Category: UNCATEGORIZED

This week Gtmhub announced a $9 million Series A led by CRV. The investment was not a large round, even for an A. But the capital found its way into one of the fastest-growing SaaS companies that we’ve spoken with recently, which made it interesting all the same.

And, the firm was willing to talk about its financial performance in some detail. The combination made its Series A impossible to ignore.

TechCrunch caught up with Gtmhub’s CMO Seth Elliott this morning to learn more. 

What it does

Let’s start with OKRs. Objectives and key results, better known as OKRs, are a method for organizational planning. They are famous thanks to their roots in Google’s success, but have since broken free of the technology world and become a well-known planning method for corporations of all sizes and types.

Gtmhub deals with them, providing software and services around OKR implementation, training and tracking. (If you an OKR neophyte, head here for a quick overview of what they are.)

Making OKR software isn’t a differentiator in today’s market. Ally does it (it also raised capital recently), along with WorkBoard, Koan and Lattice, among others.

Given the crowded market, Gtmhub stressed during our call how it thinks of itself as differentiated. The company has three things that it hopes will give it an edge in the market. The first is a focus on enterprise customers. According to Elliot, enterprise-sized clients are his company’s “bread and butter,” from a revenue perspective. Instead of starting with a small or mid-sized business target market and later targeting enterprise-scale customers, Gtmhub is going after the top-end of the market first.

Second, the company’s software is designed to interface with external tooling, allowing for real-time OKR tracking as it ingests information to help teams vet how they are progressing against their goals. And, the firm is working on a marketplace where, over time, customers will be able to learn from existing OKR setups and leverage analytics setups that help with data importation and visibility.

In its own words, Gtmhub is an OKR-centric software company, while “provid[ing] a long-term vision and the execution process necessary to bridge the strategy/execution gap,” according to Elliot.

Notably, Gtmhub, despite its enterprise focus, is not abandoning smaller companies. According to Elliot, the startup is announcing a new, stripped-down, $1 per user per month plan next week called START, aimed at smaller firms.

If START is an attempt to onboard companies when they are small so they can be upsold later, or if it is more a contra-competitor move, isn’t clear. But the new, cheap plan (priced at about 10% of other Gtmhub tiers) could shake up the OKR software space by making table-stakes features worth less than they were before.

Gtmhub’s round

Gtmhub is a distributed company, with offices in Denver, Sofia, Berlin and London for its roughly 60 workers. You might think, given its global footprint and number of employees, that the company had raised lots of capital to fund its operations. The opposite, as it turns out.

The startup’s $9 million Series A dwarfs its preceding rounds, including about $3.2 million in seed capital raised over two rounds (one, two) in February of 2018. Aside from those checks and the new capital, all we know about Gtmhub’s fundraising history is that it picked up $100,000 in angel money in early 2017.

All told, Gtmhub has raised just over $12 million to date, making its Series A about 73% of its known raised capital. That’s not the mark of a company built on burn.

Of course, if Gtmhub kept a lid on its expenses by growing slowly, its parsimony might be more sin than virtue; after all, private companies backed with venture dollars are built for expansion.

The opposite, as it turns out.

Growth

Elliot shared a number of notable metrics with TechCrunch that we’ve prepared for you below, in an ingestible format:

• ARR growth: Over 400% year-over-year (YoY)
• Gross margin: Above 90%, up from over 80% YoY
• ACV trends: +650% YoY

Take a moment and square those results with how much capital Gtmhub raised and ask yourself if the performance matches the raise. It doesn’t. I suspect that Gtmhub could have raised a lot more money than it chose to, given its growth rate and other marks of financial health.

But, after expanding to 60 people on less than $3.5 million in known venture, the company probably isn’t too unprofitable, and can do a lot with just $9 million. (Gtmhub could also raise more if it needed to, given its metrics.)

