Year: 2020

28 Dec 2020

2021 will be a calmer year for semiconductors and chips (except for Intel)

If ever there was a typically quiet tech industry that seemed to drive massive headlines this year, it was semiconductors. From record-setting M&A purchases to prodigious venture capital financing, the decline of major players and huge international trade fights, semiconductor companies found themselves in the crosshairs of inventors, VCs, regulators, politicians and, well, Apple.

2020 was a banner year, mostly since it was the culmination of patterns we’ve been watching in the industry for years now. It’s dangerous to predict that there will be “less news” in any tech industry, but these patterns have in many ways worked themselves out, and it seems highly probably that 2021 will be a quieter year for semiconductors than the past year has been.

Here’s a snapshot of four of the largest story lines of 2020, and what may happen next as we enter 2021.

Chip consolidation is in process. The question is whether it will all be approved

The biggest story this year in chips was the rapid consolidation of the industry in just the span of a few months. That consolidation was headlined by Nvidia’s $40 billion purchase offer of Arm, the chip design firm that supplies the blueprint for almost all smartphones and is also starting to encroach on the desktop world with Apple’s launch of its M1 processor.

Nvidia wasn’t unique in throwing around big money to consolidate. AMD spent $35 billion to buy Xilinx, which makes reprogrammable chips known as FPGAs that are increasingly vital in tech stacks like 5G, where technologies change faster than silicon can be replaced. Intel sloughed off its memory unit to SK Hynix for $9 billion as it fights for survival, and Analog Devices bought Maxim for $21 billion in a bid to consolidate the embedded chips market in areas like sensors and power management. Beyond the major headlines of course, there were many smaller acquisitions made across the industry.

The chips industry isn’t unique in its heavy consolidation — plenty of other industries have also taken the M&A route given the relatively lenient antitrust policy in place and the abundant capital from the public markets at their disposal. Yet, there are also unique forces pushing semis to head this direction.

First, the cost of staying competitive in the chip industry have been rising rapidly. For the most high-performance chips, fabs cost tens of billions of dollars to construct and require years of lead time. R&D costs remain high, which is one reason why VC financing of the industry has been limited in the past (although that has changed – read below). It’s just tough to make it in chips if you are small and don’t have the capital to burn to stay competitive.

Perhaps even more importantly though, there has been consolidation on the customer side, and that monopsony is also forcing general consolidation for suppliers. Among the largest buyers of high-performance compute and storage today are the big cloud platforms like AWS, Google Cloud and Microsoft Azure. Apple and a few other manufacturers control most of the market in smartphones, and even in embedded systems, the number of buyers is apparently consolidating. Customer consolidation forces supplier consolidation, fighting markets demand power with market supply power.

Those two trends have been around for years, but they culminated this year with the M&A frenzy we saw. That’s not to say that there is nothing left to buy in the market, but big players like Nvidia and AMD have made their biggest bets and are unlikely to make any more major acquisitions in the meantime.

What to watch for in 2021: The big story next year is which of these massive acquisitions actually receives approval. Antitrust regulators have been remarkably sanguine about consolidation in the sector, but now that consolidation is reaching its logical end, with only a few players — or even just one — existing in their respective markets.

These antitrust concerns are most notable with Nvidia/Arm, which has to receive simultaneous approval from four authorities (United States, Britain, Europe and China). Experts in the industry that I have talked to have been divided on their predictions, with some feeling that the parties can “work out a deal” and others feeling that China in particular is unlikely to approve a deal. We can expect some signs of how this is going in 2021, although approval of the deal might well head into 2022.

AMD/Xilinx has also raised some eyebrows among experts, but hasn’t gotten nearly the press that Nvidia/Arm has. As for Analog Devices and Maxim — which is pretty much classic horizontal consolidation — shareholders approved the merger in October, and the company said in its press release then that the period for the U.S. to intervene on antitrust grounds had expired. It still faces regulatory approvals in other regions and could close by summer 2021.

Given the huge spike in antirust concerns in the United States among both Democrats and Republicans around platform companies like Google and Facebook, the big question is whether those concerns spill over into other technology industries like chips. So far, that hasn’t been the case, but the new Biden administration might have other ideas when it sets up shop in January.

Venture capital activity in chips flourished in 2020. How much more investment can the industry take though?

2020 was another major year for VC dollars in next-generation silicon, after huge investment in 2019 and 2018. I’ve covered a lot of the exciting startups in the space, including Nuvia (which announced $240 million in September for its Series B), SiFive, EdgeQ, and Cerebras, and there are even more companies in the sector, including Graphcore and Mythic that are working on exciting products. Aggregate dollars in the sector are hard to calculate, since most chip companies stay very quiet about their funding for years due to concerns about competition. Nonetheless, even just the rounds that have been announced are staggering in scale.

