new rules enterprise/venture will be private. Being private also means your competitors cannot benchmark themselves against you.

And, my favorite quote from one of those surveyed:

“VCs should take more V and act less like a bank.”

My take: Too true. In fact, I meet more ex-VCs these days, using their venture knowledge to run their own companies. It is a knowledge capital world now, uppercase V and lowercase c, is how the Vcs should present themselves, and the better ones do. imho.

More here: http://www.foley.com/ecsurvey

By Tom Foremski - November 18, 2005 | Permalink | Comment on this post |
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

January 24, 2006

Big Brother brings business opportunities

With all the chatter about Big Brother, and government subpoenas for internet usage data, there are business opportunities to be had...

Take a look at my idea for the Big Bro Co-investors VC fund--focusing on telemetry applications. Monitoring advertising, or network performance, or people--it's all the same: essential to both commerce and government.

It's a huge business opportunity. Take a look at my ZDNet blog/column IMHO and let me know what you think.

A new VC fund to help develop the next-stage internet technologies

By Tom Foremski - January 24, 2006 | Permalink | Comment on this post | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

January 30, 2006

Fear and Loathing in VC land--animosity towards VCs is rampant

By Tom Foremski for SiliconValleyWatcher

SVW reader Penguin points to VC Rick Segal's recent post about the quandary venture capital is in.

To summarize: Web 2.0 companies don't need much capital and GOOG, YHOO and MSFT can step in and buy them just for the heck of it for a few million and the VCs don't get a look in. Plus there is not much distinction between the Web 2.0 startups.

Welcome to the world of the new rules startups; no VCs required, although an Angel or two helps... It's a knowledge capital world these days and GOOG and pals offer the largest platform for rolling out Web 2.0 services/products. How can VCs compete against that?

But also, there is widespread animosity towards VCs today. I've been covering Silicon Valley since 1984 and I haven't come across as much hostility towards VCs from startups, as I have over the past 18 months.

Why? Because of the many outrageous VC practices during the dotcom boom and afterwards. VCs always get their pound of flesh and then some.

But what goes around comes around. We live in a serial entrepreneur community here in Silicon Valley, and memories are still very fresh.

The strategy for startups these days is to bootstrap--go for Angels if you need money. And if you do need to pitch the Sandhill row, first raise your valuation as much as possible through your own efforts and financing.

I have a lot of respect for many VCs. Those are usually the ones I come into contact with, because they are out and about and pitching their investments.

There are hundreds of VCs that I never come across and seem to be baffled about what to invest in; they follow each other with a herd mentality and thus mess up the markets for all; and with almost no IPO market exit strategies rely on selling out to one of a small number of large companies--which keeps valuations in check.

When I recently met with VC M.R. Rangaswami of Sandhill.com, he said there were still too many VCs, and that the industry must come to terms with the fact that future returns on investments will be far lower than at traditional levels.

That means VCs have to tell investors in their funds to expect smaller gains. That's a tough sell, especially since the risk has not decreased. I could argue that the risk of failure for VC-backed startups has increased. . .(more on that in future posts).

While some VCs are twiddling their thumbs thinking about what to fund, they would do well to hire a PR agency to spruce up their image. Something along the lines of a benevolent "uncle" looking out for the best interests of their young charges might be an appropriate image to shoot for :-)

- - -
Please also see SVW: That giant sucking sound...will massive tech companies vacuum up all the cool/hot tech companies?

By Tom Foremski - January 30, 2006 | Permalink | Comment on this post | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

February 5, 2006

Slave Girl reads the Watcher!

I found this in my comments . . .

Fear and Loathing in VC Land? Try a pleasure to hard to resist...

Sneers and roasting are abundant in the realm of http://www.sandhillslave.com

Rants on Life in VC through the eyes of an assistant.

You should go and visit this site. This is very se.x.x.x.y writing (!)

