Posts Tagged "round"

  • Plastic Logic flexible, color e-reader

    Plastic Logic demo-ed its flexible, color e-reader today — another screen to add to the growing reality that e-readers may one day act like paper.

    According to Engadget, Plastic Logic received a funding round of $700 million from Rusnano, which the company has used to create the new screen. The screen is able to display over 4,000 different colors, and has 1.2 million plastic transistors. It also used the funding to deploy its e-textbook reader to schools in Russia.

    Flexible e-reader screens are gaining a lot of popularity. As tablets become faster and more exciting, e-readers, which are naturally easier on the eyes, are expected to gain some cool new features as well. Flexible e-ink screens create that reading-a-magazine-or-newspaper feel that, honestly, just looks cool.  They can bend and fold like paper, though you won’t be able to fold your e-reader like a soft cover book just yet. What’s more impressive is that these new screens, Plastic Logic’s in particular, are being designed to keep images true and not distort them  as folding a screen might otherwise do.

    In March, LG released details of its flexible e-reader screen. LG referred to the screen as an electronic paper display, which stands about six inches tall and sports 1024×758 pixels. The screen can be bent at a 40 degree angle and can weigh half as much as its glass counterpart. Despite being new technology for today’s market of e-readers, LG believes these flexible, plastic displays will even be cheaper to produce than glass.

    Check out the video of Plastic Logic’s color, flexible screen below:

    via Engadget

    Filed under: VentureBeat

    Read More...
  • belly

    What started as a quirky loyalty program at one Chicago comic hideaway has spread to 14,000 locations in nine months, and can now count on the loyalty of one of Silicon Valley’s hottest venture capital firms.

    Belly, a digital loyalty program for small businesses, today announced a $10 million round of funding, financed entirely by rapidly-rising Valley heavyweight Andreessen Horowitz.

    Belly is the maker of a small business- and consumer-friendly rewards system and universal loyalty card. For a monthly subscription fee, the Chicago-based startup tailors programs around store culture to create rewards. To simplify management, it issues each location an in-store iPad display. Customers can use their Belly card or the Belly mobile app to “scan-in” to locations, earn points for each visit, and view rewards.

    The rewards can sometimes be a bit unusual. For instance, at AllyCat Comics, the Chicago comic store where Belly got its start last August, a Belly customer who makes 50 purchases earns the opportunity to punch the owner in the gut.

    With a growing but still small presence in eight major markets, including the just-added metros of Boston and New York, Belly needs money for expansion. The extremely young company will use its new funding to expand to new cities, form new partnerships, and hire top-notch engineering talent, founder and CEO Logan LaHive told VentureBeat.

    Belly’s premise seems promising enough. Who actually wants to carry around loyalty cards? And aren’t rewards more fun when they encapsulate everything you love about a locale? The problem is trickier to solve in practice, however, and Belly’s current strength is less in its ability to be a universal loyalty card — support at 14,000 locations does not a universal system make — and more in its novelty. There’s something to be said for walking into your favorite boutique, scanning a barcode at an in-store iPad display, and finding out that you’re eligible for something fun.

    To date, Belly has attracted 200,000 active users who have checked-in via scan more than 800,000 times. The startup now sees roughly 10,000 store check-ins per day, LaHive said. But competition abounds, so Belly’s biggest challenge will be differentiating itself and finding mainstream audiences.

    Belly, which employs a team of 50, previously raised $2.87 million in funding, mostly from Lightbank. Jeff Jordan, general partner at Andreessen Horowitz, former chairman and CEO of OpenTable, and former president of PayPal, is joining Belly’s board.

    In the video below, the owner of an Austin, Texas-based frozen yogurt store talks about how Belly has helped her business.

    Filed under: deals, mobile

    Read More...
  • Classroom management software company Engrade has closed a $3 million funding round.

    Company founder Bri Holt developed an online gradebook in 2003, while he was still a high school student. While I was chasing boys and trying to pass algebra, Holt was developing software that would eventually lead to a business. He now serves as the chief technology expert for Engrade.

    What started as a simple gradebook has morphed into a full featured software suite with teacher-specific tools, such as seating charts, discipline tracking, and alerts for at-risk students. There are also parent-teacher communication tools, such as email reports and mass text messaging. School administrators can use Engrade to view teachers and their students’ progress in grades and classroom performance. At an even higher level, school boards are able to manage data from multiple schools and students with Engrade, keeping track of grade point averages, disciplinary problems, and test scores.

