Year: 2019

12 Dec 2019

Chatbots spotlight machine learning’s trillion-dollar potential

The global industry potential of artificial intelligence is well-documented, yet the vision of this AI future is uncertain.

AI and automation trends are generating significant debate among economists and governments, particularly around employment impact and uncertain social outcomes. The mainstream attention is warranted. According to PwC, AI “could contribute up to $15.7 trillion to the global economy in 2030, more than the current output of China and India combined.”

AI is at a crossroads, and its long-term outlook is still hotly debated. Despite social media giants, automotive companies and numerous other industries investing hundreds of billions of dollars in AI, many automation technologies are not yet directly generating revenue and instead are forecasted to become profitable in the coming decades. This creates additional uncertainty of AI’s true market potential. The realistic potential value of AI is unknown, yet, as the technology advances, the ultimate impact could be of great consequence to virtually every economy.

There are many reasons to view AI’s future from an optimistic lens, however: chatbots provide significant evidence for AI’s positive impact on both business growth and employment markets. Today, chatbots are increasingly capable of mimicking human interactions and conversations to assist business-to-business, business-to-consumer, business-to-government, advertising audiences and other diverse groups. The evolution of the cognitive computer science behind conversational chatbots is perhaps one of the best examples of AI technologies driving revenue. Further, chatbot technology shows some of the greatest promise for augmenting, rather than replacing human workers.

AI is driving value while augmenting human workers

Chatbots are delivering real revenue today for some of the world’s leading financial services (Bank of America), retail (Levi’s), and technology companies (Zendesk) . We’re seeing more consumers taking the next step in a transaction or even making a purchase decision based off conversations with chatbots. Beyond driving sales, chatbots have numerous applications to a wide range of organizations. Nonprofits, NGOs, and even political campaigns find value in deploying chatbots to help handle the influx of inquiries from stakeholders and relevant audiences.

Rather than these chatbots replacing human workers, organizations are finding chatbots to be a helpful and value-creating opportunity that frees employees to focus on more strategic tasks. Apple’s Siri, Amazon Alexa and Microsoft Cortana aren’t replacing executive assistants today, but these technologies are all capable of supporting the executive assistant function in the workplace.

Gartner predicts AI augmentation, defined as a “human-centered partnership model of people and AI working together to enhance cognitive performance,” could generate $2.9 trillion of business value by 2021. Many industries see potential for chatbots to augment functions like sales, customer support and IT, enabling workers to create value in more strategic ways. Bain & Company finds chatbots to be among the most notable examples of artificial intelligence and automation in practice: “Companies use AI applications to understand industry trends, manage their workforce, address problems, power chatbots and personalize content to enable self-service.”

Clearly, the implications of scaled, human-like engagement are stunning in their capacity to carry out tasks. A chatbot’s ability to simultaneously hold tens of thousands of conversations — pulling from many millions of data points — is comparable to what a human customer service rep could accomplish in more than 1,000 years of nonstop work. Scaling customer service via AI allows service professionals to focus on big picture and more complex issues, and it provides rich data on customer interactions. We anticipate seeing more companies look to build better customer service experiences through chatbots, as Google and Salesforce announced in April.

The transformative impact of chatbots across industries

From our research and work with leading global companies, it’s clear that enterprises are finding that chatbots bring about tremendous value while supporting both people employment and long-term business growth opportunities today. Ultimately, chatbots are on track to showcase some of the most optimistic examples of AI augmentation. Consider three examples:

12 Dec 2019

The IPO window is open

Hello and welcome back to our regular morning look at private companies, public markets and the grey space in between.

This morning we’re digging into the current IPO market, asking ourselves how much damage WeWork really did to other companies hoping to go public. Is the IPO window closed, and if not, what sort of companies can still get out?

There’s some good news out today for late-stage startups looking to debut — along with a few impending tests regarding the market’s appetite for risk that we should understand as we head into 2020.

Bill.com’s good news

In terms of IPOs, Bill.com’s felt comfortably standard for 2019. Bill.com was a heavily venture-backed company that had raised just under $350 million while private across myriad rounds, and by the time it wanted to go public it still lost money.

At the same time, the company had a number of strengths. These include historically slim losses as a percent of revenue ($7.3 million in its most recent fiscal year, against $78.4 million in revenue), differentiated revenue sources (subscription income and rising interest payments), and improving gross margins (74 percent in its most recent quarter, up from a little under 72 percent in the year-ago period).

Those factors combined were sufficient to entice investors to price the company’s IPO far above its initial expectations of $16 to $18 per share. Instead, Bill.com raised its range once and then priced above the higher interval. At $22 per share, the company’s value rose by about 60% compared to its most recent private financing. (You can read more on the debut here.)

This matters as WeWork was said to have closed the IPO window for companies more focused on growth than profits. The way the market reality was discussed in venture circles seemed to indicate that WeWork’s implosion had slashed investor interest in growth, with public market players now favoring profits, or something close.

Bill.com’s most recent three-month period featured far-larger losses than its year-ago quarter, which mattered little in the end. The firm’s solid growth and moderate losses, it seems, were more than enough to secure a strong welcome to the public markets.

Yes, but…

You may be wondering why we just spent so much time explaining why a healthy company managed to go public. The goal, simply, was to point out that not only can companies still losing money and burning cash go public, they may even get a strong reception.