By Tom Foremski - February 5, 2006 | Permalink | Comment on this post | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

Continue reading "Slave Girl reads the Watcher!" »

February 7, 2006

Enterprise software might not be dead after all. . . at least not in early April

By Tom Foremski for SiliconValleyWatcher

Death-of-Enterprise_Redux.jpgM.R. Rangaswami is a venture capitalist who produces one of the best enterprise software publications. I'm a big fan of his online magazine Sandhill.com, and also his conferences, with one coming up in early April. He just sent out his latest edition of the Software Pulse newsletter, with an interesting opinion piece by Geoffrey Moore. (More here. . .)

M.R.'s interest in the subject of enterprise software comes from a different direction than traditional publishers, he's interested in the trends and issues so that he and other investors can better understand the deal flow and improve on their funding decisions.

A traditional trade publisher such as an IDG with Computerworld, or a ZDNet, takes a different approach to the subject--writing from the users/customers/decision makers' points of view. Both approaches, it turns out, produce equally high-quality editorial products.

I tend to favor M.R.'s approach: I like to look at companies and products as existing within a framework of business models; pulled by trends in markets; and all bobbing around within the fluid dynamics of their capital markets.

By Tom Foremski - February 7, 2006 | Permalink | Comment on this post | Enterprise IT
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

Continue reading "Enterprise software might not be dead after all. . . at least not in early April" »

February 13, 2006

Mohr, Davidow Ventures and the Gordian Knot

By Tom Foremski, Silicon Valley Watcher

Gordian_Knot.jpgPamela Mahoney from the veteran venture capital firm Mohr, Davidow Ventures (MDV) invited me to stop in and chat with a couple of their in-house entrepreneurs about media technology products they are developing.

Ted Shelton and Nick Chim showed me some of their work and I'm glad I got to see it because I got to glimpse a new class of emerging internet applications that could provide that next, defining edge that is lacking in the morass of so many similar "web 2.0" applications out there.

By Tom Foremski - February 13, 2006 | Permalink | Comment on this post | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

Continue reading "Mohr, Davidow Ventures and the Gordian Knot" »

March 27, 2006

DARPA TinyOS developers get $5m from Intel and others

By Tom Foremski for SiliconValleyWatcher

Big-Bro_Arch-Rock.jpgWho says Big Brother/Sister isn't coming? It is but under a different guise...Here is mesh/sensor network company Arch Rock, who today announced $5m in funding for:

Arch Rock’s vision is to help customers create and manage billions of sensor-based touch points with the physical world of matter and space and generate new actionable intelligence that can be leveraged in a wide variety of new industrial and consumer applications.

An investor said:

By being able to measure anything, monitor it on the Internet and act on the information, businesses will be able not only to predict the outcome of a situation, but actually influence or control that outcome. That’s the promise of wireless sensor and control networks” said Forest Baskett, general partner with NEA.

The Series A funding comes from New Enterprise Associates, Shasta Ventures and Intel Capital. And the Berkeley inventors of TinyOS (DARPA funded) are the founders of the new company.

I predicted such investments two months ago: Big Brother brings business opportunities

Here is the release:

By Tom Foremski - March 27, 2006 | Permalink | Comment on this post | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

Continue reading "DARPA TinyOS developers get $5m from Intel and others" »

May 4, 2006

Exclusive interview: Terry Garnett explains his firm's VC buyout strategy...

. . . and the launch of Ingres and Wyse Technology--two well established companies with large market potential

Exec_Terry_Garnett_03.jpg
I recently met with Terry Garnett of Garnett & Helfrich Capital--the venture buyout firm behind behind Ingres and Wyse Technology. These are two very interesting companies that had caught my eye and I didn't realize the same investment team was behind both ventures.

I have been writing a lot abut Ingres because it is a small open source software company that has been assembling a dream team of top executives more suited to running multi-billion dollar business groups. So you can bet that Ingres won't be sitting on its hands. (Please see SVW: The ambitions of Ingres: A small company with the executive team of a giant )

And Wyse Technology is another interesting company, essentially reinventing the whole thin computer concept and renaming it Thin Computing. It takes a systems approach to driving down the cost of installing and operating large numbers of PC systems which can be replaced with Thin Computing systems and the users don't even know it. (Please see SVW: Wyse says in talks with Google and Yahoo on thin computing)

Garnett & Helfrich Capital has a modest buyout fund by the standards of Silver Lake Partners and others that have raised multi-billion dollar funds. But, it's not the amount of money you have, its the operational abilities, and long experience in the industry to be able to read the evolving trends--that Mr Garnett and his partner David Helfrich bring to the table.