    Engrade has built up a track record with several school boards and private schools, including the New York City Department of Education, North Star Academy, and Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools.

    Engrade isn’t alone in the online grading world by a long shot. Thinkwave, Common Goal Systems, and GradeConnect offer similar systems to track student performance. Engrade hopes to set itself apart by offering its services for free and making money off its premium offering, Engrade Plus which starts at $600 per year for 100 students.

    Rethink Education led the round, with NewSchools Venture Fund and private investors Greg Gunn, Zac Zeitlin, and Richard Chino. The company plans to expand its service and improve its tools with the funding.

    Student with laptop image via Shutterstock

    Filed under: deals, VentureBeat

    Read More...
  • reaction-engines-spaceplane-skylon-critical-cooling-tests

    Want to get from New York to Perth in under 4 hours, or maybe just head to outer space on a lark? Reaction Engines’ “Skylon” mach 5 spaceplane might be your chariot — or not. Its scheme of ingesting oxygen from the atmosphere instead of stowing it like a 50-year old modern multi-stage rocket sounds good, but the project’s fate may hang on critical new tests. Failure is still a possibility, but if the high-speed, superhot gases can be cooled enough for the hybrid Sabre engines to work, and if Reaction Engines Limited can secure another round of funding, punching your space-ticket could soon be a very real possibility.

    Space travel coming to an airport near you? Maybe, if Skylon keeps its cool originally appeared on Engadget on Fri, 27 Apr 2012 23:56:00 EDT. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

    Permalink   |  BBC News  | Email this | Comments

    Read More...
  • singlehop-funding-cloud

    Infrastructure-as-a-service startup SingleHop has raised $27.5 million in its first round of funding, cash that will help it quickly accelerate growth, the company announced today.

    SingleHop has been slowly making a name for itself in the cloud computing and cloud infrastructure arena. The company’s proprietary management platform, called LEAP, makes it possible for its clients to deploy and manage their web infrastructure from a unified platform. Its traction has been so good that was named #25 on the Inc. 500 list for fastest growing companies in the U.S., leaping up from #58 a year prior.

    The firm’s relatively large first round came from Boston-based Battery Ventures. Battery General Partners Dave Tabors and Morad Elhafed will join SingleHop’s Board of Directors.

    “SingleHop is well positioned given the rise in cloud computing and demand for outsourced IT services. With its automated technology platform, the company has carved out a unique position in the market,” said Tabors, in a statement. “Customers are happy and sticking around, and that’s a direct result of the company’s business model, coupled with superior technology and a smart leadership team. We’re really looking forward to helping this company scale.”

    Chicago-based SingleHop was founded in 2006, has 80 employees, and has clients in 114 countries. The company has two Chicago-area data centers and more than 10,000 servers online. Next on its to-do list is to open a data center facility in Phoenix.

    You can watch SingleHop’s video describing the LEAP3 cloud infrastructure solution below:

    Photo credit: Alexander Kirch/Shutterstock

    Filed under: cloud, deals

    Read More...
  • instagram logo

    Andreessen Horowitz revealed that it made $78 million off its $250,000 seed investment in Instagram in a post that was meant to quell criticism that it “fumbled” its involvement with the company.

    “Ordinarily, when someone criticizes me for only making 312 times my money, I let the logic of their statement speak for itself,” wrote general partner Ben Horowitz. “However, in this case, the narrative that some critics put forth has the nasty side effect of casting two outstanding entrepreneurs—Kevin and Dalton Caldwell—in an unfair light and glosses over an important ethical issue that we faced.”

    While Andreessen Horowitz was one of Instagram’s very earlier investors, it said it didn’t follow-on because of a conflict of interest with another company it funded. The firm had supported Picplz, another photo-sharing concept that didn’t end up having as much momentum as Instagram. The company behind it eventually changed changed course and turned into App.net, which gives other mobile developers landing pages and other tools for acquiring users.

    Dalton Caldwell, who was chief executive of the company behind Picplz, was already working on photo concepts in April 2010, a month after Kevin Systrom raised $500,000 in funding for Burbn, a location-sharing concept that would eventually morph into Instagram. Instagram launched in early October 2010 and Caldwell’s company said it had closed funding in early November. Instagram later went on to take funding in a round led by a rival top-tier firm, Benchmark Capital.

    Last week, The New York Times ran a story saying that Andreessen Horowitz had basically screwed up its investment in the company. The decision to fund Picplz “was a calculated bet against Instagram and it left Mr. Systrom livid,” the Times reported.