But what about companies in slightly less good shape? What does Bill.com’s IPO pricing indicate for Sprout Social, a company of similar size that’s going public this week which is also unprofitable, but growing more slowly (29.5% year-over-year in Q3 2019, compared to Bill.com’s 57%)?

Its pricing and debut will be a more interesting test. And luckily for us, it should price its shares this evening. (Even more fun, it targeted the same $16 to $18 per-share initial IPO price range that Bill.com initially had in its own sights.)

If Sprout Social manages to price in-range, we’ll have another data point in favor of the IPO window being comfortably open. It’s not surprising that Bill.com’s IPO priced well, but Sprout Social’s slower growth rate likely make its losses less palatable; if it can debut all the same we’ll know that the band of venture-backed companies that can public post-WeWork in the dead of December is wide.

That’s good news for illiquid unicorns and their backers, provided that their companies are at least as healthy as Chicago’s Sprout.

WeWork 2.0

Finally, we have one more test of the IPO market ahead of us.

China-based Ucommune is a co-working company with self-described “global impact and ambitions.” Claiming to be the “largest co-working space community in China,” Ucommune espouses “sharing, innovation, responsibility and success for all.” In its F-1 document, filed yesterday and setting in motion a possible US-listed IPO, Ucommune details comical levels of unprofitability and growth.

If all that sounds familiar, it should. It should feel similar to WeWork, which makes the timing of Ucommune’s IPO filing all the more amazing. WeWork’s pulled IPO was minutes ago, and here we are, staring down the filing of yet another coworking IPO?

The situation gets even better. Observe the following results:

  • Ucommune Q1, Q2, Q3 revenue: $122.4 million

12 Dec 2019

Waymo buys Latent Logic, drives deeper into simulation and Europe

Waymo has acquired Latent Logic, a UK company that spun out of Oxford University’s computer science department, as the autonomous vehicle company seeks to beef up its simulation technology.

The acquisition also marks the launch of Waymo’s first European engineering hub will be in Oxford, UK. This likely won’t be the end of Waymo’s expansion and investment in Europe and the UK. The former Google self-driving project that is now an Alphabet business said it will continue to look for opportunities to grow the team in the UK and Europe.

Earlier this year, Waymo locked in an exclusive partnership with Renault and Nissan to research how commercial autonomous vehicles might work for passengers and packages in France and Japan. In October, Waymo said that its working with Renault to study the possibility of establishing an autonomous transportation route in Paris.

Waymo has made simulation a one of the pillars of its autonomous vehicle development program. But Latent Logic could help Waymo make its simulation more realistic by using a form of machine learning called imitation learning.

Imitation learning models human behavior of motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. The idea is that by modeling the mistakes and imperfect driving of humans, the simulation will become more realistic and theoretically improve Waymo’s behavior prediction and planning.

Waymo isn’t sharing financial details of the acquistion. But it appears that the two founders Shimon Whiteson and João Messia, CEO Kirsty Lloyd-Jukes and key members of the engineering and technical team will join Waymo. The Latent Logic team will remain in Oxford.

“By joining Waymo, we are taking a big leap towards realizing our ambition of safe, self-driving vehicles,” said Latent Logic co-founder and chief scientist Shimon Whiteson. “In just two years, we have made significant progress in using imitation learning to simulate real human behaviors on the road. I’m excited by what we can now achieve in combining this expertise with the talent, resources and progress Waymo have already made in self-driving technology.”
12 Dec 2019

Interpreter, Google’s real-time translator, comes to mobile

After rolling out on smart speakers and displays earlier this year, Google’s interpreter real-time translation mode finally landing on mobile. A far more handy application for such functionality, the feature arrives on both Android and iOS handsets globally, starting today.

The feature works in tandem with Assistant. Say something like, “Hey Google, be my German translator” or “Hey Google, help me speak Thai,” and the feature kicks in, offering up a real-time translated transcript and audio. The feature also offers some Smart Replies a la Gmail, to help keep the conversation going.

The feature is now available in 44 languages (full list here), up from the 29 available on the smart displays/speakers. It’s integrated directly into the Google Assistant app, negating the need to download an additional translation app. Between this and Lens, Google’s apps have quickly become a necessary part of traveling abroad.

12 Dec 2019

Robinhood lets you invest as little as 1 cent in any stock

One share of Amazon stock costs over $1700, locking out less wealthy investors. So to continue its quest to democratize stock trading, Robinhood is launching fractional share trading this week. This lets you buy 0.000001 shares, rounded to the nearest penny, or just $1 of any stock with zero fee.

The ability to buy by millionth of a share lets Robinhood undercut Square Cash’s recently announced fractional share trading, which sets a $1 minimum for investment. Robinhood users can sign up here for early access to fractional share trading.

As incumbent brokerages like Charles Schwab and E*Trade move to copy Robinhood’s free stock trading, the startup has to stay ahead in inclusive financial tools. Fractional share trading ensures no one need be turned away, and Robinhood can keep growing its user base of 10 million with its war chest of $910 million in funding.

Robinhood has a bunch of other new features aimed at diversifying its offering for the not-yet-rich. Today its Cash Management feature it announced in October is rolling out to its first users on 800,000 person wait list, offering them 1.8% APY interest on cash in their Robinhood balance plus a Mastercard debit card for spending money or pulling it out of a wide network of ATMs. The feature is effectively a scaled-back relaunch of the botched debut of 3% APY Robinhood Checking a year ago which was scuttled since the startup failed to secure the proper insurance it now has for Cash Management.