28 Dec 2020

Tesla to make India debut ‘early’ next year

Tesla will begin its operations in India “early” 2021, a top Indian minister said on Monday, a day after the tech carmaker said it was confident it would enter the world’s second most populated market next year.

The American car company will begin operations with sales in early 2021 and then “maybe” look at assembling and manufacturing of cars in the country, India’s transport minister Nitin Gadkari told newspaper Indian Express. How early? Definitely not next month, Musk tweeted over the weekend.

Tesla, which broke ground in early 2019 on a $5 billion factory in China — its first outside of the U.S.. — has for years expressed interest in expanding to India. But in a 2018 tweet, Tesla chief executive Elon Musk shared that “some government regulations” in India had emerged as a roadblock.

Like elsewhere in the world, Musk has amassed tens of millions of fans in India. A handful of people paid the token amount of $1,000 to pre-order the Model 3 in 2016. Musk later blamed the local regulations for the delay in bringing the cars to customers in India.

“Maybe I’m misinformed, but I was told that 30% of parts must be locally sourced and the supply doesn’t yet exist in India to support that,” he tweeted in 2017.

India has emerged as one of the world’s largest battlegrounds for American, South Korean, and Chinese firms, that are looking at the South Asian market to expand their user and customer bases. Facebook and Google, both of which identify India as their biggest market by users, wrote multi-billion checks to Indian telecom giant Jio Platforms this year, for instance. Apple has ramped up its local production in the country in recent years to secure a larger smartphone market share — more than 70% of which is currently commanded by Chinese smartphone vendors.

New Delhi, which has claimed to abolish more than a 1,000 “archaic laws” in recent years, has previously acknowledged the pain points expressed by Musk. In the past three years, India has proposed billions of dollars in incentive to car companies to switch to electric alternatives and accelerate innovation and manufacturing of batteries in a bid to reduce its spendings on oil and curb air pollution.

India also proposed to ride-hailing firms Uber and Ola to convert 40% of their fleets in the country to electric by April 2026. It stated that the ride-hailing giants must convert 2.5% of their fleet of cars by 2021, 5% by 2022 and 10% by 2023.

Indian ride-hailing firm Ola, acquired Amsterdam-based Etergo earlier this year, said this month that it plans to invest about $327 million to set up “the world’s largest scooter factory” in the Southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu, which it said will be able to create 10,000 new jobs and have an initial capacity to produce 2 million electric vehicles in a year.

Earlier this year, a proposal drafted by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi-backed think tank Niti Aayog said the country could slash its spendings on oil import by as much as $40 billion in the next 10 years if electric vehicles were to be widely adopted.

Gadkari told the Indian newspaper that he is hopeful that India will emerge as the No. 1 manufacturing hub for auto in five years.

28 Dec 2020

2020 was a defining year for cannabis: What comes next?

To say that COVID-19 has dominated the past year would be an understatement. We’ve seen the pandemic reorient how we interact with businesses, each other and the world around us. It’s accelerated many trends in business — from e-commerce to digital payments — by several years in a matter of months.

The cannabis industry is no exception. Cannabis was already the country’s fastest-growing industry, but 2020 has taken the space to another level. A record-high percentage of Americans now support cannabis legalization.

By all accounts, cannabis was one of the biggest winners on Election Day, with legalization passing in Arizona, Montana, Missouri, New Jersey and South Dakota. More than one-third of the country — over 111 million people — now live in a state with legal recreational cannabis. By 2021, the legal industry is expected to be worth $24.5 billion.

A record-high percentage of Americans now support cannabis legalization.

Never has it been more clear that cannabis is now a staple in mainstream America. As we look toward 2021, this upward trajectory not only opens new doors for the industry, but the economy as a whole, with greater innovation, investment and employment opportunities flowing into the space.

A green economy

More than 57 million Americans have filed for unemployment since March. While the financial and employment opportunities around cannabis are not a silver bullet, they’re certainly not something we should ignore.

Legal cannabis sales reached nearly $20 billion this past year and are expected to top $40 billion annually within the next four years. As the industry continues to grow, companies are hiring to keep pace. The legal cannabis market supports 243,700 full-time-equivalent American jobs, which are set to multiply by 250% between 2018 and 2028. This makes the cannabis industry America’s largest source for new jobs.

Cannabis can also strengthen state economies and generate opportunities for increased tax revenue, particularly as state and local budgets dwindle. For example, with its new legalization measure, Arizona will issue a 16% tax on cannabis sales that will go toward community colleges, police, fire departments and public health programs.

