Category: UNCATEGORIZED

27 Mar 2020

Los Angeles-based Ficto launches its Quibi competitor — with Niantic as a content partner

Consumers now have their first chance to sample the wares of a short-form streaming service — and it’s not Quibi.

Ficto, a streaming service without a paywall offering interactive dramas, film adaptations, comedies, documentaries, talk shows, game shows, and news, is now live on iOS and Android.

The company’s entertainment is designed to be interactive with live-streaming, geo-location, live chat, polling, choice-based narratives, 360 viewing, augmented reality, and click through e-commerce, the company said.

Their slate of thirty shows at launch is far more sparse than Quibi’s robust and star-studded lineup, and the average viewing times of five minutes per episode is a bit shorter than Quibi’s too. Series run anywhere from three to ten episodes and there area an additional twenty shows that are currently in production now.

Shows on the platform at launch include a gameplay-focused series built around the augmented reality game, Ingress, developed by Niantic, the game studio behind the massive AR hit Pokemon Go.

“Storytelling is incredibly important at Niantic and we are always looking for interesting ways to expand on the narrative of our real world mobile games,” said Ingress: The Series director Spencer McCall.

Other shows on the platform include the documentary series “Represent”, which follows women surfers looking to take the sport to the Olympic games (now scheduled for 2021); “East of La Brea”, a show from executive producer Paul Feig, which follows to Muslim women in Los Angeles; the dating show “Date & Switch”, which lets an audience decide who contestants should date; “Brothers From the Suburbs”, a comedy about three African American teens growing up in an affluent, white suburban community; and “Nothingman” about a resident of Los Angeles’ Skid Row.

Key to Ficto’s pitch to content creators is the company’s a smart contract system that automatically pays royalties to the show’s producers and talent based on how often their content is viewed. The pre-determined contracts and revenue shares are intended to draw in new talent with a more equitable — and longer term — revenue stream than the upfront payments that are a part of most streaming contract, according to Ficto co-founder and chief executive, Mike Esola.

The company also has a brand studio, Ficto Studio, which works with marketers and agencies to help them design promotions based on Ficto’s interactive capabilities. These promotions range from sponsorship opportunities to augmented reality, geo-location, click-to-purchase, product integration, launch events, creator collaborations and other promotions.

27 Mar 2020

UK tech industry forms Code4COVID.org to fight the Coronavirus crisis

A coalition of grassroots UK tech initiatives has come together to co-ordinate the key groups of tech industry people supporting the UK’s response to the Coronavirus.

COVID19 Tech Response (CTR) aims to co-ordinate the supply of available tech talent; work on the problems that need solving and the matching of the two. So far, they have brought over 400 tech volunteers together, mostly from the UK, some of whom have been providing volunteer support to local Covid Mutual Aid groups which have sprung up across the country.

CTR will also aim to co-ordinate tech industry volunteers to coach and support UK citizens who are experiencing problems during the crisis, with any tech solutions available. 

The coalition is working closely with the CoronavirusTechHandbook, an initiative by political technology college Newspeak House which has quickly become a global resource

The four main “call to arms” of the group are:
1) Join the Code4COVID Slack as a volunteer or to source volunteers, or work on projects

2) Add your tech skills to the Covid-19 Tech Response Airtable form

3) Submit mainstream UK tech problems to Covid Tech Support

4) Contribute to and access the resources on the CoronavirusTechHandbook

CTR has been formed by many of those coming together to support anyone building solutions to the ongoing pandemic. These include:

COVID19 Tech Response says its aim is not to build the individual solutions needed by those on the front line but instead be a steering group that provides the broad oversight that connects these individual efforts together. It also aims to put in place the system that enables new problems to be solved efficiently and effectively using technology. 

CTR hopes to create a “matching agency” where community volunteers are matched with technical problems. It will also be encouraging the tech community to talk to healthcare workers/public service workers they know and share tools and build tech teams who can be staged to solve problems.

The formation of the group was inspired by similar initiatives globally, including, Helpwithcovid.com and Covid19-response.