Their current fund of $350m has done some very interesting deals and there are more to come plus plans to raise yet another fund around the end of the year.

I popped in on Mr Garnett last week, in the "VC Gulag" a raggle taggle sprawl of small office buildings on Sandhill Road (they are moving to larger quarters in Hillsdale). We covered a lot of ground, here is part of our conversation:

Mr Garnett said he used to be a venture capitalist at Venrock but he also has a long career in the software industry at many different companies. Here is his bio:

From 1990 to 1994, he worked with Oracle Corporation reporting to Larry Ellison, as Senior Vice President, Worldwide Marketing and Business Development and other positions. He has helped establish and build CrossWorlds, Lightyear, he has worked at McKinsey & Company; and held management positions with Tandem Computers. From 1995 to 2003, he was at Venrock where he led early stage financing and served on the boards of: New Era of Networks acquired by Sybase, Niku, CrossWorlds Software acquired by IBM, Neoforma, Netobjects; he was an early stage personal investor in Siebel Systems and Checkpoint Software.

It's clear that he understands the enterprise software market and his partner David Helfrich has led what he calls, a "parallel career." The two met at a horse riding school for their kids, and they spent two years "at the rail" getting to know each other before they decided to pool their skills and created Garnett & Helfrich Capital in March 2004, with an initial fund of over $250m, soon expanded to $350m.

"I sometimes explain what we do as 'there is a little bit of chocolate in my peanut butter' by which I mean it is a little bit of venture capital investing combined with venture buyout."

The investment firm was founded on the belief that there were decent sized business groups within larger tech companies that were good businesses but were not getting the attention or the funds from their parent organisations.

The firm analyzed hundreds of IPOs and acquisitions over the past few years and started to identify business groups of at least $50m in revenues, that could survive a buyout, and the temporary disruption that such events create for a business.

Ingres was one of those businesses, a database software group spun out of Computer Associates, a business with great revenues, large numbers of customers and a solid reputation within enterprise software markets.

"It was important that Ingres had a long history, it wasn't a new startup with an uncertain product and an uncertain future. Enterprises want to buy from companies that are stable and will be around for a long time" Mr Garnett said.

But spinning out from CA was not easy because of the huge management shakeup that was going on in the wake of a scandal that is currently in the courts (Please see: Former CA chief Kumar pleads guilty to fraud.)

The deal was further complicated in that Mr Garnett had to recreate three offices from scratch, set up the telephone systems, the billing systems etc. He had to create the entire infrastructure for a 100 plus employee company from nothing, and hire the executive team, and act as the CEO.

He says he would love to give up the CEO position and get back to his regular work but that, "Finding a CEO is more difficult because of the A-list caliber of the current executive team, they are going to demand an A-list CEO." Mr Garnett said he loves to recruit and his philosophy is to recruit 10 A-list executives because they will bring in another 40 top people.

Buyouts are very popular these days, and Silver Lake is one of the top firms in this area. But Mr Garnett points out that its much easier for Silver Lake to write a check to take, for example, Serena Software private--there is no infrastructure building that had to be done, as in the case of Ingres. That's why Silver Lake might find it difficult to compete against Mr Garnett's team, if it wants to target this middle sector of the buyout market.

Mr Garnett hopes to do about five or six deals with the first fund, and he sees lots of opportunities to buy out healthy business groups from within tech giants such as Siemens for example. "In a lot of cases the seller is not getting any credit from Wall Street for owning those business groups," he said. So the deals can be very compelling for these large tech businesses. Usually, the seller will retain about a 20 per cent stake in the new company, which helps with customer continuity.

A good example is the blade server switch business bought out from Nortel. Here is a list of deals.