Additionally, Robinhood is launching two more widely requested features early next year. Dividend Reinvestment Plan (DRIIP) will automatically reinvest cash dividends Robinhood users receive into stocks or ETFS. Recurring Investments will let users schedule daily, weekly, bi-weekly, or monthly investments into stocks. With all this, Crypto trading, and  Robinhood is evolving into a full financial services suite that will be much harder for competitors to copy.

Robinhood Debit Card

How Robinhood Fractional Shares Work

“We believe that if you want to invest, it shouldn’t matter how much money you have. With fractional shares, we’re opening up a whole universe of stocks and funds including Amazon, Apple, Disney, Berkshire Hathaway, and thousands of others” Robinhood product manager Abhishek Fatehpuria tells me.

Users will be able to place real-time fractional share orders in dollar amounts as low as $1 or share amounts as low as 0.000001 shares rounded to the penny during market hours. Stocks worth over $1 per share with a market capitalization above $25 million are eligible, with 4000 different stocks and ETFs available for commission-free, real-time fractional trading.

“We believe that participation is power. Since day one, we’ve focused on breaking down barriers like trade commissions and account minimums to help people participate in the financial system” says Fatehpuria. “We have a unique user base — half our customers tell us they’re first time investors, and the median age of a Robinhood customer is 30. This means we have a unique opportunity to expand access to the markets for this new generation.”

Robinhood is racing to corner the freemium investment tool market before other startups and finance giants can catch up. It opened a waitlist for its UK launch next year which will be its first international market. But in just the past month, Alpaca raised $6 million for an API that lets anyone build a stock brokerage app, and Atom Finance raised $10.6 million for its free investment research tool that could compete with Robinhood’s in-app feature. Meanwhile, Robinhood suffered an embarrassing bug letting users borrow more money than allowed.

The move fast and break things mentality triggers new dangers when introduced to finance. Robinhood must resist the urge to rush as it spreads itself across more products in pursuit of a leveler investment playing field.

12 Dec 2019

Facebook Messenger adds Star Wars-themed features and AR effects

Star Wars has come to Facebook’s Messenger app. Facebook today announced a new set of Star Wars-themed features for Messenger users, including a chat theme, reactions, stickers, and AR effects. The features were developed in partnership with Disney to help promote the upcoming film, “Star Wars: The Rise of Skywalker,” which premieres nationwide on December 20.

Both the stickers and the reactions allow users to express themselves using characters from both sides of The Force, says Facebook. Disney also helped to create a set of limited-edition AR effects which can be used both while taking photos and selfies or when you’re on video calls.

One, the Lightspeed Effect, gives the appearance of jumping into hyperspace. Another, the Cockpit Effect, lets you see yourself as a member of the Resistance, traveling across the galaxy in Poe Dameron’s X-Wing. The Dark vs Light Effect lets you choose your side of the Force.

There’s also a Star Wars chat theme you can enable from the Messenger thread settings. (You access the Settings by tapping the thread’s name — typically the name or names of those you’re chatting with at the top of the screen, unless you or someone else has already renamed the chat.)

This isn’t the first time Disney has partnered with a major tech company on a big marketing push around the Star Wars franchise. In 2015, Disney teamed up with Google to built out a new tool that let you theme its suite of apps, including Gmail, YouTube, Google Maps Chrome and others with either a Light Side or Dark Side effect. Facebook that year also let users change their profile photo to a Star Wars-themed pic where they posed with a red Dark Side cross-guard lightsaber or a Light Side blue one.

And in 2017, Google launched an AR Stickers app with a set of licensed characters from Star Wars to promote The Last Jedi. Apple got on board, too, with an updated version of its Clips app with a set of new “Selfie Scenes,” including those for the Millennium Falcon and Mega-Destroyer, also from Star Wars: The Last Jedi.

The sorts of collaborations benefit both parties. In the case of this new Messenger partnership, Disney gets to market its new movie to Messenger’s over one billion users. Meanwhile, Facebook gains increased usage and engagement for its popular Messenger app in a competitive market, where AR effects alone can be a key selling point for attracting users.

The new Star Wars features are rolling out today, December 12, to Messenger.

 

12 Dec 2019

Conductor execs buy their company back from WeWork

It’s been less than two years since WeWork announced the acquisition of SEO and content marketing company Conductor — but those two years have been bumpy, to say the least.

Briefly: Parent organization The We Company’s disastrous attempt to go public resulted in the ouster of CEO Adam Neumann, an indefinite delay of its IPO and reports that the company was weighing the sale of subsidiaries Meetup, Managed by Q and Conductor.

So it’s no surprise that Conductor is, in fact, being sold — not to another company, but to its own CEO and co-founder Seth Besmertnik, COO Selina Eizik and investor Jason Finger (managing partner of The Finger Group and founder of Seamless).

“We’re grateful for our time with WeWork, during which we’ve been able to invest aggressively in R&D, doubling the size of our team with world-class talent that helps our customers achieve success everyday,” Besmertnik said in a statement. “People don’t want to be advertised to or sold to anymore. Our solutions make it easier for brands to deliver marketing that is helpful and valuable. It’s marketing that consumers actually seek out.”

The company also says that Conductor’s employees will be given a new category of stock that they’re calling founder-preferred shares, turning them into “250 employee co-founders” who can appoint a representative to the board of directors. This should give them a bigger stake and a bigger say in where Conductor goes from here.