Commenting, Ed Saperia, co-founder of CoronavirusTechHandbook said: “Millions of knowledge workers are showing up to help. This is fantastic, and will change society, but it needs coordination. Often the hard part is not the tech, but understanding what you can do, and it’s here that you should apply your intelligence and creativity.”

Cinzia Ricciardone, co-founder of code4covid, said: “Formed on March 16th by a few technologist friends, code4covid now counts over 400 tech volunteers. Our mission is to find technology solutions and resources to help people during the COVID-19 crisis, and ensure energy gets directed to the right place in order to save lives.”

CTR Co-organiser Freddie Fforde said: “Like so many other groups across the country, people in tech are trying to play their part. We don’t know where this will lead but we have to start somewhere by helping people come together and seeing what they can build.

Josh Russell, co-founder of Tech For UK, said: “Our goal is for teams that emerge to have a good understanding of the problem space, so we’ll be forming a User Research (explainer) function that will feed insights to the community on a regular basis. User Research is the secret sauce, if you’re a User Researcher tick the right box when you register on code4covid.org.”

Marc Sloan, co-founder of Covid Tech Support, said: “Our aim is that no one should needlessly be put at risk because they didn’t have access to technology that a volunteer technologist could have helped with.”

Nathan Young, co-founder of CoronavirusTechHandbook said: “CoronavirusTechHandbook is a library of every project and resource, and working together with initiatives like CTR to illuminate problems and coordinate responses, we can achieve incredible things very quickly.”

Mike Butcher, co-founder of Tech For UK, said: “There are several UK tech communities responding to this crisis, but many are not co-ordinating or even aware each one exists. It’s our responsibility to get as many people into a broad group, where the UK can call on the greatest amount of tech talent at this time of need.”

27 Mar 2020

Yelp pauses GoFundMe Covid-19 fundraising after opt-out outcry

A fundraising program that Yelp and GoFundMe put in place this week to help local businesses impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic has been paused after public outcry over how it was rolled out — specifically, controversy over how the two provided no easy and quick way to opt out of the fundraising.

The fundraising campaigns started to appear automatically with company profiles on Yelp after the announcement, and to get out of running the campaigns, Yelp and GoFundMe required more identification from business owners (for example drivers’ licenses or business ID verifications). One estimate put the number of fundraisers that had been created through the program at 144,000.

After a lot of pushback on social media (and likely directly too), the two companies are now working together to create a “more seamless” way to opt out of the fundraising feature and to opt in to use it in the first place, Yelp said in a statement. (You can read the full statement at the bottom of the article below.)

The lesson here is that while the Covid-19 pandemic has undoubtedly had a major impact on local retailers and other businesses that have been forced to close, or have lost business, due to shelter-in-place and other social distancing measures, this incident highlights the fact that this doesn’t mean that every business want to fundraise to offset their own specific predicaments.

And if they do, ultimately it is their own choice which companies they will choose to work with if they do so.

The original fundraising feature was launched by Yelp earlier this week as part of a bigger effort from both companies to provide assistance to businesses and individuals impacted by the coronavirus pandemic. (Yelp has also committed $25 million in waived fees for those who usually pay it for premium listing services; while GoFundMe is also working with other companies like Intuit QuickBooks to build fundraisers for its business customers.)

At the time, the companies noted that the feature would “automatically” appear under a business profile on Yelp.

It was only yesterday, however, that outcry began to emerge over how that integration was actually put in place, and how hard it was to remove, both for small businesses and for those that are part of larger chains.

At a time when we are seeing a huge groundswell of good works and charity to help our communities get through what is not just a public health crisis, but a social and economic one, the resulting feature left a bad taste in everyone’s mouth, and felt more like opportunistic profiteering (both GoFundMe and Yelp are businesses, after all) than altruism.