With Gtmhub and Ally each flush with new cash, it’s going to be enjoyable to watch the OKR and OKR-empowered software space grow over the next few years. There will be eventual consolidation, right?

Photo by Startaê Team on Unsplash

A year ago, we asked some of the most prominent smart home device makers if they have given customer data to governments. The results were mixed.

The big three smart home device makers — Amazon, Facebook and Google (which includes Nest) — all disclosed in their transparency reports if and when governments demand customer data. Apple said it didn’t need a report, as the data it collects was anonymized.

As for the rest, none had published their government data-demand figures.

In the year that’s past, the smart home market has grown rapidly, but the remaining device makers have made little to no progress on disclosing their figures. And in some cases, it got worse.

Smart home and other internet-connected devices may be convenient and accessible, but they collect vast amounts of information on you and your home. Smart locks know when someone enters your house, and smart doorbells can capture their face. Smart TVs know which programs you watch and some smart speakers know what you’re interested in. Many smart devices collect data when they’re not in use — and some collect data points you may not even think about, like your wireless network information, for example — and send them back to the manufacturers, ostensibly to make the gadgets — and your home — smarter.

Because the data is stored in the cloud by the devices manufacturers, law enforcement and government agencies can demand those companies turn over that data to solve crimes.

But as the amount of data collection increases, companies are not being transparent about the data demands they receive. All we have are anecdotal reports — and there are plenty: Police obtained Amazon Echo data to help solve a murder; Fitbit turned over data that was used to charge a man with murder; Samsung helped catch a sex predator who watched child abuse imagery; Nest gave up surveillance footage to help jail gang members; and recent reporting on Amazon-owned Ring shows close links between the smart home device maker and law enforcement.

Here’s what we found.

Smart lock and doorbell maker August gave the exact same statement as last year, that it “does not currently have a transparency report and we have never received any National Security Letters or orders for user content or non-content information under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).” But August spokesperson Stephanie Ng would not comment on the number of non-national security requests — subpoenas, warrants and court orders — that the company has received, only that it complies with “all laws” when it receives a legal demand.

Roomba maker iRobot said, as it did last year, that it has “not received” any government demands for data. “iRobot does not plan to issue a transparency report at this time,” but it may consider publishing a report “should iRobot receive a government request for customer data.”

Arlo, a former Netgear smart home division that spun out in 2018, did not respond to a request for comment. Netgear, which still has some smart home technology, said it does “not publicly disclose a transparency report.”

Amazon-owned Ring, whose cooperation with law enforcement has drawn ire from lawmakers and faced questions over its ability to protect users’ privacy, said last year it planned to release a transparency report in the future, but did not say when. This time around, Ring spokesperson Yassi Shahmiri would not comment and stopped responding to repeated follow-up emails.

Honeywell spokesperson Megan McGovern would not comment and referred questions to Resideo, the smart home division Honeywell spun out a year ago. Resideo’s Bruce Anderson did not comment.

And just as last year, Samsung, a maker of smart devices and internet-connected televisions and other appliances, also did not respond to a request for comment.

On the whole, the companies’ responses were largely the same as last year.

But smart switch and sensor maker Ecobee, which last year promised to publish a transparency report “at the end of 2018,” did not follow through with its promise. When we asked why, Ecobee spokesperson Kristen Johnson did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

Based on the best available data, August, iRobot, Ring and the rest of the smart home device makers have hundreds of millions of users and customers around the world, with the potential to give governments vast troves of data — and users and customers are none the wiser.

Transparency reports may not be perfect, and some are less transparent than others. But if big companies — even after bruising headlines and claims of co-operation with surveillance states — disclose their figures, there’s little excuse for the smaller companies.

This time around, some companies fared better than their rivals. But for anyone mindful of their privacy, you can — and should — expect better.

Facebook’s founding got the movie treatment with Aaron Sorkin’s “The Social Network.” The story of how Snapchat came to be will be a flagship series on the upcoming streaming service, Quibi. Today, Spotify is the latest startup to get its story told on screen — this time, as a new Netflix show.