In fact, Besmertnik noted that pre-acquisition, the Conductor team (including himself) owned less than 10% of the company, while under the new structure, employees will own “more than four times what they did when we sold the company” — and combined with Besmertnik and Eizik’s shares, they have a majority stake.

“Our ownership model is going to really create an even more committed and even more passionate group of people as we apply that to our mission and vision,” he told me.

Conductor started out with a focus on helping marketers optimize their websites for search, then expanded with tools for creating the content that’s being found through search. Since its acquisition, the company has operated as a WeWork subsidiary, and it’s currently working with more than 400 enterprises including Visa, Casper and Slack.

The financial terms were not disclosed, but Conductor says that as a result of the deal, it’s fully divested from The We Company.

12 Dec 2019

Klarna CEO says “maybe” of taking public Europe’s most valuable fintech next year (but he’s not ruling out another round, either)

Yesterday, at TechCrunch Berlin, we sat down with Sebastian Siemiatkowski, the cofounder and CEO of Klarna, a 15-year-old company that’s currently the most highly valued privately held fintech in Europe, following a $460 million investment that pegged the company’s worth at $5.5 billion back in August. (Asked yesterday to confirm that the company has raised $1.2 billion altogether from investors, Siemiatkowski joked — without confirming the amount — “It sounds like you know better than I do.”)

Siemiatkowski had come to the event largely to take the wraps off a new tech hub in Berlin that will house 500 employees in product and engineering. But we were far more interested in discussing the future of the company, which is best known for providing instant credit to online shoppers at the point of checkout and is growing fast, with nearly 3,000 employees across 17 countries. Klarna has also begun competing more aggressively in the U.S.  —  as well as fending off a against a growing spate of competitors, from publicly traded AfterPay to Max Levchin’s Affirm to Sezzle. a company in Minneapolis that seemingly appeared from the blue a few years ago. 

Of course, the toughest competition of all may come from Amazon and Google, which are increasingly embedding their payment systems — Amazon Pay and and Google Pay — into their own massive platforms. We talked with Siemiatkowski about how Klarna survives as they gobble up more of the retail industry. We also asked about whether Amazon might be an acquirer, or whether Klarna might be eyeing an IPO in 2020 instead. You can check out excerpts from our conversation below. They’ve been lightly edited for length and clarity.

TC: The last time we sat down together was four years or so ago, when Klarna was best known for its checkout product. What are some of the ways in which the company has evolved since then?

SS: There’s a massive opportunity. For consumers, when they shop online today, they have so many friction points. One of them might be the ability to get free credit without all the fees and things that people associate with credit cards. But there’s also other things like, where’s my package? When will it arrive? How do I do returns? Where are the best offers? Where are the best discounts? There’s a lot of things that people still struggle with. And so what we’re trying to do is create that super-smooth shopping experience, and the more problems we solve for these customers, the better, and the happier they are, and the more they’re going to use it.

TC: Do you have any other financial products, like [longer-term] loans?

SS: We do direct type of payments like that. And then, in some countries here in Europe, we’ve already launched a plastic card, as well. So you can use this like that. And then we also do this kind of Mint.com-like financial dashboard that shows you your spending habits, and all that kind of stuff.

TC: You’re adding this hub in Berlin, but you’re already in Germany–

SS: Yes, Germany is actually our largest market. In Germany, we have about 30 million users, which, you know, takes us about 10 million ahead of that American wallet thing [PayPal], which is quite cool. So Germany is a super important for us, but right now what’s exciting is the U.S., so right now we’re adding customers at a pace that will be about six million customers on an annual basis right now. So the U.S. is really taking off.


TC: This instant credit product is still the biggest producer of revenue?

SS: Yes. If you look at those two things going on here, first is that millennials, in the U.S. and U.K.,  they don’t have credit cards they have debit cards — 70% of millennials in the U.S. only have debit cards. But they’re still looking sometimes to get a cash flow ease. What’s good about our services is doesn’t cost a consumer anything, so it’s not like the old credit cards which were really expensive for users.

It’s merchant-funded, so that allows the consumers to then sometimes be able to either ease their cash flow by paying in four installments, or try before they buy [meaning they can defer the payment for some period] and stuff like. People forget that people who have debit cards have much harder issues shopping online than people with credit cards, and that’s a big piece of what we’re solving for.

TC: Do you always break the payments into four installments? Do you customize these plans?

SS: Breaking [into] four [payments] is great and that’s one option. What we’ve seen is that consumers have different needs, so some people really like our try-before-you-buy product [where] you pay nothing at the time but then [pay] everything 30 days later when you receive the products. Sometimes, if it’s a bigger purchase, like you’re buying a sofa or something, you split it over 24 months of financing or something like that, which is kind of different. And sometimes people just want to pay for everything instantly. So we just want to make sure that people have all the options that they want.

TC: How much can users spend? What’s the upper boundary?

SS: I’m sure there is one but it’s really hard to answer because it’s very individual, on an individual basis.

TC: And to be clear, you’re buying these from merchants at a discount? Is that how it works?

SS: Basically, the merchant sets up with us, they pay us a merchant fee just like they do with PayPal or somebody else. Then we process the payments for them, and we take the full risk, and all the customer care and everything related to the transaction.

TC: I’m assuming you’re not using your [venture funding] to do this. You have a bank charter in Sweden . . .

