Start-Ups Think Big, Like Twitter

September 14, 2010

For many entrepreneurs, start-ups are a labor of love.

Build what you want to see created in the world is the advice offered by Twitter co-founder and Chairman Jack Dorsey to young entrepreneurs.

“I wanted my family to use it, my friends to use it,” Dorsey said. He admits falling in love with SMS, or short messaging service, technology when it first came to the U.S.

And what about the micro-blogging site today? Twitter has some “interesting” scaling issues, with massive spikes in traffic volume. “Engineering for that is very difficult,” he said at the Demo conference in Silicon Valley.

Here are several less-established start-ups at the conference hoping for similar breakthroughs:

*Delphix. The company announced the commercial release of its database virtualization software. The product is designed to save companies money on storage hardware. Big corporations have multiple storage devices holding databases and an opportunity for consolidation. Delphix has several customers, including Staples and TiVo

*Metabeam. Metabeam’s Slideshow sends information about a television show or movie to a touch-screen device, such as an iPad. Ten thousands of people are already using the product, which was announced at the show.

*E-Fuel: The company ships an at-home systems for making ethanol from biomass, such as yard waste. (But don’t think yardwaste, because you would have to come up with a way for breaking down the plant material and converting it into sugar.)

Instead, E-Fuel owners are best off relying on distributors to will sell them distilled plant sugar in liquid form. Put the sugar solution in the fermentation tank and pump ethanol into your car. Cost: $10,000.


Smooth Stone Vows To Nearly Eliminate Server Power Use In Data Centers

August 16, 2010

Secretive chipmaker Smooth Stone came out of stealth today with an announcement of $48 million in funding and a vow to virtually eliminate server power use in data centers.

The sheer size of the Austin company’s first venture round provides a useful validation of its business plan. The funding drew investors Battery Ventures, Highland Capital Partners, Flybridge Capital Partners, Texas Instruments, the Advanced Technology Investment Company and ARM, which had already provided money to the company and has a seat on its board. (Smooth Stone had previously raised $3 million of seed capital.)

The company is among a new wave of start-ups aiming to cut data center power use – specifically server energy consumption.

CEO Barry Evans declined to provide details about its development and delivery of an ARM-based chip. But he said the goal is to deliver a “disruptive” technology that will eliminate “almost all” of the power demands of a data-center server. ARM chips are generally used in low-power devices, such as cell phones and handhelds.

“We want to take power out of the equation” for data center managers, he said in an interview. “The problem is becoming so acute” – along with data-center rack space.

Other companies addressing the market include SeaMicro, which promises one-quarter the power and one-quarter the space of a typical Intel-based Xeon server. The company’s SM1000 server uses 512 Atom chips, another Intel chip made for netbooks and other low-power devices.

A third company apparently making high-efficiency processors for servers is Angilux, which Google bought earlier this month.

Smooth Stone’s business model appears to be focused on chip making, leaving the development of servers to partners and customers. The company isn’t offering much detail on its plans other than to say closing the $48 million round required it to have all the important pieces lined up, from technology to market validation.

Smooth Stone has been engaged with the market for some time, says Evans.

He adds that the money will allow it to complete its chip development and double the size of its development team over two to three months. That could hasten its move into the market.


Are Venture Capitalists Starving Clean Tech Innovation?

July 22, 2010

Clean-tech investing is a top priority for venture capitalists. But a big chunk of their money is avoiding the tiniest, early-stage start-ups with the most ambitious plans for innovation in favor of more established, later stage businesses.

The result could be a dearth of innovation several years from now, when a new generation of companies might be expected to fuel growth in the industry.

The trend toward later stage investing appears to have been gathering steam in the past year. In 2008, 197 follow-on investment deals were sealed in the United States compared with 93 first-round financings, a 2-to-1 ratio of later stage versus early stage.

In the first quarter of this year, the ratio was closer to 3-to-1, with 85 follow-on rounds completed compared with 31 first fundings.

“There are too few start-ups,” complains long-time industry insider Mark Jensen, managing partner for national venture capital services at Deloitte & Touche.

This shift comes amid a clear sign that clean tech is a growing venture capital priority – both domestically and abroad. A recent study from Deloitte & Touche and the National Venture Capital Association found that 80 percent of general partners plan to increase their clean-tech investing over the next five years. The commitment was far ahead of their number two priority, health care services, which 63 percent said they would fund more actively.

The survey contacted more than 500 venture capitalists in nine countries, including the United States, China, France, the United Kingdom, Brazil, Canada, Israel and India. And it found the intentions were pretty uniform country to country. Clean tech was the top focus for VCS in the United States, China, India, the United Kingdom, Germany, Canada and France.

And yet in countries such as the United States and Europe, money is flowing most readily to later stage businesses where partners hope for a big kill if a high profile Better Place or Amyris goes public.