Mr Garnett's many years in the enterprise software business have given him an understanding and an appreciation for brands, and the realization that brand building is long and difficult. Therefore if he can acquire products such as Ingres and Wyse, that have long established brands, that brings with it a significant amount of credibility among customers that is very valuable.

I think this is an important understanding of how markets and customers buy products. During Internet 1.0 and the dotcom boom, there was a lot brand building attempted, but throwing money, billboards, and cute sock puppets at the challenge of establishing lasting brands didn't work. Brands are built slowly, over time, they are trust-built relationships just like human relationships.

What's the exit strategy? The same as for other ventures: IPO or sell to larger players. But building a $50m to $100m dollar revenue businesses to the next stage, is a lot less riskier than trying to build a startup and take it beyond several millions dollars in revenue. It's smart investing and there are still plenty of deals to be done. It'll be interesting to see which other players emerge in this field.

By Tom Foremski - May 4, 2006 | Permalink | Comment on this post | Thoughtleaders
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

July 25, 2006

1999 all over again? VCs setting funding records

By Richard Koman for SiliconValleyWatcher

The Valley is back. How do you know? Follow the money.

AP reports that VCs sunk $6.35 billion into 856 startups in Q2 - the hottest quarter for VC investing since Q4 of 2001. And surely you remember that quarter with fond memories. VCs also set records in fundraising for future investments - $11.2 billion.

VCs delivered first-time financing to 282 companies for a total of $1.2 billion in the quarter. That's the most in five years.

And what are they funding? Yup, Web 2.0. PricewaterhouseCoopers just compiled a list of Q1 funding to W2s (.xls file) and it comes in at $870m, up from $786 in 2005's Q4. But Ajay Sanghani at ITVidya.com notes that the list is a little funky, as it includes such back-end companies as Riverbed and Netli

So Bubble 2.0? Ajay talked to Tracy Lefteroff, the global managing partner of PwC's venture capital practice. "People are trying to contrast this with the Internet bubble, and want to know if we're getting in the same risk category we saw developing in late 1999, early 2000.You always run that risk, but I still don't see the frenzy to invest in these companies that we saw in the late 1990s."

Seven of the top W2 deals in the first quarter were in Silicon Valley, it's Seattle that's grabbing headlines this week. Jobster, a Web 2.0 approach to head-hunting is now valued at $100m, the Merc's Matt Marshall reported last week.

And yesterday, Zillow.com, which provides value estimates on homes, landed a $25m round and has now raised $57m.

All of which leaves Jason Wood in a cold sweat. He commented: "Seeing some of these new rounds is absolutely sending a chill down my spine as a public investor. Where's the exit strategy? I would love to know the post money valuation Zillow got for this round. Wow."

By Richard Koman - July 25, 2006 | Permalink | Comment on this post | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

November 28, 2006

No money down: How IBM leverages Silicon Valley's VC billions

IBM, the world's largest computer company, has a successful venture capital group operating  in the heart of Silicon Valley, yet it makes no investments in startup companies. Instead, it tells VC firms what types of startups it might want to acquire and waits for the Silicon Valley innovation machine to do the rest.

It's a very good system for IBM. There is no need to make risky investments, to spend years on boards helping to nurture and grow startup companies, and certainly no need to hit the road to raise new venture capital funds.

It is a beautiful system that leverages tens of billions of dollars of other people's money, and it can all be done with just a few people. IBM's Venture Capital Group in Menlo Park consists of just half-a-dozen specialists plus some support staff.

Because there is virtually no tech IPO market to provide exits for investors in thousands of startups, VCs are more than happy to offer IBM the cream of the startup crop. Since the IBM Venture Capital Group was formed in 2000, it has had a hand in 15 acquisitions, and that rate is increasing.

But acquisitions are just one way IBM benefits from Silicon Valley's bountiful crop of startups.  It also partners with about 1200 startups in various endeavors in which it uses their technologies in IT services deals through business partnerships. Business partnerships as a whole account for one third of its annual revenues, or about $27bn.