SS: Yes, we’re a fully licensed bank and we have deposits to fund the balance sheet. So people in Germany can actually save with Klarna and get 1%, which doesn’t sound a lot, but it’s massively more than they get with any of the traditional banks in Germany.

TC: What about interest fees and late fees? How do those work?

SS: Basically, we keep them extremely low. There are sometimes if you’re late, there might be a late fee but but the whole purpose here is that it’s merchant-funded. So merchants pay for this, and the consumers get a much better product than the traditional credit card or other options.

TC: What’s the default rate?

SS: Super low. If look at overall Klarna, for all markets, it’s is less than 1%.

TC: There is a competitor of yours, AfterPay, that was criticized last year because something like a quarter of its revenue was coming from late payments. What [is your revenue coming from]?

SS: Most of it is coming from merchant fees, and late fees in general are never bigger than the losses that you’re making. But I think it’s definitely an important topic, where all the companies in this industry need to be very careful about how you set up your products.

I think Klarna — maybe because we’ve been around longer than the competitor you’re referring to and because we’re five times their size in totality — maybe we have just come a little bit further in how we think about consumer value and making sure that fees are right and so forth. So those are important topics to keep an eye on. But I also think that what’s even more important is that you have this credit card industry, which in general has charged massive interest rates, a lot of late fees, and been not a very transparent and great industry. And I think, actually, the big opportunity is for people like us, and the one you refer to and others, to disrupt that industry. It’s the credit card industry that we’re going after.

TC: Sure, and I’m not going to defend the credit card industry, but did you say what your interest fees are?

SS: It depends on an individual basis, but it’s definitely lower than the average credit card fee.

TC: Meanwhile, you’re charging merchants more than credit card companies, which you can do because you’re basically increasing their customers’ purchasing power.

SS: Yes. If you look to some markets like Brazil and Turkey that’s kind of how the whole world work. So in a way,  that’s kind of the direction we’re heading in, because as a merchant, you’ll have more buying power than as a single individual consumer, so you’ll be able to negotiate better rates, and be able to offer these products at a better rate than this as a single individual [receives].

TC: Obviously you’ve heard concerns that, especially as we’re maybe heading into a recession, easy credit may be dangerous for consumers. Your technology can assess whether or not someone is a good credit risk and whether or not an attempted transaction is fraudulent, but you’re not really getting a picture of a customer’s other financial obligations or burdens. 

SS: We do thorough credit checks. It depends because it’s hard to answer these questions when you’re active in 17 markets, because they’re all different. But it’s a definite obvious for us that we need to be able to assess people’s ability to pay, as well as their intent to pay . . . We’ve been doing this for 15 years, so we really learned how to identify that and do it in a, in a thoughtful and in a good way for the consumer.

TC: A lot of competitors have sprung up in recent years. Why hasn’t there been more consolidation in the space? Is it too soon?

SS: I think it might come eventually, but I do think again that there’s a lot of focus on these companies right now . . . and the point is that like, what we’re trying to do all of us, all these companies together, is really going after the trillion-dollar credit card industry  that hasn’t served customers well, that hasn’t, you know, and has been all about hiding fees and hasn’t been transparent and whose products and services are fairly poor quality.

There’s a big opportunity to change how this whole [industry works] and that’s true for us and to some degree also true for [mobile-only banks] N26 and Monzo and all the banking disruptors. We’re all going after these big banks that haven’t really served their customers well.

TC: It’s interesting that a lot of them are taking stakes in companies like yours. Visa made a strategic investment in Klarna in 2017. Why aren’t they pulling the trigger on more acquisitions? Is it a matter of them not knowing how to integrate these new technologies into their legacy systems but wanting at the same time to keep tabs on things?

SS:  I genuinely think —  I’ve been doing this now for 15 years, which is kind of crazy; I was 23 when we started —  that the bank disruption is actually happening now and I’m one of the people who would never say that. I’m always like, ‘Oh, [something] is just a trend, it’s hype, it’s going to pass, it’s going to take longer than people expect.’ But I see it happening. Consumers are switching en masse to these new services.

So what the legacy incumbents can do is [choose] from three options: transform themselves, which demands a very courageous CEO to really change a business like that; secondly, M&A; and third, go away and die as a company. So I do think that’s what you’re going to see in the market.  In general, if you look at the whole industry, you’re going to see a lot of investments in M&A activity going on, because that’s just how you defend yourself as as an incumbent versus disruption.

TC: Have you been approached?

SS: We get approached all the time, yeah.

TC: I thought it was interesting that you announced in October that AWS is now your preferred cloud provider. I imagine that Amazon is an important partner for you.

SS: Yes.

TC: I’m wondering especially about Amazon given that Amazon and Google are now embedding payment systems into their platforms. How do and your rivals [compete against them]?

SS:  I’m [someone who] believes that sticking to core is so important and so, like, what’s happening is we’ve seen a lot of like the big tech giants trying to kind of do more and more and more and more things. And I just think that’s very hard to do over time.

The other thing we do at Klarna is try to consistently stay ahead. When we started 15 years ago, payments online was all about safety; that was the only thing people [cared about] because they felt unsafe shopping online. I think 2010 to 2020 has been about simplicity — one click. one click. one click, because Amazon really taught us that one click was important and everyone wants to do one click. The question is, what happens from 2020 to 2030? That’s what we’ve been thinking about. How do we stay ahead of the game? How do we innovate? How do we keep creating new services and improvements to consumers so that they feel that this is better than what’s out there right now.