Accelerating cannabis e-commerce

If there’s one point that’s been reinforced this year, it’s that cannabis is a highly demanded and indispensable consumer good.

At the height of widespread shelter-in-place orders this spring, dispensaries were classified as “essential” in many states alongside grocery stores, gas stations and pharmacies. While people couldn’t shop at department stores or go to the movies, they could still purchase from their local dispensary. This government recognition was a major signal to the market that the space has been elevated to the mainstream.

A resounding response from consumers followed with record cannabis sales. Unprecedented demand forced cannabis retailers to revolutionize the ways they do business and how customers purchase products. To minimize direct person-to-person contact that can potentially spread the virus, dispensaries turned quickly to e-commerce and digital payment solutions to keep employees and consumers safe while modernizing their business.

As a result of these changes across industries, online sales will reach $794.5 billion by the end of the year, far surpassing original estimates. Experts estimate that the pandemic accelerated the shift to e-commerce by five years. At Dutchie, we’ve seen this firsthand. Since March, we’ve experienced a 700% surge in online orders and a 32% increase in average order size.

Looking ahead to 2021

These political and business transformations were milestones that we’ve fast-forwarded to at breakneck speed. So, what comes next?

I see technological innovation at the forefront of the legal industry moving forward. Technology will enable dispensaries to streamline operations in a highly regulated space where compliance is essential. In turn, data will increasingly become more important as retailers will need to better understand their data to make more proactive, informed decisions. This will be a focus for dispensaries of all sizes, but in particular larger businesses that are looking for an increasingly high level of sophistication for their online experiences.

To meet this need, we’re finally seeing new enterprise-level solutions on the market that empower dispensaries to fully leverage their data to design their unique online identity so they can remain competitive as more players join the space.

As legalization continues to spread, wider adoption will further legitimize the industry and de-stigmatize cannabis sales and use. We will likely see cannabis companies attracting more top talent from some of the most notable companies across mainstream industries, and more software platforms, businesses and investors that were formerly hesitant to enter the space begin to work with and invest in cannabis-related businesses. Federal legalization of cannabis also has the potential to enhance liquidity and open the floodgates to more investment deals.

Additionally, as we’ve already begun to see, there will be an increasing trend toward consolidation across the space as retailers continue to make big acquisitions and mergers. More multistate operators will consume smaller players and smaller players will combine forces, creating a space that is more cohesive and less fragmented.

The future of cannabis

The cannabis industry is still in its infancy, but its potential is crystal clear.

As more states legalize and the industry grows and matures, we will see the needle move even closer to where we want to be: Where legal cannabis is afforded the same technological and financial resources as other mainstream industries; innovators can more freely come together to develop modern technology solutions to push the space forward; and where consumers and patients can get what they want more conveniently.

28 Dec 2020

Equity Monday: No, tech news doesn’t stop over the holidays

Hello and welcome back to Equity, TechCrunch’s venture capital-focused podcast where we unpack the numbers behind the headlines.

This is Equity Monday, our weekly kickoff that tracks the latest private market news, talks about the coming week, digs into some recent funding rounds and mulls over a larger theme or narrative from the private markets. You can follow the show on Twitter here and myself here — and don’t forget to check out the first of our two holiday eps, the last one talking to VCs about what surprised them in 2020.

Anyhoo, from vacation, here’s what Chris and I got up to:

Tune in Thursday for one more fun episode, and then we’re back to regular programming the week after!

Equity drops every Monday at 7:00 a.m. PST and Thursday afternoon as fast as we can get it out, so subscribe to us on Apple PodcastsOvercastSpotify and all the casts.

28 Dec 2020

4 keys to international expansion

During my five years with Global Founders Capital, Rocket Internet’s $1 billion VC arm, I saw more than a hundred of Rocket’s incubated companies attempt to internationalize. For background, Rocket Internet has helped launch some very successful businesses internationally, including HelloFresh ($12.9 billion market cap), Lazada ($1 billion exit to Alibaba), Jumia ($3.2 billion market cap), Zalando ($21.2 billion market cap) and many others. Rocket often followed the Blitzscaling model popularized by Reid Hoffman — earning them an appearance in his book of the same name.

After an initial success helping Groupon scale internationally via a merger with Rocket’s incubation firm CityDeal, Rocket’s team have aggressively scaled businesses from Algeria to Zimbabwe — sometimes in a matter of weeks. No surprise, Rocket also has a graveyard of failed companies that were victims of bad internationalization efforts.

Many companies make the costly mistake of launching abroad too soon.

My personal observations on Rocket’s successes and failures start with this crucial point: These learnings might not apply to your unique combination business model, market and timing. No matter how well you prepare and plan your internationalization, in the end you need to be agile, alert and smart as you dip your toes into your first foreign market.