We’re still waiting to hear back from GoFundMe, but Yelp’s statement is below:

On Tuesday, Yelp announced a partnership with GoFundMe to provide a fast and easy way for people to support their favorite local businesses by donating to a GoFundMe fundraiser directly on the Yelp pages of eligible businesses. In an effort to get businesses help quickly and easily, a GoFundMe fundraiser was automatically added to the Yelp pages of an initial group of eligible businesses, with information provided on how to claim it or opt out should a business choose to do so. However, it has come to our attention that some businesses did not receive a notification with opt-out instructions, and some would have preferred to actively opt-in to the program. As such, we have paused the automatic rollout of this feature, and are working with GoFundMe to provide a seamless way for businesses to opt into the program moving forward, as we have received a great deal of interest and support for the program from both consumers and businesses alike.

27 Mar 2020

Not all entrepreneurs are 30-year-old guys

All co-working isn’t WeWork . And not all entrepreneurs are 30-year-old guys.

I know this well, having built my first startup in the mid-1980s after a potential employer said women wouldn’t be accepted in technical sales. Within five years, their large computer manufacturing business was gone, but we were selling our products around the world.

About twelve years ago, my partner and I saw how the workplace was changing as laptops and WiFi allowed people to work anywhere. At the same time, endless commutes and long office hours were separating families, generating excess CO2 emissions and making work-life balance almost impossible.

We understood that enabling people to work close to home, rather than in their home, could address these issues while reducing isolation and distractions. We could apply our startup, manufacturing, building and operations backgrounds to this problem to develop automated, welcoming workspace centers in neighborhoods and small-town cores, and we could make this replicable.

This was 2008 — nearly a decade before Masayoshi Son plowed billions into WeWork with the directive to be crazier, go bigger. Our model was very different from WeWork’s model of large centers in large cities that primarily targeted large corporations. It was more than a real estate play and with an interesting problem to solve: community focused centers were valuable to regular people, but could these be created sustainably and profitably over the long term?

We thought it could. So we built it.

The crux of what we developed was smaller, replicable, technologically-enabled and automated centers, outside big cities, that could meet the needs of their members and do it profitably and with minimal staffing. We developed our co-working management software, Satellite Deskworks, along with our now patented tracking and automation, to run any type of shared use center, and to do it simply, intuitively, and comprehensively.

I do not get funded. Several guys — without cynicism — suggested that I get a 30-year-old front man.

With the model proven, we began working on funding to scale the enterprise. The business plan, slide deck and pro forma were written. The pitches started, all the while running and growing the business from personal and generated funds. More pitches. And more pitches. Clearly we weren’t making it interesting enough. Or it was too early. Or the people with funds didn’t understand how important this was for the vast majority of workers and their local communities. Or perhaps there was just something wrong with us, since the business was already working.

Some of the pitch meetings felt like walking through the looking glass: One VC group provided us with an internal sponsor who advised us to only talk about software. Then his associate took over and said that advice was all wrong: our strength was in the combination of real-world and software.

On pitch day, before our presentation, a single-function app was pitched — just an idea, no product. It got funded. Subsequently, even though we had three profitable centers and several software clients, I was told that we weren’t far enough along to validate the market. Another group declined to fund us, then a year later asked me back as an expert on co-working to explain this emerging industry to them. But, again, no funds were forthcoming.

Over and over again, I’d be told that the presentation was spot-on, and yet, no funds.

I’m an older woman. I got my undergraduate degree at 43 years old and a masters at 46. I had started, run and sold my first startup to a large multinational by the time I was 40. I am good at what I do; I build and scale businesses.

Another group declined to fund us, then a year later asked me back, as an expert on co-working, to explain this newly emerging industry to them.

But I do not get funded.

This is not a complaint. This is a fact. I understand what happened at those pitches. Despite our scalable, successful business model, the decision makers were trying to gauge what others at the table would do, how they would perceive me. And the double-whammy of being older and a woman was a bridge too far.

Like picking at a scab, I talk to people knowledgeable in venture who nod their heads at the idea that I’d have trouble getting funded, no matter how well the model worked or the software functioned.

Several guys — without cynicism — suggested that I get a 30-year-old front man. But instead, I focused on growing my business organically, perhaps missing the opportunity to truly scale something that communities of all sizes need.