    But Horowitz is framing the choice as an ethical issue:

    After speaking with both entrepreneurs and much internal discussion, we concluded that funding Kevin to compete with Dalton would be a violation of the original implicit commitment we made to Dalton—to not fund competitors to PicPlz. On the other hand, funding Dalton did not violate our implicit agreement with Kevin because he changed his business—we’d funded Burbn not Instagram.

    So our choices were: a) invest in Dalton b) invest in neither or c) invest in Kevin and violate our commitment to Dalton. As soon as we fully recognized those were the choices, we ruled out option c and elected option a.

    However, we still had a problem: because we had invested in Kevin’s seed round, we had both information rights and pro rata rights to the series B. These are important and valuable rights, but it seemed completely unethical to us to exercise them since we funded a competitor. As a result, we unilaterally and without compensation or consideration gave Kevin back those rights and did not invest further in Instagram.

    This story is developing….

    Read More...
  • economics for dummies

    Editor’s note: Scott Edward Walker is the founder and CEO of Walker Corporate Law Group, a boutique corporate law firm specializing in the representation of entrepreneurs. Check out his blog or follow him on Twitter as @ScottEdWalker.

    This is the second part of a three-part primer on convertible note seed financings. Part 1, entitled “Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Convertible Note Seed Financings (But Were Afraid To Ask),” addressed certain basic questions, such as (i) what is a convertible note? (ii) why are convertible notes issued instead of shares of common or preferred stock? and (iii) what are the advantages of issuing convertible notes?

    This part will address the economics of a convertible note seed financing and the three key economic terms: (i) the conversion discount, (ii) the conversion valuation cap and (iii) the interest rate.

    Part 3 will cover certain special issues, such as (i) what happens if the startup is acquired prior to the note’s conversion to equity? and (ii) what happens if the maturity date is reached prior to the note’s conversion to equity?

    What Is a Conversion Discount?

    As discussed in part 1, in the context of a seed financing, a convertible note is a loan that typically automatically converts into shares of preferred stock upon the closing of a Series A round of financing. A conversion discount (or “discount”) is a mechanism to reward the noteholders for their investment risk by granting to them the right to convert the amount of the loan, plus interest, at a reduced price (in percentage terms) to the purchase price paid by the Series A investors.

    In other words, the founders are saying to the investors, in effect, if you take this risk and give us money today, we’ll reward you by giving you “20% off” at our Series A round down the road (20% being the usual discount, as discussed below). For example, if the investors in a $500,000 convertible note seed financing were granted a discount of 20%, and the price per share of the Series A Preferred Stock were $1.00, the noteholders would convert the loan at an effective price (referred to as the “conversion price”) of $0.80 per share and thus receive 625,000 shares ($500,000 divided by $0.80). That’s 125,000 shares more than a Series A investor would receive for its $500,000 investment and a 1.25x return on paper ($625,000 divided by $500,000). (The foregoing example does not include accrued interest on the loan, which is typically about 5%-7% annually, as discussed below.)

    Discounts generally range from 10% (on the low side) to 35% (on the high side), with the most common being 20%.  In Fenwick & West’s 2011 Seed Financing Survey (the “Fenwick Survey”), the percentage of convertible note seed financings that granted a discount to investors was 67% in 2010 and 83% in 2011; and the median discount was 20% in both 2010 and 2011.

    One of the significant advantages of issuing convertible notes, as opposed to shares of preferred stock, is the extraordinary flexibility they offer in connection with “herding” prospective investors and raising the round. Clearly, a greater discount can be offered to early investors who are assuming more risk, particularly where the startup is closing its financing on a rolling basis over an extended period of time (as is the trend).

    Moreover, a note can include a discount that increases over time – e.g., (i) 1.5% per month up to 25%; or (ii) 10% if the Series A round closes within 6 months, 15% if it closes between 6 and 12 months, and 20% if it closes after 12 months. In the Fenwick Survey, the percentage of convertible note seed financings that included a discount which increased over time was 25% in 2010 and 5% in 2011.

    Finally, founders should be aware that investors will sometimes push for the issuance of warrants in lieu of a discount. In a seed round, this makes no sense and only creates more paperwork and, accordingly, higher legal fees. In the Fenwick Survey, the percentage of convertible note seed financings that included the issuance of warrants was 0% in both 2010 and 2011.

    What is a Conversion Valuation Cap?