Fail fast and cheaply

Internationalization can be a big driver of growth and consequently enterprise value, which is why investors always push for it. But going abroad can also destroy value just as quickly. As a founder, it’s your job to manage financial and operational risks. Finding the right balance between keeping costs in check and not underinvesting can mean doing things more slowly than your board would like. For example, you might launch new markets sequentially instead of rolling 10 out at the same time.

Adopt a “hire slow, fire fast” mentality for your expansion strategy. Don’t be afraid to pull the plug if things don’t work out.

Our team at Heartcore Capital use the following framework and learnings to guide internationalization strategies for our portfolio companies. A successful internationalization strategy needs to answer and address the “Four Ws”: When, Where, Which and With whom to internationalize. (Regarding the fifth W from journalism, you should not need to ask the “Why” question if you want to build a large business!)

1. When is the right time to start?

Many companies make the costly mistake of launching abroad too soon. They look at internationalization as a detached function, isolated from the rest of the business and then launch their second market prematurely. Follow this simple rule: Wait to internationalize until you hit product/market fit.

How do you know exactly when you’ve reached product/market fit? According to Marc Andreessen, “Product/market fit means being in a good market with a product that can satisfy that market.” He adds that experienced entrepreneurs can usually feel if they’ve reached this point.

Let’s take the man for his word and move on to the actual argument: Until you have product/market fit, you will not be able to distinguish between what you’ve learned from your business model and what you’ve learned from your in-country experience. Mistakes will compound. Complexities and costs will multiply. I contend that insufficient understanding of their business and operating model is the main reason why companies fail with their expansion strategies.

Founders should also consider the underlying costs of internationalizing before they decide to expand (more about this in the “What” section below). Some companies are global by default — think mobile gaming companies — or simply require language localization. Others need to build new warehouses, hire local teams or build entirely new products. The costs and respective risks of expanding prematurely depend heavily on the business model.

There are edge cases where companies need to move quickly to internationalize for strategic reasons — despite uncertainty about their market fit. For instance, companies like Groupon or those engaged in food delivery face winner-takes-most markets, where opportunities for product differentiation are limited. “Blitzscaling” makes sense in cases like these.

However, you should tread carefully if your only reason to start scaling abroad is a large fundraise or to match a competitor’s internationalization efforts. Scaling prematurely for the wrong reasons might just cost you your entire company.

When Rocket Internet announced it would launch the Homejoy model into European markets with Helpling, the American “original” company launched quickly in Germany in an effort to squash their new competitor. In the early days of “on-demand everything,” a managed marketplace for cleaning services sounded like the next unicorn in the making.

In 2013, Homejoy had a fresh $24 million Series A from Google Ventures and First Round — considered a huge round at a time when Instacart had just raised an $8 million Series A and Snapchat had done a $13 million Series A round. It must have seemed like a good idea to squash the German competition early.

As it turned out, Homejoy’s product was not yet ready to scale internationally. Just 13 months after launching in Germany, Homejoy had to cease operations globally, while Rocket’s Helpling is still alive and kicking. Helpling focused carefully on product, automation and making their unit economics work. A rush to crush an international competitor caused the demise of a would-be unicorn.

Homejoy expanded internationally in 2014 in a rush to squash a new German competitor Helpling. Their websites in 2020 show starkly different outcomes.

Homejoy expanded internationally in 2014 in a rush to squash a new German competitor Helpling. Their websites in 2020 show starkly different outcomes. Image Credits: Homejoy/Helpling

2. Where should you internationalize?

When deciding which new international market to tackle, it is vital to do your homework. Analyze the competitive environment, partner availability, infrastructure, culture, regulation and synergies with your home market.

In the early days of e-commerce, it was rather easy to analyze if a market was an expansion target. In the absence of professional competition, Rocket chose new countries based solely on GDP and internet penetration.

28 Dec 2020

Chinese online education app Zuoyebang raises $1.6 billion from investors including Alibaba

The rivalry between China’s top online learning apps has become even more intense this year because of the COVID-19 pandemic. The latest company to score a significant funding round is Zuoyebang, which announced today (link in Chinese) that it has raised a $1.6 billion Series E+ from investors including Alibaba Group. Other participants included returning investors Tiger Global Management, SoftBank Vision Fund, Sequoia Capital China and FountainVest Partners.

Zuoyebang’s latest announcement comes just six months after it announced a $750 million Series E led by Tiger Global and FountainVest. The latest financing brings Zuoyebang’s total raised so far to $2.93 billion. The company did not disclose its latest worth, but Reuters reported in September that it was raising at a $10 billion valuation.