Netflix says it’s developing a scripted series inspired by the book “Spotify Untold” by business reports at Swedish Dagens Industri, Sven Carlsson and Jonas Leijonhufvud. The story will focus on Spotify’s founding and how it changed the way people listen to music over the past decade.

“The founding tale of Spotify is a great example of how a local story can have a global impact,” said Tesha Crawford, Director of International Originals Northern Europe at Netflix. “We are really excited about bringing this success story to life and we look forward to continuing our great collaboration with director Per-Olav Sørensen and the team at Yellow Bird UK.”

Banijay Group company, Yellow Bird UK, is also the production company behind the upcoming Netflix crime series “Young Wallander.” Yellow Bird UK will produce this new and yet-to-be-titled Spotify show and Per-Olav Sørensen will direct. Berna Levin (“Young Wallander,” “Hidden,” and “The Girl in the Spider’s Web”) will serve as executive producer.

The series itself will center around Swedish tech entrepreneur, Daniel Ek, and his partner Martin Lorentzon, who created the free and legal music service at a time when music piracy was at its height. Netflix describes the show as one about “how hard convictions, unrelenting will, access, and big dreams can help small players challenge the status quo.”

Netflix says the series will be available in both English and Swedish languages.

“I’m thrilled to be making this timely and entertaining series for Netflix. The story of how a small band of Swedish tech industry insiders transformed music – how we listen to it and how it’s made – is truly a tale for our time. Not only is this a story about the way all our lives have changed in the last decade, it’s about the battle for cultural and financial influence in a globalized, digitized world,” says Berna Levin, Executive Producer, Yellow Bird.

As Netflix’s announcement also notes, telling the story of a tech startup can be difficult because things move and change quickly. Spotify, after all, is still around and growing. It’s likely that by the time the show goes to air, it will have undergone many more transformations.

“I am excited to bring the story of Sweden based Spotify to life on the screen. It is an ongoing fairytale in modern history about how Swedish wiz kids changed the music industry forever. The story is truly exciting and challenging,” added Per-Olav Sørensen. “Challenging because the Spotify story has not ended yet – it is still running with high speed and will probably change while we work on the project.”

Netflix did not share a release date for the series.

After last year’s stellar turn out of almost 1,000 Silicon Valley shakers and movers at our inaugural Winter Party, TechCrunch is returning with the 3rd Annual Winter Party in San Francisco on February 7.

The party will feature tasty cocktails and canapés, party games and activities, plenty of photo ops, giveaways and some fun surprises. As you network your way across the sea of attendees, you’ll also get to check-out a handful of promising early-stage startups just waiting for their big break.

The shindig will be held in the multi-level facility at Galvanize in San Francisco on Friday, February 7. While the venue is large, it won’t be able to hold all of Silicon Valley, so tickets are very limited and will be released on a rolling basis for $85 each. If you’re a startup and want to demo your product at this event, demo tables are available for purchase at $1,500 each. Demo tickets are limited too, so get yours before we sell out!

More about the Winter Party:

When? Friday, February 7, 6:00 p.m. – 9:00 p.m.

Where? Galvanize, 44 Tehama St., San Francisco, CA 94105

How? Get tickets here for just $85 each. There are only a limited number of tickets for this event. Tickets will be released in batches, so if you don’t see any availability, stay tuned to TechCrunch for our next release (following us on Facebook or Twitter works great), as they sell out quickly. TechCrunch parties have a history of being the place you want to meet your future investor, acquirer or co-founder. And to top it all off, we’re going to give away some really great door prizes, like TC swag and tickets to Disrupt SF.

Hope to see you all there!

Our sponsors help make TechCrunch events happen. If you are interested in learning more about sponsorship opportunities, please contact our sponsorship team by filling out this form.