There is a serious flaw in how businesses are funded, and it is the same discussion we had twenty and thirty years ago about who was at the table in managing businesses.

Vibrant, innovative concepts and businesses are frequently started by people who aren’t happy with their options inside the box of the corporate world. 45% of small business owners are from minority ethnic groups. Women start businesses at twice the rate of men, yet female founders got 2% of VC dollars in 2017. Black women are the most educated group in the U.S., yet they receive about 0.2% of VC funding.

Older founders are seen as less dynamic, less adventurous, while the reality is that half the startups in the U.S. are by people over 50 — and older entrepreneurs are actually more likely to succeed.

Despite the fact that many acknowledge this as a problem, the solutions seem elusive. But they shouldn’t be. Corporations are stronger because of bringing diversity to boards, and the VC model would be stronger by employing many of the same tactics. The likelihood that funded startups will succeed increases by appealing to a broader audience, and the best way to do that is to fund a broader segment of entrepreneurs. Although these shouldn’t be new concepts, let me propose a few ideas:

Set up and support funds at an intermediate level. There is a crying need for funding in the $1 million – $3 million range, particularly for women- and minority-owned businesses. We know how to successfully bootstrap, but however good we are, it takes investment to scale.

If you measure it, you get it. Set up metrics. 10% of your board will be women within a year, 30% within three years, and 50% within six years. Set up similar metrics for ethnic and racial diversity. Set a goal for the percentage of your portfolio that will be minority- and women-owned startups each year over the next five years. And measure the performance of these startups against the past portfolio.

Increase the diversity of VC management and boards. By including decision-makers at the table from a broad range of backgrounds, ethnicities, ages, and genders, the industry should get to a more diverse portfolio with a greater likelihood of overall success.

Get to critical mass. Token diversity accomplishes little. You need enough people to truly provide a voice and echo. It’s easy to ignore a single voice from a different perspective. Research has shown that for a group to even hear a woman’s voice in a meeting at least 30% of that group needs to be women.

So, yes, I walk into the VC pitch rooms, and I know I’m not walking out with funding. No one is going to wire me a generous seed round and tell me to go break things.

Because of who I am and how this particular world perceives me, I have to build a business that works, that stands on its own from the beginning. This is not the end of the world. Businesses should work.

But the VC model needs to work, too.

27 Mar 2020

Lime’s valuation, variable costs and diverging categories of on-demand companies

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

We’re wrapping the week with Lime, scooters and the divergence between Uber and Lyft and their two-wheeled rivals. It’s been a hectic year for ride-hailing, but an even more turbulent time for the scooter unicorns that exploded into the venture capital scene in early 2018.

Scooter-focused startups were, at one point in time, among the hottest companies that money could chase. That’s no longer true. This week it was reported that at least one major player in the scooter world is pursuing a painful valuation cut so that it can raise the cash it needs to survive. Lime, according to The Information, may see its valuation fall to $400 million from $2.4 billion as it tries to “raise emergency funds.”

The scooter crisis has arrived as Uber and Lyft have come to something akin to a truce with public market investors, a feat that we’ve covered extensively. But perhaps most notable of all is the differing fortunes between Lime and friends, and Uber and Lyft. The two categories of on-demand transportation are diverging, and ironically, it’s the option that’s human-powered that appears set to come out in the best shape.

Let’s talk cash, profits, margins, and survival this morning as Uber and Lyft prepare to drive straight through the economic crisis, while scooters appear headed for a pothole at best.

27 Mar 2020

Stocks fall sharply Friday morning as the mid-week recovery falls short

The major American stock market indices are down sharply this morning at the open, with stocks falling after a multi-day rally helped shave some losses off their calendar-year results. So far, 2020 has proven to be a toxic year for publicly traded equity, as a decade-long bull market collided with a global pandemic and stark economic slowdown around the world.

This week it became known that around 3.3 million Americans filed for unemployment benefits this week, a record-setting figure that dwarfs tallies set in during the 2008-era economic meltdown. Shares rose in the wake of that news; today’s losses could point towards a less optimistic view of the layoffs, the global contagion, or, simply, some profit taking after the markets bounced off lows.