One of Zuoyebang’s main competitors is Yuanfudao, which announced in October that it had reached a $15.5 billion valuation after closing a $2.2 billion round led by Tencent. This pushed Yuanfudao ahead of Byju as the world’s most valuable ed-tech company. Another popular online learning app in China is Yiqizuoye, which is backed by Singapore’s Temasek.

Zuoyebang offers online courses, live lessons and homework help for kindergarten to 12th grade students, and claims about 170 million monthly active users, about 50 million of whom use the service each day. In comparison, there were about 200 million K-12 students in 2019 in China, according to the Ministry of Education (link in Chinese).

In fall 2020, the total number of students in Zuoyebang’s paid live-stream classes reached more than 10 million, setting an industry record, the company claims. While a lot of the growth was driven by the pandemic, Zuoyebang founder Hou Jianbin said in the company’s funding announcement that it expects online education to continue growing in the longer term, and will invest in K-12 classes and expand its produt categories.

 

28 Dec 2020

China lays out ‘rectification’ plan for Jack Ma’s fintech empire Ant

What a whirlwind holiday for Jack Ma and his fintech empire. The People’s Bank of China, the country’s central bank, summoned Ant Group for regulatory talks on December 26th, announcing a sweeping plan for the fintech firm to “rectify” its regulatory violations.

The meeting came less than two months after China’s financial authorities abruptly halted what could have been a record-setting initial public offering of Ant over the firm’s regulatory compliance issues. The company, which started out as a payments processor for Alibaba’s online marketplaces and spun out in 2011, lacked a sound governance structure, defied regulatory requirements, illegally engaged in arbitrage, excluded competitors using its market advantage and hurt consumer rights, said the central bank.

Concurrently, Jack Ma’s e-commerce giant Alibaba is under investigation by China’s top market regulator over alleged monopolistic behavior.

The banking authority laid out a five-point compliance agenda for Ant, which is controlled by Alibaba’s billionaire founder Jack Ma. The fintech company should return to its roots in payments and bring more transparency to transactions; obtain the necessary licenses for its credit businesses and protect user data privacy; establish a financial holding company and ensure it holds sufficient capital; revamp its credit, insurance, wealth management and other financial businesses according to the law; and step up compliance for its securities business.

Following the closed-door meeting, Ant said it has established an internal “rectification workforce” to work on all the regulatory requirements.

The shakeup could take months to carry out and likely dent Ant’s valuation, which surpassed $300 billion around the time it was scheduled to go public. For instance, the government recently announced plans to raise the bar for third-party technology platforms like Ant to provide loans to consumers, a segment that made up about 35% of Ant’s annual revenue. The proposed change, which is part of Beijing’s effort to control the country’s debt risks, also sets a new requirement for online microlenders to provide at least 30% of the loan they fund jointly with banks, which could put pressure on Ant’s cash flow.

Some remain optimistic about Ant’s future. “[Ant] creates a lot of value. If you take the long view, the temporary suspension of its IPO has a limited impact on its business,” Bill Deng, founder of cross-border payments operator Xtransfer and a former executive at Ant, said to TechCrunch.

“From the regulator’s standpoint, [Ant’s] lending size is getting so big that it has extended beyond the old regulatory perimeters. To some extent, it has also encroached on the core interests of traditional financial players,” he added.

The clampdown on Ant has no doubt sent a warning to the rest of the industry. In a surprising move, JD.com’s fintech unit, a challenger to Ant, appointed its former chief compliance officer to steer the fintech firm as the new chief executive officer.

Tencent also has a sprawling fintech business, but it may not receive the same level of scrutiny because the social and gaming giant is “not nearly as aggressive” as Ant, said a partner of Tencent’s overseas fintech business who asked not to be named.

28 Dec 2020

Indian startups raised $9.3 billion in 2020

The coronavirus pandemic — and a handful of other factors — slowed dealmaking for startups in India this year.

Compared to their record $14.5 billion fundraise last year, Indian startups are ending 2020 with about $9.3 billion. This is the first time since 2016 that startups in India, one of the world’s largest startup communities, has raised less than $10 billion in a year, according to consultancy firm Tracxn.

The number of deals fell from 1,185 last year to 1,088 in 2020. There were fewer larger sized rounds, too. Rounds with dealsize $100 million or larger fell from 26 in 2019 to 20 (these rounds delivered $3.6 billion this year, compared to $7.5 billion last year), and similarly rounds with dealsize $50 million to $100 million fell from 27 to 13. (The figures do not include investments in telecom giant Jio Platforms, which alone raised over $20 billion this year.)

Despite the slowdown, Indian startups saw substantial rebound in the second half of this year. In the first half, startups in the world’s second largest internet market had raised just $4.2 billion from about 461 deals, said Tracxn.