There is also a very nice business to be had in selling technology licenses to startups. IBM has a massive portfolio of patents and it offers favorable terms to startups. This might be a good insurance policy since Big Blue has lately become much more aggressive in pursuing companies that it believes are using its technologies without payment.  (See News.com: IBM: Amazon violates our patents – October 23, 2006.)

Tomorrow on Silicon Valley Watcher: Interview with Drew Clark, co-founder of IBM Venture Capital Group - find out what types of startups are on his shopping list.

- - -

Additional info:


VC-backed ISVs: Open Source Opens Doors

Startups to have access to IBM's entire patent portfolio with simplified terms



IBM announces formation of Venture Capital Advisory Council


IBM launches new initiative to help developers in emerging markets build skills and open standards solutions

By Tom Foremski - November 28, 2006 | Permalink | Comment on this post | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

January 23, 2007

VC investments highest in 5 years - Life Sciences leads, no sign of mania

Latest data from PricewaterhouseCoopers/National Venture Capital Association MoneyTree report, shows decent sized increase in VC deals and money invested. This means steady investment rises and no sign of over funding mania:

 

Venture capitalists invested $25.5 billion in 3,416 deals in 2006, realizing a 10 percent increase in deal volume and a 12 percent increase in dollar value, according to the MoneyTree Report by PricewaterhouseCoopers and the National Venture Capital Association, based on data from Thomson Financial.  The year, which marked the highest level of investment since 2001, saw quarterly investment levels remain steady in the $5- to 6-billion dollar range, as the venture industry invested in the traditional technology and life sciences sectors and began a deliberate foray into the energy sector.  


The year was characterized by significant growth in the life sciences sector, with biotech and medical device investing both reaching record high levels.  Other areas of growth included Media/Entertainment, Energy and Internet-Specific companies.  Seed and Early-Stage companies received more financing and dollars in 2006 but the largest gains were in the Expansion Stage deals during the year.  First-time financings reached the highest level since 2001.  


Investments in the fourth quarter of 2006 totaled $5.7 billion in 802 deals, down from $6.6 billion in the third quarter of 2006, but were well within the range of $4.3 to $6.9 billion investments seen over past five years.

 

Here is the breakout (I added the bold in this section):

 

The Life Sciences sector (Biotechnology and Medical Devices industries, together) set the pace for investing in 2006 with $7.2 billion in 731 deals compared to $6.0 billion going into 647 deals in 2005. The increase was driven equally by significant increases in the Biotechnology and Medical Device sectors, both of which had record high levels in 2006.   For the year, Life Sciences accounted for 28 percent of all venture capital invested, consistent with historical percentages .   Life Sciences was also the number one investment sector for 2006.


Software investing remained relatively flat in 2006, with $5.0 billion going into 865 deals compared to $4.8 billion going into 869 deals in 2005, but still remained the largest single industry sector for the year and the fourth quarter in terms of both deals and dollars.  


The Industrial/Energy sector experienced a sharp gain of more than 107 percent in dollars invested in 2006 with 183 companies receiving $1.8 billion, compared to 136 companies in 2005 receiving $851 million.  The alternative energy subsector accounted for 40 percent of the dollars invested in this category.  


The Media and Entertainment sector saw more venture capital dollars in 2006, with $1.6 billion going into 299 deals compared to 2005 when $1 billion went into180 deals.  Telecom companies also saw an increase, although less substantial, with 294 deals getting $2.6 billion dollars in 2006 compared to 263 deals receiving $2.5 billion in 2005.  The wireless subsector accounted for 44 percent of the Telecom sector in terms of dollars, with 128 deals garnering $1.2 billion during 2006.


Internet-specific companies received $4.0 billion in 645 deals in 2006, a notable increase over 2005, when these companies received $3.2 billion in 494 deals. "Internet-specific" is a discrete classification assigned to a company whose business model is fundamentally dependent on the Internet, regardless of the company's primary industry category.  These deals accounted for 16 percent of all venture capital dollars in 2006.