The fallout is that early-stage entrepreneurs are forced to seek money from angel investors for seed and sometimes first rounds. In some cases, angels have begun playing the role of venture capitalists, but with less cash to deploy.

This was clearly the case in the second quarter. Venture capitalists in the United States set a quarterly record by investing $1.47 billion in clean-tech start-ups, a 107 percent increase from the first quarter.

But the number of companies receiving money remained almost unchanged at 71, compared with 70 in the first quarter.

Large deals dominated. Better Place raised $350 million, BrightSource collected $150 million and Boston Power added $62 million to its bank account.

Experts such as Jensen say they don’t expect the trend to reverse itself any time soon. At least not until VCs start making some money on clean-tech and become more comfortable taking on risk.

Until then, early stage businesses are likely to find money hard to get.


Clean Tech Investments Hit Quarterly Record

July 16, 2010

Clean-tech investing set a record in the second quarter led by a handful of large deals.

The up tick by venture capitalists suggests investment levels should remain strong through the rest of the year.

But there is caution in the figures released by the National Venture Capital Association, Thomson Reuters and PricewaterhouseCoopers. The number of companies receiving money remained largely unchanged from the first quarter, indicating that the investment surge is confined to a relatively small group of start-ups.

The quarterly MoneyTree survey found venture capitalists invested $1.47 billion in clean-tech start-ups during the three months, a 107 percent increase from the first quarter of 2010. (The increase was an even greater 198 percent from the second quarter of last year, when the recession gripped the economy.)

Seventy-one companies received money in the quarter, compared with 70 in the first quarter.

The MoneyTree numbers are the second set of figures to confirm the quarterly investment trends. Earlier this month, the Cleantech Group found a 65 percent quarterly rise with big deals leading the way. The Cleantech Group measures investments worldwide, which partly explains the differences. The MoneyTree surveys focuses on the U.S.

Among the top deals, electric-car battery-swapping company Better Place raised $350 million, the fourth largest deal in the past 15 years.

Also in the top ten, solar plant developer BrightSource raised $150 million; solar technology developer Stion raised $70 million; lithium-ion battery maker Boston Power raised $62 million; electric-car maker Miles Electric Vehicles raised $57 million and solar system financer SunRun raised $55 million.


Venture Industry Is In A Trough

July 12, 2010

The venture-capital industry is less a harbinger of things to come for the clean-tech industry than it used to be.

In the early years of this century, private money from venture investors helped defined which companies lived and died, which expanded and which did not.

Markets for solar panels, biofuels and smart meters have grown substantially since then. Market-place demand, economic trends and government spending now wield bigger influences on company prosperity.

So the news Monday morning that venture industry fundraising has swooned will have less impact on clean-tech companies than it would have four years ago. But it is still not good.

The National Venture Capital Association and Thomson Reuters announced that the amount of money going into new venture funds fell 49 percent in the second quarter to $1.9 billion. The quarterly total is the lowest since 2003.

Clearly the industry succumbed to the financial turmoil stirred up by the debt crisis in Europe and the corresponding fears of a slower United States economy. NVCA President Mark Heesen says the fund raising trough is likely to continue through the year.

The challenge for venture firms is they raise their money from big pension funds, endowments and financial houses that are sensitive to changes in the broad investment environment. Add that to fears of a continued slow IPO market, from which venture funds make money – and the mixture is catatonic.

A few successes in the IPO market could change this. If Tesla Motors holds onto a gain, or Amyris gets a warm reception, big money could loosen up.

But on the present course, there will be less money for clean-tech companies and more willingness to invest in smaller rounds.

Is this a sign of a long-term change in venture capital? Probably not. Is it a sign of short term slowing of investments. Yes.


Solar Tops Venture Investing But Watch Out Below

July 1, 2010

Overall, the second quarter appears a stable investment period for venture capital and clean tech.

A breakdown of second quarter clean-tech investment categories shows the prominence of solar

Venture capital firms poured $2.02 billion into 140 companies despite a relatively tumultuous three months in the public markets. This global total nearly matches the $2.04 of the first quarter and is up 43 percent from last year (an almost pointless comparison given the depths of the global downturn last year).

What’s really interesting in Thursday report from the Cleantech Group and Deloitte is the amount of money VC continued to put into solar start-ups, despite the prevailing wisdom that these cash-intensive investments so popular several years ago had seen their day. Without that money – $811 million – venture investing looks depressed and should signal a warning for the rest of the year.

Solar drew the largest chunk of the money, and big deals were the fashion of the day. Solyndra took in $175 million; BrightSource claimed $150 million; and Amonix, a developer of a concentrating photovoltaic technology, won $129.4 million from Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers and others.