Other than the coronavirus, which has impacted startups worldwide, another factor that impacted the dealmaking was absence of — or reduced participation from — some of the biggest investors.

Chinese giants such as Alibaba — and its affiliate Ant Group — and Tencent wrote fewer checks this year to Indian startups amid tension between the two neighboring nations. SoftBank also delivered less capital as many of its high-profile portfolio firms including Paytm, Oyo Rooms, and Ola did not raise money.

But the virus also accelerated growth of some startups. Byju’s is now valued at over $11 billion, up from $8 billion in January this year. Unacademy, another high-profile startup in the online learning space, raised two rounds at the height of the pandemic, increasing its valuation from about $500 million in February this year to over $2 billion.

Bond, a firm started by Mary Meeker and other high-profile investors, backed Byju’s this year. Bond believes that Byju’s will be worth over $30 billion in three years, a person who was briefed by the investment firm told TechCrunch. Several startups in India operating on a SaaS model and catering to customers worldwide also picked up momentum this year.

11 Indian startups including RazorPay, Unacademy, DailyHunt, and Glance became a unicorn this year. (On a side note, Google and Facebook wrote several checks to Indian firms this year. Google backed Glance and DailyHunt last week, while Facebook invested in Unacademy. Both the firms also invested in Jio Platforms this year.)

“I am old enough (unfortunately!) to have seen the 2001 and 2008 downturns so when Covid hit and there were stories of doom and gloom everywhere, I remembered what I saw happening in the past downturns — a beginning of a new generation of teams who built the next generation of companies,” said Vaibhav Domkundwar, founder and managing partner at Better Capital. Better Capital, which backs early stage startups in India, wrote 43 investment and follow-on checks this year.

M&A activities also accelerated this year. Byju’s acquired WhiteHat Jr for $300 million, while Unacademy acquired PrepLadder, which offers courses aimed at medical students, for $50 million in July. It also led an investment round of $5 million to acquire a majority stake in Mastree.

Reliance Industries acquired online pharmacy Nedmeds and, in a fire sale, Urban Ladder.

But for the first time, Indian startups are on the verge of seeing another kind of exit. Zomato, Flipkart, and Policybazaar are among some startups that plan to go public next year. Analysts at Bernstein have identified Paytm, Byju’s, PhonePe, and Delhivery among those who could also go public by 2022.

27 Dec 2020

Gillmor Gang: Get Back

Today we sat on the deck with our daughter Ella and her boyfriend Nick. Knowing of my fascination with all things Beatles, Nick gave me a Japanese 45 of Get Back flipped with Don’t Let Me Down. His gift coincided with a 5 minute cut of material from a newly authorized production of a new version of Get Back, the film. A short history follows.

In the waning days of The Beatles’ partnership, the band decided to return to a more slimmed down production style, minus overdubs and plus a live feel. After original sessions in Twickenham Studios, the group decamped to the basement of their Apple headquarters and a hastily rebuilt studio courtesy of their usual producer, George Martin and loaned equipment from EMI Studios.

In the years since Sgt. Pepper, Beatles records had begun to retreat from their highly produced studio experiments. The most recent double album, The Beatles (commonly known as the White Album) was largely recorded in single takes, driving a wedge between the group and their producer that fostered a two week holiday where Martin turned the production over to his assistant.

The multiple takes also exacerbated growing tensions between the band members, as hundreds of attempts to perfect Paul McCartney songs like Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da drove Lennon further into his heroin experiments with Yoko Ono. Bickering drove Ringo Starr to quit for two weeks before being lured back with flowers draping his drum kit; George Harrison invited Eric Clapton in to a session in a successful attempt to put the rest on their best behavior. This gambit worked again with Billy Preston in the Get Back sessions four months later in January 1969.

It may be hard to understand the context of these tensions in a world beset with a global pandemic and the worst president in the history of the free world, but this was the middle of the Vietnam War and the first term of Richard Nixon. His landslide reelection in 1972 would preclude the voters turning him out of office, and the Watergate scandal that drove him to resign was only just beginning to unfold. Compare the emotional turmoil of four rock musicians to today’s terror at the actions of an unhinged autocrat being removed from office in what seems like an endless thirty days. But it really sucked then as now.

Part of the problem was the disquieting anxiety on the part of the postwar boomer generation that we didn’t really deserve the respect we weren’t getting from straight society. The silent majority of our parents and peers sneered at our experiments of free love and drug-induced “insights.” The counter culture we labeled ourselves was as lonely a place to be as the Deplorables of 2016. We had no power, no real leaders, and nowhere to go but down when Woodstock collapsed into Altamont, assassination, and addiction.