    A conversion valuation cap (or “cap”) is another mechanism to reward the noteholders for their investment risk (and for their efforts in increasing the value of the startup as a result of introductions, advice, etc.). Specifically, a cap is a ceiling on the value of the startup (i.e., a maximum dollar amount) for purposes of determining the conversion price of the note — which (like a discount) thereby permits investors to convert their loan, plus interest, at a lower price than the purchase price paid by the Series A investors.

    Using the example above, let’s assume the cap were $5 million and the pre-money valuation in the Series A round were $10 million. If the noteholders invested $500,000 and the price per share of the Series A Preferred Stock were $1.00, the noteholders would convert the loan at an effective price of $0.50 per share ($5,000,000 divided by $10,000,000) and thus receive 1,000,000 shares ($500,000 divided by $0.50), which is 500,000 shares more than a Series A investor would receive for its $500,000 investment and a 2x return on paper ($1,000,000 divided by $500,000), not including any accrued interest on the loan. Notice that if there were a 20% discount and no cap, the noteholders would only receive 625,000 shares or a 1.25x return, as noted above.

    If we bump-up the pre-money valuation to $20 million and the cap remains at $5 million, you can see how the noteholders are rewarded (and protected): Their $500,000 loan now converts at an effective price of $0.25 per share ($5,000,000 divided by $20,000,000) and they would thus receive 2,000,000 shares ($500,000 divided by $0.25), which is 1,500,000 shares more than a Series A investor would receive for its $500,000 investment and a 4x return on paper ($2,000,000 divided by $500,000), not including any accrued interest on the loan. Again, if there were a 20% discount and no cap, the noteholders would only receive 625,000 shares or a 1.25x return.

    As you can see, noteholders with a 20% discount and no cap would receive 625,000 shares whether the pre-money valuation in the Series A round were $10 million, $20 million or $50 million.  This is why sophisticated investors vehemently argue that a note without a cap (i) misaligns the interests of the founders and the investors; and (ii) penalizes investors for their efforts in helping the startup increase its value. The math can be tricky, but the bottom line is that noteholders without a cap do not share in any increase in the value of the startup prior to the Series A round.

    Accordingly, as discussed in detail in part 1, a cap is akin to a valuation in a priced round (i.e., if the startup were issuing shares of common or preferred stock); however, the beauty of a cap is that it is not a valuation for tax purposes — which facilitates the financing by allowing the founders to grant different caps to different investors.

    In the Fenwick Survey, the percentage of convertible note seed financings that included a cap was 83% in 2010 and 82% in 2011; and the median valuation cap was $4 million in 2010 and $7.5 million in 2011.

    How Do the Discount and the Cap Interrelate?

    If the convertible note includes both a discount and a cap, the applicable language will typically provide that the conversion price will be the lower of (i) the price per share determined by applying the discount to the Series A price per share; and (ii) the price per share determined by dividing the cap by the Series A pre-money valuation. As reflected in the examples above, the reason the conversion price is the “lower of” (not the “higher of”) is because the lower the conversion price, the more shares the noteholders are issued upon conversion.

    In the first example above where the discount was 20%, the cap was $5 million and the pre-money valuation was $10 million, we saw that the conversion price was (i) $.80 when we applied the discount to the Series A price and (ii) $.50 when we divided the cap by the pre-money valuation.  Accordingly, the conversion price would be $.50 (the lower of) for purposes of computing the number of shares issued to the noteholders upon conversion.

    Now watch what happens if we drop the pre-money valuation to $6 million: Applying the discount, the conversion price, of course, stays the same at $.80; but when we divide $5 million (the cap) by $6 million (the pre-money valuation), we get $.83, which is obviously higher than $.80 — and thus the discount applies, not the cap. This is a bit counter-intuitive because the pre-money valuation exceeds the cap by $1 million. Notice, however, that unless the pre-money valuation were greater than $6,250,000, the cap would not be triggered ($5,000,000 divided by $6,250,000 equals $.80).

    If this weren’t confusing enough, there is one other complex issue that founders need to be aware of with respect to discounts and caps: the additional liquidation preference that is created. Indeed, this is a particular problem, and could result in a substantial windfall to investors, in a large convertible note financing with a low conversion price.

    For example, in a $2 million convertible note financing with a 50% discount (or a 50% conversion cap ratio), the noteholders would receive $4 million worth of shares of Series A Preferred Stock upon conversion (not including accrued interest), which would include whatever liquidation preference is attached to the shares (typically 1x). Accordingly, the noteholders would receive an extra $2 million of liquidation preference.