In my opinion, that really demands you to be passionate and in love with your business. And I think it’s hard for tech giants to be that at that scale. It’s easy to recognize what’s going on right now; it’s much harder [for them] to guess what’s going to happen five years from now. That’s really demand that passion and closeness to what you’re doing.

TC: Talking about the future, I saw that you talk to the Financial Times this summer, and when they asked you about going public after all these years, you said that, “In many ways we have most of the things in place that we need. It’s more question of timing and focus.” So how is 2020 looking in terms of timing?

SS: Yeah, I don’t know, maybe it could happen. It was kind of funny, because I was reading an interview with Michael Moritz, who’s on our board, and he was saying that we were going to stay private forever. So, I don’t know, it’s hard for me to know that what’s true anymore. People are reporting different things about Klarna.

TC: You never do know what Michael Moritz is going to say. But if you were to go public, I assume it would be a U.S. listing.

SS: I would assume so, too.

TC: What do you make of this whole direct listing concept that your neighbor [in Stockholm, Spotify, pioneered]?

SS: I think it’s wise. I mean Michael [Moritz] is a big proponent of it. I think it makes sense. I read all the arguments, and it looks interesting.

TC: But you’re not raising money with direct listings — your existing shareholders are instead selling their shares on the open market — which sort of begs the question: will you be raising [another private round] of funding again? You raised a big round in summer.

SS: We are in a very exciting phase right now, where the U.S. and U.K. is growing so fast for us. . . And we want to continue investing. We think the potential market in in the US is just massive . . .So we’ll we’ll see what happens, but I wouldn’t rule it out, that one thing that could happen is raise even more money to be investing even more in growth and product delivery, and new products and services, as well as sales and marketing in the US,

TC: Of course, every time you raise money it impacts whether or not you’re profitable. Are you profitable now? Have you been?

SS: Klarna has been profitable every year up until this year.

TC: That giant fundraise [in summer] kind of threw you off.

SS: Yeah, exactly.

12 Dec 2019

Klarna CEO says “maybe” of taking public Europe’s most valuable fintech next year (but he’s not ruling out another round, either)

Yesterday, at TechCrunch Berlin, we sat down with Sebastian Siemiatkowski, the cofounder and CEO of Klarna, a 15-year-old company that’s currently the most highly valued privately held fintech in Europe, following a $460 million investment that pegged the company’s worth at $5.5 billion back in August. (Asked yesterday to confirm that the company has raised $1.2 billion altogether from investors, Siemiatkowski joked — without confirming the amount — “It sounds like you know better than I do.”)

Siemiatkowski had come to the event largely to take the wraps off a new tech hub in Berlin that will house 500 employees in product and engineering. But we were far more interested in discussing the future of the company, which is best known for providing instant credit to online shoppers at the point of checkout and is growing fast, with nearly 3,000 employees across 17 countries. Klarna has also begun competing more aggressively in the U.S.  —  as well as fending off a against a growing spate of competitors, from publicly traded AfterPay to Max Levchin’s Affirm to Sezzle. a company in Minneapolis that seemingly appeared from the blue a few years ago. 

Of course, the toughest competition of all may come from Amazon and Google, which are increasingly embedding their payment systems — Amazon Pay and and Google Pay — into their own massive platforms. We talked with Siemiatkowski about how Klarna survives as they gobble up more of the retail industry. We also asked about whether Amazon might be an acquirer, or whether Klarna might be eyeing an IPO in 2020 instead. You can check out excerpts from our conversation below. They’ve been lightly edited for length and clarity.

TC: The last time we sat down together was four years or so ago, when Klarna was best known for its checkout product. What are some of the ways in which the company has evolved since then?

SS: There’s a massive opportunity. For consumers, when they shop online today, they have so many friction points. One of them might be the ability to get free credit without all the fees and things that people associate with credit cards. But there’s also other things like, where’s my package? When will it arrive? How do I do returns? Where are the best offers? Where are the best discounts? There’s a lot of things that people still struggle with. And so what we’re trying to do is create that super-smooth shopping experience, and the more problems we solve for these customers, the better, and the happier they are, and the more they’re going to use it.

TC: Do you have any other financial products, like [longer-term] loans?

SS: We do direct type of payments like that. And then, in some countries here in Europe, we’ve already launched a plastic card, as well. So you can use this like that. And then we also do this kind of Mint.com-like financial dashboard that shows you your spending habits, and all that kind of stuff.

TC: You’re adding this hub in Berlin, but you’re already in Germany–

SS: Yes, Germany is actually our largest market. In Germany, we have about 30 million users, which, you know, takes us about 10 million ahead of that American wallet thing [PayPal], which is quite cool. So Germany is a super important for us, but right now what’s exciting is the U.S., so right now we’re adding customers at a pace that will be about six million customers on an annual basis right now. So the U.S. is really taking off.


TC: This instant credit product is still the biggest producer of revenue?

SS: Yes. If you look at those two things going on here, first is that millennials, in the U.S. and U.K.,  they don’t have credit cards they have debit cards — 70% of millennials in the U.S. only have debit cards. But they’re still looking sometimes to get a cash flow ease. What’s good about our services is doesn’t cost a consumer anything, so it’s not like the old credit cards which were really expensive for users.