The Daily Crunch is TechCrunch’s roundup of our biggest and most important stories. If you’d like to get this delivered to your inbox every day at around 9am Pacific, you can subscribe here.

1. The iPhone’s new parental controls can limit who kids can call, text and FaceTime and when

With the release of iOS 13.3, parents will for the first time be able to set limits over who kids can talk to and text with during certain hours of the day. These limits will apply across phone calls, Messages and FaceTime.

In practice, this means parents could stop their child from texting friends late at night or during the school day. It also allows parents to manage the child’s iCloud contacts remotely.

2. Pear, whose seed-stage bets are followed closely, just raised $160 million for its third fund

That’s more than twice the $75 million that the firm raised for its second fund in 2016 and triple the $50 million it raised for its debut fund back in 2013.

3. Uber guarantees space for skis and snowboards with Uber Ski feature

Starting on December 17 in select cities, an Uber Ski icon will pop up on the app, allowing passengers to order a ride with confirmed extra space or a ski/snowboarding rack. Nundu Janakiram, Uber’s head of rider experience, said to expect more features like this.

4. Accel and Index back Tines, as the cybersecurity startup adds another $11M to its Series A

Founded in February 2018 by ex-eBay, PayPal and DocuSign security engineer Eoin Hinchy, Tines automates many of the repetitive manual tasks faced by security analysts so they can focus on other high-priority work.

5. How Station F is boosting the French tech ecosystem

Three years after unveiling Station F at Disrupt, its director, Roxanne Varza, came back to our stage to provide an update on the world’s biggest startup campus, where there are now 1,000 companies at work.

6. Hyperproof wants to make it easier to comply with GDPR and other regulations

As companies try to figure out how to comply with regulations like GDPR, ISO or Sarbanes Oxley, Hyperproof is launching a new product to workflows that will allow them to gain compliance in a more organized way.

7. Introducing ‘Dear Sophie,’ an advice column for US-bound immigrant employees

Dear Sophie is a collaborative forum hosted by Extra Crunch and curated by Sophie Alcorn, who is certified as a specialist attorney in immigration and nationality law by the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization.

Shares of popular home exercise company Peloton are off 7% in regular trading today as the company continues to reel in the wake of an advertisement it released that went viral for the wrong reasons.

The ad is to blame for Peloton being in the public eye for the wrong reasons, but can’t be framed for causing all the company’s recent stock price declines. Having a brand-centric company’s name drawn into controversy can have a larger impact on a momentum-focused stock than on, say, an industrials concern whose brand isn’t in the consumer eye. But it isn’t enough, on its own, to explain Peloton’s recent value erosion.

Still, it does matter that Peloton is shedding value after it helped an already fit woman become slightly more fit while her husband slept in. That other brands have picked up on the ad segment (which also got a mention on Saturday Night Live) has helped keep the episode alive far longer than it might have on its own.

History

Peloton, a heavily backed company that raised nearly $1 billion while private, went public earlier this year worth $29 per share. Its post-IPO life was initially fraught, as the company’s losses were rising sharply alongside its revenue leading to investor unrest.

For context, Peloton lost about four times as much in its fiscal year ending June 30, 2019 (a net loss of $195.6 million) compared to the preceding fiscal year ($47.9 million). As the market rejected the WeWork IPO and SmileDirectClub’s own losses seemed to push investors away from high-growth, high-loss companies, Peloton’s debut quickly slipped underwater as its shares closed under its IPO price.

Then things got better. After Peloton reported its first earnings as a public company in early November, its share price recovered, cresting its IPO price and reaching $37 per share. Today the company is worth just a little over $30 per share, a sharp retread from its return to form.

Why

If the ad isn’t entirely to blame, why is Peloton losing value? Short interest is helping spook investors about the company’s future prospects recently, and, I would add, the company’s churn rate is rising.