The conclusion one might draw is that VCs continue to think solar will be a big money maker and a substantial piece of the world’s energy future. But there are a variety of factors at play, some not so sanguine. Solyndra took its money after withdrawing an IPO that was unlikely to be welcomed on Wall Street. There may have been no alternative except for venture investors to walk away from money already spent.

BrightSource, too, had special needs. It is trying to secure its first solar thermal plant in the Southwest desert and faces an end-of-year tax credit deadline and a September 2011 construction deadline for its $1.37 billion in federal loan guarantees. It needs to have a lot happen between now and then, including taking in private money to match the public funds.

The second largest category, biofuels, roped $301 million. But this total also needs to be examined closely. Of the amount, Amyris captured almost $109 million. The company is shortly headed to the public markets for an IPO, so is a special investment case. Virent Energy Systems, a Wisconsin biofuel maker, attracted an additional $46 million from Shell and Cargill (not typical venture sources), and Kior of Texas took in $40.

The remaining categories of smart grid and energy efficiency posted investments of $256 million and $147 million, respectively.

In other words, while the quarter appeared stable, several large deals with special needs were responsible for a big slice of the total. Without them, a stable seeming clean-tech venture capital environment might be down in the dumps.


Will Unprofitable Zipcar Be Another Webvan?

June 1, 2010

Zipcar’s IPO is likely to be an interesting test for clean-tech investing.

The company doesn’t make lithium batteries or solar cells. But it capitalizes on the same green product trends slowly taking shape in the United States and around the world.

Zipcar made a name for itself by convincing people to drive less and rely on car sharing networks when they do. And while it has racked up impressive sales, it is spilling red ink like an underwater oil well and forecasts more losses this year and possibly in the next several to come. So will it be a clean-tech Webvan or eventually a money gusher?

Zipcar had revenue of $131.2 million in 2009, but losses of $4.6 million. More red ink is on the way.

Wall Street may find out later this year as Zipcar said Tuesday it will sell about $75 million of stock to the public.

Some observers suggest the reception could be good despite the losses. Zipcar has built a brand and its cars are increasingly visible in the Bay Area, says Silicon Valley consultant Louis Gray. More importantly, losses at the company have been cut by more than half in the past year while revenue growth is about 30 percent a year.

Some companies “choose growth and seize opportunity” instead of hold down costs to generate profits, Gray says.

But professional investors are cautious. The company doesn’t have a new technology that differentiates it from its rivals – which are low-margin rental companies, such as Avis or Hertz, said one who asked to remain anonymous. It needs to show it can make money from invested capital – perhaps by selecting a typical market, such as San Francisco, and demonstrating  it can turn a profit. Then the task would be to translate that success into a formula it can apply to other markets.

“You don’t want to be another Webvan” and sacrifice profits for unrestrained growth, he said. The online grocer went bankrupt during the 2001 dot-com crash when it found it couldn’t turn a profit.

The venture capital-backed company claims its opportunities for expansion are stunning. Zipcar already operates what it claims is the world’s largest car sharing network, with operations in 13 metropolitan areas and on 150 university campuses in the U.S., Canada and the United Kingdom. It rents cars to a self-service clientele of 400,000 members, who pick them up in reserved parking spots and pay by the hour, or day.

Zipcar claims in a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission it has identified 100 metropolitan areas across the globe ripe for expansion. “Given our estimate that ten million driving age residents, business commuters and university community residents live or work within a short walk of a Zipcar, we believe the adoption in our current cities represents only a small fraction of the existing market opportunity,” the filing states.

According to a Frost & Sullivan estimate contained in the document, the car-sharing market could amount to $3.3 billion by 2016.

However, building a profitable business is anything by assured. Revenue was $131.2 million in 2009 before the April acquisition of U.K.’s Streetcar. (Streetcar had revenue of $23.1 million.) Yet the company lost $4.6 million, an improvement from $14.5 million in 2008.

“We expect to incur net losses in 2010 (and) we do not know if our business operations will become profitable or if we will continue to incur net losses in 2011 and beyond. We expect to incur significant future expenses as we develop and expand our business,” according to the SEC filing.

The losses come on top of an accumulated deficit of $56.4 million, with $26.9 million in long-term debt. (Zipcar hopes to pay down this debt with the money from the IPO.)

Still, the company has no trouble calculating a positive value for its stock. That value was $3.49 in July 31, 2009 and $4.37 at the end of December.

With improving financial markets and lower risks in the company’s business the value rose to $5.27 by March 2010, Zipcar says in its filing. It will be interesting to see how accurate the estimate is as losses continue to pile up and investor faith is tested.


Green Plastics, Water Tech And Management Software Are Hot Among Clean Tech Investors

May 14, 2010

Clean-tech investors appear to be shifting their focus from energy efficiency to water technologies, green plastics and software tools to manage the horde of data expected to flow across the smart grid.