It’s merchant-funded, so that allows the consumers to then sometimes be able to either ease their cash flow by paying in four installments, or try before they buy [meaning they can defer the payment for some period] and stuff like. People forget that people who have debit cards have much harder issues shopping online than people with credit cards, and that’s a big piece of what we’re solving for.

TC: Do you always break the payments into four installments? Do you customize these plans?

SS: Breaking [into] four [payments] is great and that’s one option. What we’ve seen is that consumers have different needs, so some people really like our try-before-you-buy product [where] you pay nothing at the time but then [pay] everything 30 days later when you receive the products. Sometimes, if it’s a bigger purchase, like you’re buying a sofa or something, you split it over 24 months of financing or something like that, which is kind of different. And sometimes people just want to pay for everything instantly. So we just want to make sure that people have all the options that they want.

TC: How much can users spend? What’s the upper boundary?

SS: I’m sure there is one but it’s really hard to answer because it’s very individual, on an individual basis.

TC: And to be clear, you’re buying these from merchants at a discount? Is that how it works?

SS: Basically, the merchant sets up with us, they pay us a merchant fee just like they do with PayPal or somebody else. Then we process the payments for them, and we take the full risk, and all the customer care and everything related to the transaction.

TC: I’m assuming you’re not using your [venture funding] to do this. You have a bank charter in Sweden . . .

SS: Yes, we’re a fully licensed bank and we have deposits to fund the balance sheet. So people in Germany can actually save with Klarna and get 1%, which doesn’t sound a lot, but it’s massively more than they get with any of the traditional banks in Germany.

TC: What about interest fees and late fees? How do those work?

SS: Basically, we keep them extremely low. There are sometimes if you’re late, there might be a late fee but but the whole purpose here is that it’s merchant-funded. So merchants pay for this, and the consumers get a much better product than the traditional credit card or other options.

TC: What’s the default rate?

SS: Super low. If look at overall Klarna, for all markets, it’s is less than 1%.

TC: There is a competitor of yours, AfterPay, that was criticized last year because something like a quarter of its revenue was coming from late payments. What [is your revenue coming from]?

SS: Most of it is coming from merchant fees, and late fees in general are never bigger than the losses that you’re making. But I think it’s definitely an important topic, where all the companies in this industry need to be very careful about how you set up your products.

I think Klarna — maybe because we’ve been around longer than the competitor you’re referring to and because we’re five times their size in totality — maybe we have just come a little bit further in how we think about consumer value and making sure that fees are right and so forth. So those are important topics to keep an eye on. But I also think that what’s even more important is that you have this credit card industry, which in general has charged massive interest rates, a lot of late fees, and been not a very transparent and great industry. And I think, actually, the big opportunity is for people like us, and the one you refer to and others, to disrupt that industry. It’s the credit card industry that we’re going after.

TC: Sure, and I’m not going to defend the credit card industry, but did you say what your interest fees are?

SS: It depends on an individual basis, but it’s definitely lower than the average credit card fee.

TC: Meanwhile, you’re charging merchants more than credit card companies, which you can do because you’re basically increasing their customers’ purchasing power.

SS: Yes. If you look to some markets like Brazil and Turkey that’s kind of how the whole world work. So in a way,  that’s kind of the direction we’re heading in, because as a merchant, you’ll have more buying power than as a single individual consumer, so you’ll be able to negotiate better rates, and be able to offer these products at a better rate than this as a single individual [receives].

TC: Obviously you’ve heard concerns that, especially as we’re maybe heading into a recession, easy credit may be dangerous for consumers. Your technology can assess whether or not someone is a good credit risk and whether or not an attempted transaction is fraudulent, but you’re not really getting a picture of a customer’s other financial obligations or burdens. 

SS: We do thorough credit checks. It depends because it’s hard to answer these questions when you’re active in 17 markets, because they’re all different. But it’s a definite obvious for us that we need to be able to assess people’s ability to pay, as well as their intent to pay . . . We’ve been doing this for 15 years, so we really learned how to identify that and do it in a, in a thoughtful and in a good way for the consumer.

TC: A lot of competitors have sprung up in recent years. Why hasn’t there been more consolidation in the space? Is it too soon?

SS: I think it might come eventually, but I do think again that there’s a lot of focus on these companies right now . . . and the point is that like, what we’re trying to do all of us, all these companies together, is really going after the trillion-dollar credit card industry  that hasn’t served customers well, that hasn’t, you know, and has been all about hiding fees and hasn’t been transparent and whose products and services are fairly poor quality.

There’s a big opportunity to change how this whole [industry works] and that’s true for us and to some degree also true for [mobile-only banks] N26 and Monzo and all the banking disruptors. We’re all going after these big banks that haven’t really served their customers well.

TC: It’s interesting that a lot of them are taking stakes in companies like yours. Visa made a strategic investment in Klarna in 2017. Why aren’t they pulling the trigger on more acquisitions? Is it a matter of them not knowing how to integrate these new technologies into their legacy systems but wanting at the same time to keep tabs on things?

SS:  I genuinely think —  I’ve been doing this now for 15 years, which is kind of crazy; I was 23 when we started —  that the bank disruption is actually happening now and I’m one of the people who would never say that. I’m always like, ‘Oh, [something] is just a trend, it’s hype, it’s going to pass, it’s going to take longer than people expect.’ But I see it happening. Consumers are switching en masse to these new services.