Regarding the short interest, you can read the report in question here, but it deals mainly with the possible challenge of lower-priced, third-party hardware being paired with Peloton’s lower-cost media option. This would undercut Peloton’s revenue twice, though consumers would still add to the company’s subscription revenue category in the scenario. The same group also points out that Peloton’s valuation per subscriber is higher than some market comps; how to weigh those concerns we leave to you.

Turning to churn, observe the following data from Peloton’s recent earnings report:

The table shows Peloton’s average churn rising from 0.50% to 0.90%. That’s up 80% in a single year. If that trend continues, some of the money that Peloton spent on sales and marketing in the calendar year 2019 will look a bit more expensive than it did at first; rising churn lowers the lifetime value of a subscriber, making marketing spend less efficient.

Peloton shares are down, but remain far above its recent lows, and the company is still worth far more today ($8.5 billion) than it was as a private company ($4.1 billion). The ad, of course, hasn’t helped.

In YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki’s quarterly letter last month, the exec said the company was working to develop a new harassment policy. Today, YouTube is sharing the results of those efforts with the release of an updated policy which now takes a stronger stance against threats and personal attacks, addresses toxic comments, and gets tougher on those with repeat violations.

“Harassment hurts our community by making people less inclined to share their opinions and engage with each other. We heard this time and again from creators, including those who met with us during the development of this policy update,” wrote YouTube’s Matt Halprin, Vice President, Global Head of Trust & Safety, in an announcement.

YouTube claims it will continue to be an open platform, as Wojcicki had earlier described it. However, it will not tolerate harassment, and is laying out several steps it believes will better protect YouTube creators and the community on that front.

The company says it met with a range of experts to craft its new policy, including organizations that study online bullying, those who advocate on behalf of journalists, free speech proponents, and organizations from all sides of the political spectrum.

The first change to the policy focuses on veiled threats.

Before today, YouTube prohibited videos that explicitly threatened someone, revealed confidential personal information (aka “doxxing”), or encouraged people to harass someone. Now, it will expand this policy to include “veiled or implied threats,” as well. This includes threats that simulate violence toward an individual or use language that suggests physical violence could occur.

The new policy will also now prohibit language that “maliciously insults” someone based on their protected attributes — meaning things like their race, gender expression, sexual orientation, religion, or their physical traits.

This is an area where YouTube has received much criticism, most recently with the Steven Crowder controversy, in which the conservative commentator repeatedly used racist and homophobic language to describe journalist Carlos Maza.

YouTube demonetized the channel but said the videos weren’t in violation of its policies. It later said it would revisit its policies on the matter.

YouTube’s decisions around its open nature were raised again this month after Wojcicki went on “60 Minutes” to defend the YouTuber platform’s policies. 

As reporter Lesley Stahl rightly pointed out, YouTube operates in the private sector and therefore is not legally beholden to support the first amendment’s right to free speech. That means it can make up its own rules around what’s allowed on its platform and what’s not. Yet YouTube has over the years decided to design a platform where hateful content and disinformation can flourish, whether that’s white supremacists looking to indoctrinate others or conspiracy theorists peddling wacky ideas that have even translated into real-world violence, as with #pizzagate.

Notably, YouTube says its policy will apply to everyone — including private individuals, YouTube creators, and even “public officials.” Contrast that with Twitter’s policy on this matter, which will leave up tweets from public officials that violate its rules, but places them behind a screen that users have to click through in order to read.

Another big change involves tougher consequences for those whose videos don’t necessarily cross the line and break one of YouTube’s rules, but repeatedly “brush up against” its harassment policy.

That is, any creators who regularly and repeatedly harass others in either their videos or in the comments will be suspended from YouTube’s Partner Program (YPP). This gives YouTube a way to deal with creators whose behavior isn’t appropriate or “brand-safe” for advertisers — and potentially allows YouTube to make calls on an individual basis, at times, based on how it chooses to interpret this rule.