So we didn’t know what we were talking about and yet here we were owning the ceramics we broke. Our heroes in London were on top of the world, and they couldn’t stand each other. What to do? Let’s make a movie of how we really are. On the plus side, there was real alchemy between these four young men. Even though sick of each other, they loved the results of what they found together. Lennon was haughty but funny, McCartney pleasant but coiled like a big cat. Ringo was Everyman, with an actor’s surprise at his luck and proud of his true role of ignition switch.

Harrison is the crucible, where the steel is forged. In interviews after the breakup and narrating during, George seems to be the one who realizes the true value of the partnership even as he explodes it with solo success. The backlog of his material spilled out in his first album, so successful that its chart topping drove McCartney and Lennon to try and keep up for the next 8 years until Lennon’s death.

Yet of all the others, he was the one to recognize the value, the responsibility, of keeping the door open for what they had together. When Lennon recorded his vicious assault on McCartney, How Do You Sleep, George not only played on the record but provided the emotional power with a surging slide guitar lead he’d only developed when the group was done. During the White Album sessions that produced some of Lennon’s best work, he suggested Lennon change the title from Maharishi to Sexy Sadie to lose the personal attack on the guru for what may have turned out to be a jealous setup by another of the group’s coterie.

In the film fragment released for Christmas 2020, Harrison is seen kicking off Get Back, the first time you can really see the role George played in the propulsion of the track. As with many players, you can best understand this when he drops out for a retake or a tempo adjustment led by Paul; the absence of the guitarist shows how central he is to the mix. In the only footage released prior to this new material, Harrison seemed subdued on the roof concert version of the track. He reportedly was opposed to doing a live concert in general, and only agreed to go out on the roof when Lennon finally committed.

It’s this context that is so striking in the new material. The tensions within the group can be seen not only for the inevitability of their collapse but also their courage to be filmed and displayed for all to consume. As a persistent fan of the band and all of its dynamics at the core of the century, the new footage comes across like The Godfather and its sequels. Like Godfather II, the Beatles studio phase once they abandoned live performance in 1966 transcended their initial success in a way that essentially invented the modern Hollywood business of sequels.

The return to live phase that began with the White Album and continued through the Get Back sessions resolved itself with the last Beatles recording of Abbey Road. In this way the Get Back film apparently includes early recordings of material from Abbey Road as well as Harrison and McCartney tracks never finished by the group. Unlike the Let It Be film that emerged as a director’s cut of the breakdown of the group pre-Abbey Road, this new Get Back film will likely serve as a document of the final phase of the group in both defeat and resolution.

The last Beatles recording of all four plus Billy Preston produced I Want You (She’s So Heavy), the long bluesy track that ends side one of Abbey Road. It’s a tantalizing glimpse into the future that never was of the greatest group there ever was. Like Francis Ford Coppola’s reimagining of the the last Godfather sequel, Get Back is a coda to the tragic highs and lows of the time that was the Sixties. At the time, it was impossible to imagine where we could go from there. Today, we share that same feeling of despair, but perhaps, the hope of what the future could bring.

from the Gillmor Gang Newsletter

__________________

The Gillmor Gang — Frank Radice, Michael Markman, Keith Teare, Denis Pombriant, Brent Leary, and Steve Gillmor . Recorded live Friday, December 18, 2020.

Produced and directed by Tina Chase Gillmor @tinagillmor

@fradice, @mickeleh, @denispombriant, @kteare, @brentleary, @stevegillmor, @gillmorgang

Subscribe to the Gillmor Gang Newsletter and join the backchannel here on Telegram.

The Gillmor Gang on Facebook … and here’s our sister show G3 on Facebook.

26 Dec 2020

What startups can learn from this dumpster fire year

Want this newsletter in your inbox every Saturday morning? Sign up here.

Remember when it was news that venture capitalists were open for business? Or when Zoom investing was only done by that one guy in Ann Arbor (ha, I kid!)? These past few months have felt busier than ever, with no holiday slowdown in sight when it comes to startup growth, hot IPOs and new financings.

Even with a distracting bull market, I wanted to reflect and see how the youngest startups are faring. Alex Wilhem and I dove into data, provided by Pitchbook, to see if the next DoorDashes and Airbnbs are getting their first financings.

The answer is that seed investing flourished but in a complicated way. COVID-19 shook up which startups were considered attractive by private investors. And that changeup came at risk to certain sectors and people.

Here’s how two investors explained the dynamics:

Freestyle’s Jenny Lefcourt:

I think seed prices are being driven up by the larger [venture] firms playing earlier and feeling like they cannot afford to miss the next DoorDash. I think the larger firms have so much capital to put to work and feel they are better off burning some [cash] at seed for the upside of being in the right [startups] where they can double, triple, 10x down on their winners.