So what the legacy incumbents can do is [choose] from three options: transform themselves, which demands a very courageous CEO to really change a business like that; secondly, M&A; and third, go away and die as a company. So I do think that’s what you’re going to see in the market.  In general, if you look at the whole industry, you’re going to see a lot of investments in M&A activity going on, because that’s just how you defend yourself as as an incumbent versus disruption.

TC: Have you been approached?

SS: We get approached all the time, yeah.

TC: I thought it was interesting that you announced in October that AWS is now your preferred cloud provider. I imagine that Amazon is an important partner for you.

SS: Yes.

TC: I’m wondering especially about Amazon given that Amazon and Google are now embedding payment systems into their platforms. How do and your rivals [compete against them]?

SS:  I’m [someone who] believes that sticking to core is so important and so, like, what’s happening is we’ve seen a lot of like the big tech giants trying to kind of do more and more and more and more things. And I just think that’s very hard to do over time.

The other thing we do at Klarna is try to consistently stay ahead. When we started 15 years ago, payments online was all about safety; that was the only thing people [cared about] because they felt unsafe shopping online. I think 2010 to 2020 has been about simplicity — one click. one click. one click, because Amazon really taught us that one click was important and everyone wants to do one click. The question is, what happens from 2020 to 2030? That’s what we’ve been thinking about. How do we stay ahead of the game? How do we innovate? How do we keep creating new services and improvements to consumers so that they feel that this is better than what’s out there right now.

In my opinion, that really demands you to be passionate and in love with your business. And I think it’s hard for tech giants to be that at that scale. It’s easy to recognize what’s going on right now; it’s much harder [for them] to guess what’s going to happen five years from now. That’s really demand that passion and closeness to what you’re doing.

TC: Talking about the future, I saw that you talk to the Financial Times this summer, and when they asked you about going public after all these years, you said that, “In many ways we have most of the things in place that we need. It’s more question of timing and focus.” So how is 2020 looking in terms of timing?

SS: Yeah, I don’t know, maybe it could happen. It was kind of funny, because I was reading an interview with Michael Moritz, who’s on our board, and he was saying that we were going to stay private forever. So, I don’t know, it’s hard for me to know that what’s true anymore. People are reporting different things about Klarna.

TC: You never do know what Michael Moritz is going to say. But if you were to go public, I assume it would be a U.S. listing.

SS: I would assume so, too.

TC: What do you make of this whole direct listing concept that your neighbor [in Stockholm, Spotify, pioneered]?

SS: I think it’s wise. I mean Michael [Moritz] is a big proponent of it. I think it makes sense. I read all the arguments, and it looks interesting.

TC: But you’re not raising money with direct listings — your existing shareholders are instead selling their shares on the open market — which sort of begs the question: will you be raising [another private round] of funding again? You raised a big round in summer.

SS: We are in a very exciting phase right now, where the U.S. and U.K. is growing so fast for us. . . And we want to continue investing. We think the potential market in in the US is just massive . . .So we’ll we’ll see what happens, but I wouldn’t rule it out, that one thing that could happen is raise even more money to be investing even more in growth and product delivery, and new products and services, as well as sales and marketing in the US,

TC: Of course, every time you raise money it impacts whether or not you’re profitable. Are you profitable now? Have you been?

SS: Klarna has been profitable every year up until this year.

TC: That giant fundraise [in summer] kind of threw you off.

SS: Yeah, exactly.

12 Dec 2019

Bill.com’s IPO pricing is good news for unprofitable startups

Business-to-business payments company Bill.com priced its IPO today at an above-range $22 per share. The firm, selling 9.82 million shares in its offering, will raise around $216 million at a roughly $1.6 billion valuation.

The company’s IPO pricing comes during a modestly uncertain time for unprofitable companies looking to go public. Following the WeWork IPO mess, concerns rose that growth-oriented companies might struggle to drum up investor interest when going public.

Bill.com’s offering makes it plain that not all loss-making companies are equal; the firm’s pricing journey indicates that its growth story resonated more with investors than concerns relating to its losses. The company had targeted a $16 to $18 per-share IPO price range. However, that range was raised to $19 to $21 per share yesterday, ahead of pricing.

Financial history

To understand what the Bill.com IPO means for startups, let’s remind ourselves of how much capital it raised while private itself, and how it performed financially.

Bill.com raised $347.1 million while private across a host of Series and venture rounds, including $100 million in 2017 and $88 million in 2018. The Palo Alto-based company raised from Franklin Templeton, JP Morgan and Temasek during its late-stage private life. When it was younger, Bill.com raised capital from Emergence, DCM, Icon Ventures, Financial Partners Fund and Scale Venture Partners, among others.

The company was valued, according to Crunchbase data, at precisely $1 billion on a post-money valuation following its 2018 investment. This makes its IPO a comfortably up transaction, adding value to even Bill.com’s most recently added private investors.

Heading into its IPO, Bill.com posted both growing revenue and growing losses:

  • Q3 revenue: $35.2 million, up 56.9% year-over-year
  • Q3 net loss: $5.7 million, up 544.3 % year-over-year

The firm’s net loss growth looks worse than it really is, given that it lost less than $1 million in its year-ago Q3; but investors looking for a path to profits may not have appreciated the direction or pace of its net results regardless of how small a base they were calculated from.

An above-range pricing on a company that raised its pricing interval while losing more money than it did a year ago should allay concerns among private companies that the IPO window is closed. It is not, provided that your losses are slim as a percent of revenue and your growth is solid.