Removing the creator from YPP may be the first step, but if they continue to harass others, they may begin to receive strikes or see their channel terminated, YouTube says.

Of course, YouTube has demonetized channels before as a punishment mechanism but this solidifies that action into a more formal policy

What isn’t clear is how YouTube will specifically define and enforce its rules around these borderline channels. Will “tea” channels come under threat? Will creators who get involved with feuds ever be impacted? It’s unknown at this time, as these rules are open to interpretation.

YouTube says it’s also now changing how it handles harassment taking place in the comments section.

Both creators and viewers encounter harassment in the comments, which YouTube says not only impacts the person being targeted, but can have a chilling effect on the conversation.

Last week, it turned on a new setting that holds potentially toxic comments for review by default across YouTube’s biggest channels. It now plans to roll out this setting as enabled by default to all channels by year-end. Creators can opt-out, if they choose, or they can ignore the held comments altogether if they don’t want to make a decision about their toxicity.

YouTube says the early results from this feature are positive, as channels that enabled it saw a 75% reduction in user flags on comments.

The company acknowledges that it will likely make decisions going forward that will be controversial, and reminds creators that an appeals process exists to request a second look for any actions they believe were made in error.

“As we make these changes, it’s vitally important that YouTube remain a place where people can express a broad range of ideas, and we’ll continue to protect discussion on matters of public interest and artistic expression,” said Halprin. “We also believe these discussions can be had in ways that invite participation, and never make someone fear for their safety.”

Policies like this sound good on paper, but enforcement is still YouTube’s biggest issue. YouTube has around 10,000 people focused on controversial content, but its decisions to date have seen it defining what’s “harmful” in the narrowest of ways. It’s unclear if this tightening of policies will actually impact what YouTube actually does, rather what it says it will do.

 

 

 

Mark your calendars and dust off your public-speaking skills. This year, there’s an exciting new opportunity at TC Sessions: Robotics & AI, which returns to  UC Berkeley on March 3, 2020. We’ve added a pitch-off specifically for early-stage startups focused on AI or robotics.

You heard right. In addition to a full day packed with speakers, breakout sessions and Q&As featuring the top names, leading minds and creative makers in robotics and AI, we’re upping the ante. We’ll choose 10 startups to pitch at a private event the night before the show opens. Here’s how it works.

The first step: Apply to the pitch-off by February 1. TechCrunch editors will review all applications and select 10 startups to participate. We’ll notify the founders by February 15 — you’ll have plenty of time to hone your pitch.

You’ll deliver your pitch at a private event, and your audience will consist of TechCrunch editors, main-stage speakers and industry experts. Our panel of VC judges will choose five teams as finalists, and they will pitch the next day on the main stage at TC Sessions: Robotics + AI.

Talk about an unprecedented opportunity. Place your startup in front of the influential movers and shakers of these two world-changing industries — and get video coverage on TechCrunch, too. We expect attendance to meet or exceed last year’s when 1,500 people attended the show and tens of thousands followed along online.

Oh, and here’s one more pitch-off perk. Each of the 10 startup team finalists will receive two free tickets to attend TC Sessions: Robotics + AI 2020 the next day.

TC Sessions: Robotics & AI 2020 takes place on March 3. Apply to the pitch-off here by February 1. Don’t want to pitch? That’s fine — but don’t miss this epic day-long event dedicated to exploring the latest technology, trends and investment strategies in robotics and AI. Get your early bird ticket here and save $100. We’ll see you in Berkeley!

Is your company interested in sponsoring or exhibiting at TC Sessions: Robotics & AI 2020? Contact our sponsorship sales team by filling out this form.

Google Cloud today announced the launch of its new E2 family of compute instances. These new instances, which are meant for general purpose workloads, offer a significant cost benefit, with saving of around 31 percent compared to the current N1 general purpose instances.