 

Early stage up, later stage down, showing exit strategies have changed:

 

Funding for Seed and Early Stage companies increased by 16 percent in deals and 11 percent in dollars, with $5.0 billion going into 1,176 deals in 2006 compared to $4.4 billion going into1,018 deals in 2005. The percentage of total deals in the Seed and Early-Stage was 34 percent in 2006.  Average post-money valuations of Early Stage companies fell to $12.14 million for the 12 months ending Q3 2006 compared to $14.59 million for the period ending Q3 2005.  (Valuation data lags one quarter.)


Expansion Stage companies saw a significant increase in both deals and dollars in 2006, with $11.2 billion going into 1,283 deals, compared to 2005 when $8.6 billion went into 1,092 deals. The increase reflects a higher confidence level in companies that reached the expansion stage.  Expansion deals accounted for 38 percent of the total deals done in 2006.  Average post-money valuations were $67.56 million for 12 months ended Q3 2006 versus $61.88 million for the year-ago period.


Later Stage Investing decreased in deals and dollars on both an absolute and relative basis in 2006.   Venture capitalists invested $9.3 billion in 957 companies this past year, compared to $9.7 billion in 990 companies in 2005.  Later Stage deals accounted for 28 percent of all deals in 2006.  Average post-money valuations were $108.32 million for Q3 2006 versus $77.61 million for the year-ago period.


First Time Financings
First-time financings increased in deals and dollars to the highest levels since 2001, with 1,093 companies receiving $5.8 billion in venture capital for the first time.   This marks an increase of 10 percent in the number of companies entering the venture-financed arena.


The top industries for first-time financing growth in 2006 were Software with 234 deals valued at $1.2 billion, followed by Biotechnology with 127 deals for $773 million.  This follows 2005's pattern, when 249 Software companies garnered $1.2 billion.


Seventy percent of first time financings in 2006 were in the Seed/Early Stage of development, followed by Expansion Stage companies at 23 percent and Later Stage companies at 7 percent.


International Investing
In 2006, U.S.-based venture capitalists invested $856 million in 71 deals in India and $1.1 billion in 105 deals in China.  These figures are reported separately and are not included in the aggregate totals above.

 

Additional info and conference call replay:

Digitized Replay: Scheduled to begin on:  1/22/07 at 08:00P   end on: 1/29/07 at 11:59P (TZ: Eastern)
Telephone: (800) 230 1059              
International: (612) 332 0107    
Access Code: 858678          
Web URL -- http://www.pwc.com/webcast
Web Password ? MoneyTreeQ406
Note that the password is case-sensitive and there is no space between the letters and numerals. Each person accessing the webcast will be required to complete a brief registration on the site.
Conference Call Speakers:
John Taylor, VP Research, NVCA
Tracy Lefteroff, global managing partner, Venture Capital & Private Equity Practice, PwC
Darrell Pinto, director of global private equity performance, Thomson Financial
Terry McGuire, Polaris Venture Partners
Steve Krausz from US Venture Partners

By Tom Foremski - January 23, 2007 | Permalink | Comment on this post | VC Watch
Blog reactions | RSS Feed | SVW News Toolbar | SVW Newsletter | SVW For Your Mobile Phone

March 6, 2007

3.6.07 VC3: Ready Set Pitch

So, it's a humbling experience, making the rounds on Sand Hill, making your well-honed elevator pitch. Why not compress the whole sordid affair into a rapid-fire afternoon? That was the idea behind VC3 - part of EntrepreneurshipUSA - give budding startups three minutes to pitch and VCs three minutes to respond. Then move on.

It was a humbling experience for some of the hopeful, the Mercury News reports.

Eric Frenkiel, a purposeful, bespectacled 21-year-old Stanford junior, recently launched what he coyly described as a site ``in the fashion-media space.''

In a session with young venture capitalists John Vrionis and Chris Sun -- themselves Stanford alums now working at Lightspeed Venture Partners and Storm Ventures, respectively -- Frenkiel talked at a fevered clip ... At the end, Vrionis handed Frenkiel his business card, but Frenkiel took it glumly. ``Are you giving your card to everyone?'' he asked plaintively. His demeanor brightened when Vrionis said no.

But it's hard to hol