    There are several different approaches to solving this issue, the most elegant of which is to convert the notes into a different series of preferred stock (e.g., Series A-1), with a liquidation preference per share equal to the conversion price; however, for purposes of this post, it’s enough for founders simply to be aware of this issue and how it relates to discounts and caps.

    What is the Typical Interest Rate and How Do the Investors Get Paid?

    The third and final piece of the economics puzzle is the interest rate component. Again, a convertible note is a loan and typically requires the startup to pay simple (not compounded) interest on the amount of the loan. Interest rates on convertible notes have historically been in the range of 7%-10% annually, but recently have dropped to the 5%-7% range. In the Fenwick Survey, the median annual interest rate in convertible note seed financings was 6% in 2010 and 5.5% in 2011.

    As alluded to in the examples above, the interest is not paid in cash on a periodic basis like a typical loan, but instead accrues (or accumulates), and then the total amount of interest due is added to the loan amount and converted into shares of preferred stock upon the closing of the Series A round. For example, if the interest rate were 5% in a $500,000 convertible note seed financing and the Series A closing occurred on the one-year anniversary of the convertible note closing, the investors would convert an additional $25,000 ($500,000 x .05).

    Each state has its own laws (called “usury” laws) that limit the maximum interest rate that may be charged on a loan. In California, for example, unless an exemption applies, the maximum annual interest rate for a non-consumer loan is the higher of (i) 10% or (ii) 5%, plus the rate charged by the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco on advances to member banks on the 25th day of the month prior to the date of the loan (or, if earlier, the date of the written loan commitment).

    Read More...
  • Tango video chat video message

    Forget Apple’s Facetime. If there’s one app that shows the potential in the mobile video chat market, it’s Tango.

    Almost one year since its last round of $42 million, the cross-platform video chat company Tango announced that it has raised another $40 million in a third round of funding from Qualcomm Ventures and Access Ventures. The startup continues to see massive growth as well, reaching 45 million users 18 months after it launched.

    “The round is a license to operate with a slightly bigger vision,” said Tango CTO and co-founder Eric Setton in an interview with VentureBeat yesterday. “It’s not that we’re going to hire a 100 extra people… we want to be able to accelerate and deliver more on our roadmap.” That roadmap includes honing the company’s video and audio quality, and ensuring a great experience for all of its users.

    Settons tells me that 44 percent of Tango’s users are active monthly (this writer included), and 10 percent of them use the app every day. There’s a snowball effect to the app, as calls increase significantly when new users jump in. Settons says daily calls almost doubled in the last four months.

    Another reason for Tango’s growth is its rapid development cycle. “We’re working literally 24/7 to improve the app, fix issues and add new device support every two weeks,” Setton said last October at CTIA Enterprise.

    Tango offers apps for iOS, Android, Windows Phone, and Windows PCs. Setton said the company was excited to work together with Qualcomm for funding because its chipsets are cross platform as well. The companies have already been working closely together to optimize Tango for Qualcomm’s hardware. Setton said it was a much better option than taking funding from a specific carrier or handset manufacturer, which could interfere with Tango’s platform agnosticism.

    Tango is also releasing updates to its apps today that will offer quality improvements, as well as adaptive resolution support (which will allow the app to support a variety of new devices). The company launched Tango Messages and Tango Surprises (cute animations to use during video chats) back in December, both of which will get some big updates. You’ll now be able to send group video messages, and the company is also opening up a storefront for Tango Surprises, allowing you to buy new animations.

    Setton says that monetization from the two new features was “incredibly strong” and helped to close the new round. All Tango users get free access to their five most recent video messages and one random Surprise. But the company charges small fees to access additional video messages and Surprises (there’s no subscription model yet).

    With this latest round, Palo Alto, Calif.-based Tango has raised around $87 million in funding. Additional funds for the round came from members of Setton’s family. The company’s other investors include Draper Fisher Jurvetson, Michael Birch, Andy Bechtolsheim, and Bill Hambrecht.

    Filed under: deals, mobile, VentureBeat

    Read More...
  • Screen Shot 2012-04-17 at 2.44.52 PM

    CloudFlare, a San Francisco-based startup that protects web sites from security threats and speeds up their load times, has been in talks to raise funding at a valuation that is around $1 billion, according to multiple sources familiar with the discussions.

    Apparently on the back of the company’s growth, there was inbound interest during the last three to four months with at least one firm agreeing to north of a $1 billion valuation. A few other venture firms have given pushback, saying that a $1 billion post-money valuation is too high.