The E2 family runs on standard Intel and AMD chips, but as Google notes, they also use a custom CPU scheduler “that dynamically maps virtual CPU and memory to physical CPU and memory to maximize utilization.” In addition, the new system is also smarter about where it places VMs, with the added flexibility to move them to other hosts as necessary. To achieve all of this, Google built a custom CPU scheduler “ with significantly better latency guarantees and co-scheduling behavior than Linux’s default scheduler.” The new scheduler promises sub-microsecond wake-up latencies and faster context switching.

That gives Google efficiency gains that it then passes on to users in the form of these savings. Chances are, we will see similar updates to Google’s other instances families over time.

Its interesting to note that Google is clearly willing to put this offering against that of its competitors. “Unlike comparable options from other cloud providers, E2 VMs can sustain high CPU load without artificial throttling or complicated pricing,” the company writes in today’s announcement. “This performance is the result of years of investment in the Compute Engine virtualization stack and dynamic resource management capabilities.” It’ll be interesting to see some benchmarks that pit the E2 family against similar offerings from AWS and Azure.

As usual, Google offers a set of predefined instance configurations, ranging from 2 vCPUs with 8 GB of memory to 16 vCPUs and 128 GB of memory. For very small workloads, Google Cloud is also launching a set of E2-based instances that are similar to the existing f1-micro and g1-small machine types. These feature 2 vCPUs, 1 to 4 GB of RAM and a baseline CPU performance that ranges from the equivalent of 0.125 vCPUs to 0.5 vCPUs.

The Porsche Taycan Turbo, one of several variants of the German automaker’s first all-electric vehicles, has an EPA estimated range of 201 miles, according to government ratings posted Wednesday.

This is the first variant of the Taycan — Porsche’s first all-electric vehicle — to receive an estimated range from the EPA. The range, which indicates how far the vehicle can travel on a single charge, is far behind other competitors in the space, notably the Tesla Model S. But it also trails other high-end electric vehicles including the Jaguar I-Pace and the Audi e-tron.

The biggest gulf is between the Taycan Turbo and the long-range version of the Model S, which has an EPA range of 373 miles. The performance version of the Model S has a range of 373 miles. It was also below the Jaguar I-Pace, an electric vehicle that launched in 2018. The EPA has given the Jaguar I-Pace and official estimated range of 234. However, the company recently said it was able to add another 12 miles of range to the vehicle through what it learned in the I-Pace racing series.

The European standard known as the WLTP placed the range of the Porsche Taycan Turbo at up to 279 miles.

Despite the lower EPA range estimate, Porsche said it’s not disappointed.

“We sought to build a true Porsche, balancing legendary performance our customers expect of our products with range sufficient to meet their everyday needs,” a Porsche spokesperson told TechCrunch. “The Taycan is a phenomenal car built to perform and drive as a Porsche should. We stand by that.”

Porsche introduced in September the Taycan Turbo S and Taycan Turbo — the more powerful and expensive versions of its all-electric four-door sports car with base prices of $185,000 and $150,900, respectively.

In October, the German automaker revealed a cheaper version called the Porsche Taycan 4S that is more than $80,000 cheaper than its leading model. All of the Taycans, including the 4S, are the same chassis and suspension, permanent magnet synchronous motors and other bits. However, this third version, which will offer a performance-battery-plus option, is a little lighter, cheaper and a slightly slower than the high-end versions of the Taycan that were introduced earlier this yeasr. Theoretically, the 4S should also have a higher range.

Porsche has always said it would have multiple versions of the Taycan. The 2020 Taycan Turbo will be among the first models to arrive in the United States.

While Porsche said it isn’t disputing the EPA range, the automaker did send an email to dealers Wednesday to share additional data that shows a far rosier picture.

Porsche asked AMCI Testing to conduct independent tests to evaluate the Taycan Turbo range, according to an email the automaker sent to dealers for Taycan customers. The independent automotive research firm came up with a range of 275 miles, a result that was calculated by averaging the vehicle’s performance over five test cycles.