Water is the next carbon, says H-P's Judy Glazer

With the economy on the mend, money again has been seeping into green start-ups. But a shift in focus appears to reflect the limits of a still capital-constrained environment.

VCs appear to be betting on companies that can do more with less. The exception is where technologies have the chance to turn a market on its ear – such as plastics made from carbon and materials other than oil.

This is certainly the case for Gerd Goette, managing partner at Siemens Venture Capital, an organization with 40 different funds and investments in 150 companies.

Goette says he is interested in software and services that connect power generators and customers – systems that turn bills into real-time communications and put supply and demand face to face. Some interesting business models might bypass utilities entirely, he said.

One particular need is for software tools to manage the flood of electric cars expected to enter European, U.S. and Chinese markets in coming years. When millions of cars draw power, the demands on the electric grid will multiply.

Software infrastructure also is a focus for Andrew Williamson, a director at Physic Ventures in San Francisco. Corporations need clean-tech tools for metrics and measurement, he says.

Other areas where he is starting to invest are green plastics and water technologies that could offer big returns by muscling bottled water out off the shelves of retail stores.

“Water is going to be the next carbon,” agrees Judy Glazer, director of global, social and environmental responsibility at Hewlett-Packard. That seems to be the consensus of the environmental community, she notes.

Goette says he is intrigued as well with sensing technology that might monitor plants, equipment and the like.


Green Tech Will Reinvent The Infrastructure Of The World, Says Vinod Khosla

April 30, 2010

It is hard to predict when green energy technologies such as solar, wind and biofuel will be cheaper than oil and coal.

Khosla Ventures will make more money from the Amyris Biotechnologies IPO than it has invested so far, says VC Vinod Khosla

But when they are, watch out. “We will fundamentally reinvent the infrastructure of the world,” says top clean-tech venture capitalist Vinod Khosla. “This is about changing assumptions.”

Khosla, who was interviewed at the GreenNet conference in San Francisco, said that once the cost of green energy is competitive with fossil fuels, Wall Street financiers will pour money into projects, eager for big returns. The reinvention of the infrastructure will take place over 10 to 15 years, he said.

Khosla defended the investment portfolio he’s accumulated since turning his attention to green tech about five years ago. He admitted he hasn’t yet made money with clean-tech start-ups.

But he vowed, just like the Wall Street moneymen, he would eventually rake in big bucks – green from green, you might say. “I’m pretty confident we will,” he said.  Already the book value of the portfolio – an estimate of its market value – is higher than the amount of money his firm, Khosla Ventures, invested.

Earlier this month, Amyris Biotechnologies, one of his biofuels firms, filed to go public. It should be a success, Khosla said. “We will make more money with this than we invested so far.”

He’s equally confident about his other companies. Half will bring positive returns to Khosla Ventures, he predicted, a high hit rate for a venture fund.

So what technologies does Khosla see as ripe for investment? LED lighting is attractive with breakthroughs possible, he said. Clean coal is another area he is investigating.


Clean Tech Venture Investing Entering Fourth Stage, Says VC

April 27, 2010

The venture industry placed its first clean-tech bets on solar start-ups about five years ago. Then came the biofuels companies turning corn, edible feedstocks, and eventually grasses and wood to gasoline and diesel replacements.

The fourth wave could focus on energy storage and new-era lighting, says venture capitalist Erik Straser.

Smart-grid and smart-meter start-ups made up the third wave of investing by a venture capital industry increasingly excited by the monstrous alternative energy and green technology markets.

Now a fourth wave is approaching with a focus that appears to be on energy storage, new-era lighting and with smart-grid money being doled out a slower pace.

“I think people are looking for the candidates for the fourth wave,” says Erik Straser, a partner at the VC firm Mohr Davidow Ventures and the head of its clean-tech investment team. “I think people would like to believe it is energy storage.”

There is little question energy storage – along with lighting – are huge opportunities. Imagine the sales of lithium ion and other advanced batteries when a million or so electric cars are manufactured annually, a production target that could be reach in five to 10 years. Companies also are beginning to develop storage batteries and devices for the home. Residents might employ them to store solar energy for use at night.

But the granddaddy of the opportunities is likely electric-grid storage, says Straser. Expect venture firms to take chances on new technologies, he says – such as new materials and systems but not necessarily lithium or nickel hydride.

In the lighting space, LEDs are likely to command the most attention. The motivation will be to find business plans from start-ups that provide new ways of making light emitting diodes or which lower the costs of turning the LED chips into bulbs.

The quest is “how to drive to the next price points,” says Straser, And to make the bundle of money that has so far eluded the clean-tech venture business.

Straser has in the past invested in biofuel companies, such as Catilin, solar start-up Nanosolar and coal gasification company Laurus Energy, among others.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 31 other followers