Eniac Ventures’ Nihal Mehta:

Because you can’t meet in person, investors felt way more comfortable investing in ‘proven’ entrepreneurs that had pre-existing connections to their social circle.

The long-term ramifications of this tunnel vision means that female founders lost out during this time, since social circles in venture capital are largely white and male. From a sector perspective, e-commerce and edtech have had an easy time raising, but at the cost of travel and hospitality.

The data brings a sort of dissonance to startup-land: Even though seed investing has never looked more busy and fruitful, this is good news for some, and bad news for others. It’s a healthy reminder that a boom and bust can be true at the same time.

How’s that for a 2020 sign-off? We’ll be off next week but in the meantime, two bits of homework: take advantage of this Extra Crunch holiday sale and send me tips and thoughts to natasha.mascarenhas@techcrunch.com or tweet me @nmasc_ in between your holiday treats.

I’ll chat with you all in the New Year.

Waves of sheets of paper that mimic fire

Image Credits: Getty Images

Edtech’s biggest challenge in 2021

No sector has had a year quite like edtech. The sector attracted $10 billion in funding globally, and remote learning went from a tool to a necessity.

Here are my favorite edtech stories I wrote this year:

Finally, in my end of year op-ed for TechCrunch, I propose that the ubiquity of remote learning surely brought a boom to new users, but it may have in fact limited the sector’s ability to innovate in lieu of fast, easy scale.

Here’s my biggest tip for the year ahead:

For edtech in 2020, flexible and scrappy was a survival tactic that led to profits, growth and most of all, aha moments that technology was needed in the way we learn. Now, as we enter the rest of the decade, the sector will have to shake off its short-term-fix mentality to evolve from tunnel vision to wide-pan ambition.

 

light bulb flickering on and off

Image: Bryce Durbin / TechCrunch

A $16B checkbook for space startups

Funding for space startups is defying odds – which is the poetic flair we need once in a while. As part of our TC Sessions: Space 2020 event, a number of TechCrunch reporters dove deep into what kind of money is going into … the space.

Chris Boshuizen of the venture firm DCVC and a co-founder of Planet Labs notably said:

We don’t yet live in the sci-fi future, where you can just fly up, grab a piece of debris and bring it back. That’s really, really hard — I think probably five years away — but something we want to support and see happen.

Image of Uncle Sam floating in space with the Space Force logo above his left shoulder.

Image of Uncle Sam floating in space with the Space Force logo above his left shoulder.

Remembering the startups we lost in 2020 

Building a startup is always difficult, but the pandemic was a plot twist that led to a not-so-happy ending for many companies this year. So, as part of an annual TechCrunch tradition, we paid homage to the startups we lost in 2020. 

Here are my takeaways:

  • This is not a fun list. Failure is hard, but you can learn a thing or two when you sort through the ashes. For example? Big names, big plans, and a boatload of money isn’t a replacement for actually making money.
  • List includes short-form video app Quibi, to lawyer tech startup Atrium, to a slew of travel startups which fell apart as the virus dragged on. 
  • While some businesses chalked up failure to COVID-19, the cracks and fundamental business flaws were often peeking through far before the pandemic began.

Around TechCrunch

TechCrunch’s Favorite Things of 2020

Gift Guide: Last-minute subscriptions to keep the gifts going all year

Video: TechCrunch editors choose their top stories of 2020

Across the week

Seen on TechCrunch

Snoop Dogg’s Casa Verde Capital closes on $100 million as the cannabis industry bounces back

Activism platform actionable helps users be proactive about the causes they love

Letterhead wants to be the Shopify of email newsletters

Telegram, nearing 500 million users, to begin monetizing the app

The Biden administration can change the world with new crypto regulations

Seen on Extra Crunch

With a $50B run rate, can anyone stop AWS?

Looking ahead after 2020s epic M&A spree

Dear Sophie: What’s ahead for US immigration in 2021?

The built environment will be one of tech’s next big platforms

@EquityPod

Finally, Equity is ending the year with two holiday episodes. This week, we’ve got reflections on this dumpster fire year. I teamed up with Danny, Chris and Alex to just sit back and think about this eventful year. We also got five venture capitalists who we got to leave us their notes as well.

The goal for this episode was to sit down and think a year that no one could have ever predicted, but with a specific angle, as always, on venture capital and startups.

We asked about the biggest surprise, non-portfolio companies to watch, and trends they got wrong and right. There was also banter on Zoom investing (Alex came up with Zesting, not me) and startup pricing.

Equity drops every Monday at 7:00 a.m. PST and Thursday afternoon as fast as we can get it out, so subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, Spotify and all the casts.