Whatever your read of the market’s Rorschach suite of results, here’s today’s damage just after the market open:

  • Dow Jones Industrial Average: fell 3.73%, or 841.41 to 21,710.76
  • S&P 500: slid 3.18%, or 83.69, to 2,546.38
  • Nasdaq Composite: declined 2,87%, or 223.77, to 7,573.77

More like the Down Jones, right?

Shares of major technology companies were all down roughly 2% to 3% in early trading and the Bessemer Emerging Cloud Index was also off 3% for the day; while SaaS shares have recovered some from their lows, like other stocks they are still far from recovering all their lost ground. Today won’t help.

There’s still a chance for the market to turn around during this Friday session, but investors appear to be digesting a continued spate of bad news the U.S. has topped China for the most number of COVID-19 patients in the world. Perhaps the stimulus — once it passes through the House — will help the economy shake the weight the disease has put on the U.S. economy. However, the bill’s passing must already be priced into shares, so it’s unclear if anything that the House can do today will help.

If you’re tired of the market’s endless gyrations, get some rest. We’re not done yet.

27 Mar 2020

Social Bluebook was hacked, exposing 217,000 influencers’ accounts

A social media platform used to match advertisers with thousands of influencers has been hacked.

Social Bluebook, a Los Angeles-based company, allows advertisers to pay social media “influencers” for posts that promote their products and services. The company claims it has some 300,000 influencers on its books.

But at some point during October 2019, the company’s entire back-end database was taken in a data breach.

TechCrunch obtained the database, containing some 217,000 user accounts — including influencer names, email addresses, and passwords hashed, which had been scrambled using the strong SHA-2 hashing algorithm.

It’s not known how the database was exfiltrated from the company’s systems.

We contacted several users who, when presented with their information, confirmed it as accurate. We also provided a portion of the data to Social Bluebook co-founder Sam Michie, who confirmed the data breach.

“We have just now become aware of this data breach that occurred in October 2019,” he told TechCrunch in an email Thursday.

He said affected users will be informed of the breach by email. The company also informed the California attorney general’s office of the breach, per state law.

Social media influencers are a constant target for hackers, which target their accounts to hijack their online handles or follower count. Some influencers have relied on white-hat hackers to get their hijacked accounts back.

Last year, a social media firm left a database of Instagram influencers online, which included phone numbers and email addresses scraped from their profiles.


Got a tip? You can send tips securely over Signal and WhatsApp to +1 646-755–8849. 

27 Mar 2020

NASA still tracking towards mid-to-late May SpaceX crew launch despite parachute mishap

NASA provided an official update about the status of its Commercial Crew program, the project it’s working on with partners SpaceX and Boeing to return astronaut launch capabilities to American soil via private launch partners. This week, SpaceX encountered an issue while testing the parachute system that will be used on its Crew Dragon spacecraft, but a new update from NASA indicates the the previously stated mid-to-late May window for its first ever launch with astronauts on board is still on the calendar.

The incident occurred on March 24, and SpaceX provided a statement detailing what happened at the time. Here’s their full statement:

During a planned parachute drop test today, the test article suspended underneath the helicopter became unstable. Out of an abundance of caution and to keep the helicopter crew safe, the pilot pulled the emergency release. As the helicopter was not yet at target conditions, the test article was not armed, and as such, the parachute system did not initiate the parachute deployment sequence. While the test article was lost, this was not a failure of the parachute system and most importantly no one was injured. NASA and SpaceX are working together to determine the testing plan going forward in advance of Crew Dragon’s second demonstration mission.

Per SpaceX, and NASA’s blog on Friday, the loss of the “spacecraft-like” testing device that was suspended underneath the helicopter does not reflect any problem on the part of the parachute system itself. NASA included a closing paragraph in its update that noted it’s “looking at the parachute testing plan now and all the data we already have to determine next steps,” but it does conclude that it’s doing so in the interest of “flying the upcoming Demo-2 flight test in the mid-to-late May timeframe.”