    The company itself says it has no need to raise funding, with the majority of its last $20 million round still in the bank. (And no, they didn’t plant this story because I heard about it through other backchannel chatter about Sand Hill deal flow.)

    “Cloudflare’s team is working to address some of the Internet’s hardest challenges. We’re literally building a faster, safer, smarter web,” the company’s chief executive Matthew Prince told me. “We’re in a fortunate position where we don’t need to raise capital and have no immediate plans to do so.”

    CloudFlare is Prince’s third company after two anti-spam startups. He’s probably one of the more degree-laden founders around with an MBA, a law degree and a background in computer science. CloudFlare was a runner-up to Qwiki at TechCrunch Disrupt back in late 2010.

    Why a $1 billion valuation? Here are the pros:

    CloudFlare piqued investor interest after a presentation the company gave at an Allen & Co. retreat for late-stage companies and potential long-term IPO candidates.

    It was the company’s growth numbers that had people talking. CloudFlare is serving more than 40 billion pageviews per month and is on track to do more pageviews than Yahoo by the end of the year (although this isn’t a direct comparison as I’ll explain later on).

    CloudFlare is adding about 30,000 customers per week, primarily through word of mouth. Publishers use CloudFlare to speed up their load times and fend off attacks. During Russia’s presidential elections last month, several news agencies and bloggers used CloudFlare to hold off DDOS (or distributed denial of service) attacks that would’ve taken them down while they published reports on voting irregularities.

    The most eye-catching slide in the deck was one that showed the time it took for different pioneering Internet companies to reach 400 million unique visitors. It took Google seven years to get there, 5 years and 7 months for Facebook to get there and 5 years and 2 months for Twitter to get there. CloudFlare got to this benchmark in 1 year and 3 months.

    The company has a mixed revenue model with paid services and advertising. Publishers can either use CloudFlare for free, or pay at least $20 a month for it. Then there’s a forthcoming enterprise plan that’s presumably more expensive for bigger sites.

    CloudFlare is also experimenting with serving advertising on error or 404 pages (the landing pages you end up on when you type in an incorrect URL). A little under 4 percent or about 1.5 billion pageviews in CloudFlare’s network are error pages. On these pages, they’ll show search ads that might redirect the user to where they really want to go. Since these are search ads and not display units, they would have a higher cost-per-click because they better match a user’s intent or are closer to a transaction point. Prince says there are several other publisher services and products that CloudFlare has yet to launch.

    And why not?

    Well, from what I hear (and Prince wouldn’t comment on this at all), is that the company did about $250,000 in revenue in 2011. This would be an extremely high trailing revenue multiple so it’s understandable why there are firms backing off at this valuation. Not that the lack of revenue has stopped anyone from valuing other companies at $1 billion if they have tens of millions of users and off-the-charts engagement metrics. Cough. Instagram. Cough. Pinterest.

    Also, it’s not a totally accurate comparison to run CloudFlare’s monthly pageviews against those of consumer-facing companies like Tumblr or Yahoo, since CloudFlare’s business relationship is with the publisher, not the end-consumer. In both good ways and bad ways, that affects CloudFlare’s monetization strategy. On the one hand, CloudFlare can actually charge users for its product. On the other hand, any advertising solution CloudFlare that comes up with would have to be attractive to its publisher clients. And publishers can be very finicky.

    Read More...
  • 15721v4-max-250x250

    Today was a pretty big day for 500 Startups, the Silicon Valley seed venture capital firm and startup accelerator founded by outspoken tech investment extraordinaire Dave McClure. The firm disclosed in a regulatory filing that it’s halfway finished raising a brand new $50 million round of funding, the second in its two-year history and a significant step up from the $29 million investment that it raised in its first round. 500 Startups also named four new partners — Paul Singh, Christen O’Brien, Bedy Yang, and George Kellerman — who will help select and manage the more than 100 investments that the firm makes each year.

    So we were very happy to have McClure as a guest today on TechCrunch TV. Because of regulatory limitations on what companies can say while they’re in the process of raising funding, his hands were tied on lots of topics on the details of the new fund — but we were still able to get some great details from him on the future direction of 500 Startups and the venture funding world in general.

    Watch the video above to hear McClure’s thoughts on what some people call his “spray and pray” funding strategy, how being a “hillbilly from West Virginia” originally informs his instincts as an investor, why 500 Startups is so keen on international investments, what sector he’s especially excited about right now, and lots more.

    Read More...