Meanwhile, SpaceX also encountered an early engine cut-off issue during its most recent Starlink launch, which flew using a Falcon 9 rocket on March 18. NASA confirmed that it is participating in an investigation into what went wrong with that engine issue (which, it should be noted, didn’t actually affect the successful outcome of the launch itself).

It’s possible that either of these could impact the plans for the Demo-2 mission, but right now, things still appear to be on track. NASA is also taking measure to reduce the spread of COVID-19 and enforcing remote work policies where applicable, but this also hasn’t had an effect on the Commercial Crew timelines to date.

27 Mar 2020

Stripe goes Fast for $20M, D2C tips and tricks and what’s happening to tech internships?

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

The three of us were back today — Natasha, Danny and Alex — to dig our way through a host of startup-focused topics. Sure, the world is stuffed full of COVID-19 news — and, to be clear, the topic did come up some — but Equity decided to circle back to its roots and talks startups and accelerators and how many pieces of luggage does an urban-living person really need?

The answer, as far as we can work it out, is either one piece or seven. Regardless, here’s what we got through this week:

  • Big news from 500 Startups, and our favorite companies from the accelerator’s latest demo day. Y Combinator is not the only game in town, so TechCrunch spent part of the day peekin’ at 500 and its latest batch of companies. We got into some of the startups that stuck out, tackling problems within the influencer market, trash pickup and esports.
  • Plastiq raised $75 million to help people and businesses use their credit card anywhere they want. And no, it wasn’t closed after the pandemic hit.
  • We also talked through Fast’s latest $20 million round led by Stripe. Stripe, as everyone recalls, was most recently a topic on the show thanks to a venture whoopsie in the form of a check from Sequoia to Finix.1 But all that’s behind us. Fast is building a new login and checkout service for the internet that is supposed to be both speedy and independent.
  • All the Stripe talk reminded us of one of the startups that launched so it could beat it out: Brex. The startup, which has amassed over $300 million in known venture capital to date, recently acquired three companies.
  • We chatted through the highlights of our D2C venture survey, focused on rising CAC costs in select channels, the importance of solid gross margins and why Casper wasn’t really a bellwether for its industry.

After that we had two quick hits, namely Natasha’s look at how tech internships cancellations are impacting our future workforce, and the latest from Slack.

And that wraps up what felt like a refreshing show. We hope you think so too, and thank you for listening. Stay healthy, all.

Equity drops every Monday at 7:00 AM PT and Friday at 6:00 am PT, so subscribe to us on Apple PodcastsOvercastSpotify and all the casts.

  1. What do you call a check from Sequoia? A cheque!
27 Mar 2020

Wheels is deploying e-bikes with self-cleaning handlebars and brake levers

Wheels, which recently paused its shared bike service to limit the spread of COVID-19, is making its pedal-less e-bikes available for gig workers, restaurants, non-profits or any other people who do their own deliveries. What’s different about these bikes is they will come with self-cleaning NanoSeptic handlebars and brake levers.

NanoSeptic’s technology, which is powered by light, uses mineral nano-crystals to create an oxidation reaction that is stronger than bleach, according to the company’s website. NanoSeptic then implements that technology into skins and mats to turn anything from a mousepad to door handles to handlebars into self-cleaning surfaces.

People can either rent these bikes on a weekly or monthly basis or purchase them outright. Weekly rentals will cost $29.99 and monthly rentals cost $89.99. Buying it outright will cost $999.

“Before we temporarily paused our regular service, we were taking all the appropriate actions to keep our bikes clean,” Wheels wrote in a blog post. “Among other things, we were frequently and thoroughly cleaning our bikes with disinfectant and wiping them down with a microfiber towel. But with shared scooters and bikes being ridden by many different people every day and no operator able to manually clean each device prior to every ride, we believed a more comprehensive solution was needed.”

Wheels’ pause in operations and launch of self-cleaning handlebars and brake levers came after the micromobility company was forced to lay off 6% of its staff in February. Wheels’ regular service will be paused at least through the end of this month.