Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Logic (or Lack of It) in Appraising Start-Ups

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Logic (or Lack of It) in Appraising Start-Ups


    Otis Chandler and his wife, Elizabeth Khuri Chandler, the founders of Goodreads,
    a social media site that recently sold for a reported $150 million.



    I have a vision of how suitors decide how much to offer for a start-up they want to buy. Several executives go into a conference room. Each scribbles a number on a piece of paper and places it in a hat. Then the chief executive pulls out a number, and there it is.

    It might sound like a stretch, but given the seemingly random and sometimes nonsensical amounts for which start-ups with no revenue, or no users, or even no product are bought, I might not be far off.

    But let’s say there is a logical way to value a company. During Bubble 1.0 there seemed to be — at least sometimes. Tech start-ups were valued by the number of eyeballs they attracted. When Broadcast.com was acquired by Yahoo for $5.9 billion in stock in April 1999, it was estimated that the company paid $10,000 per user.

    Today, when eyeballs mean much less, how do start-ups with no revenue come up with a valuation? Well, it depends on a buyer’s reason for wanting the company.

    One of the growing forms of acquisitions is an acqui-hire, in which a company is bought for its talent.

    “If the company has no revenue and no users, then it comes down to the price of each engineer, which on average ranges between $750,000 to $1.5 million per person,” said Sam Hamadeh, chief executive of PrivCo, a firm that follows privately held companies, who noted that such acquisitions were up 91 percent from a year ago. “Facebook certainly pioneered and popularized this phenomenon as it made acquisitions to essentially snuff out competition.”

    An investor report released by PrivCo in late March found that 12 of the acquisitions by Facebook last year were of this type. Often Facebook integrated the engineers and then shut the newly purchased company. The report also found that Twitter had acquired eight companies to get their engineering talent. Yahoo, Google, Apple, LinkedIn and Airbnb have also done transactions just for engineers.

    Given Mr. Hamadeh’s estimate, we can begin to guess at a start-up’s value if it’s clearly an acqui-hire. If a company has 10 employees, no revenue and no users, it could be worth about $15 million. Throw in the cost of some office equipment, shutting down the technology and paying back investors, and it’s valued at $30 million.

    Chris Dixon, a general partner at the venture firm Andreessen Horowitz, said in an interview that although some of the recent start-up acquisition prices might seem high, many are amortized over four years, which makes some deals seem more rational. “If you’re paying $1 million per engineer in an acqui-hire, that’s split up over four years and ends up equaling the salary of other engineers in the Valley,” he said.

    But some of these transactions have people scratching their heads — like that of Summly, a news-reading app built by a 17-year-old with two employees, which Yahoo bought for a reported $30 million last month. As Emin Gün Sirer, an associate professor at Cornell, noted, Summly didn’t use any unique technology and has only a couple of employees.

    When a company has users and it is a straight-up product acquisition, the numbers can be more difficult to figure out. Amazon recently purchased Goodreads, a social media site built around sharing books, for a sum said to be $150 million. Mailbox, which had not properly begun, sold for $100 million last month to DropBox. And, of course, there is Instagram, which was bought for $1 billion.

    Thomas R. Eisenmann, a professor at the Harvard Business School, said that when companies weren’t being acquired just for their talent — like Goodreads and Instagram — three possible calculations were used to determine a valuation. The first requires exploring how much time and effort it would take to build the product from scratch and attract new users. The second is potential cash flow.

    The third is “in the realm of, ‘What number do we need to put on the table to convince the management and investors to part with their dream?’ ” he said. “Often, they end up somewhere in the magic middle.”

    Of course, all of this math starts to fall apart when a start-up receives an exorbitant amount of press and exposure on social networks. Then suitors become irrational, making the price people are willing to pay seem as if it were plucked out of a hat.

    E-mail: bilton@nytimes.com

  • #2
    Re: The Logic (or Lack of It) in Appraising Start-Ups

    Surprised they would write an article about magical irrational bidding for start ups without mentioning the competitive threat of being acquired by a competing company that could leverage the data & userbase.

    GoodReads.com probably isn't worth $150 million to Amazon.com (Barnes & Noble's market cap is only $1 billion), but trying to slow down Google's entry into the ebook market to keep Kindle as the default service certainly is worth $150 million.
    http://paidcontent.org/2012/08/06/go...med-at-amazon/
    https://developers.google.com/books/...reads?hl=es-ES
    http://readwrite.com/2012/01/30/why_...e_up_on_amazon
    http://paidcontent.org/2012/04/05/go...e-booksellers/

    Instagram at $750 million might not directly make sense, but if you were Facebook & feared an acquisition by Twitter that eventually led to Twitter more directly competing against Facebook with another pump of growth, then the $750 million looks cheap.

    Many of the purchases in the $10s of millions range are those acqui-hires. But when it get into the hundreds of millions to billions certainly the "what happens if this goes to a competitor" comes into play quite often.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: The Logic (or Lack of It) in Appraising Start-Ups

      I'd note that the 'acqui-hire' route also perpetrates the idea of pedigree.

      Specifically that being a technical lead, director, or VP at a big company like Google means that this person has some form of unusual skills.

      From what I've seen, this is true on occasion, but is untrue more often than not. Yet from a fundraising perspective, it is absolutely true which leads directly to valuation.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: The Logic (or Lack of It) in Appraising Start-Ups

        Originally posted by seobook View Post
        Surprised they would write an article about magical irrational bidding for start ups without mentioning the competitive threat of being acquired by a competing company that could leverage the data & userbase..
        Additionally, these companies are being evaluated and valued based upon their underlying comprehension of network science and their ability to deploy applications that leverage that understanding.

        For example, Summly's value is based upon it's management team members understanding of machine learning and natural language processing and their ability to deliver on this knowledge, building a powerful filter so that users can attenuate the vast variety of content available online. Essentially, they're matching interfacing subsystem capabilities using Cybernetic principles. While tech media isn't talking about filters yet, they will be. Summly obviously understands the underlying system needs and was able to convey that need in their narrative to investors and via their functional application specs.
        Last edited by reggie; April 11, 2013, 10:51 PM.
        The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge ~D Boorstin

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: The Logic (or Lack of It) in Appraising Start-Ups

          Originally posted by reggie View Post
          Additionally, these companies are being evaluated and valued based upon their underlying comprehension of network science and their ability to deploy applications that leverage that understanding.

          For example, Summly's value is based upon it's management team members understanding of machine learning and natural language processing and their ability to deliver on this knowledge, building a powerful filter so that users can attenuate the vast variety of content available online. Essentially, they're matching interfacting subsystem capabilities using Cybernetic principles. While tech media isn't talking about filters yet, they will be. Summly obviously understands the underlying system needs and was able to convey that need in their narrative to investors and via their functional application specs.
          ...who said the "service economy" was all about flipping hamburgers. :-)

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: The Logic (or Lack of It) in Appraising Start-Ups

            Originally posted by GRG55 View Post
            ...who said the "service economy" was all about flipping hamburgers. :-)
            Yup. Some are referring to our social transition as "The Rise of the Attention Economy." But that's just one spin on the Re-Assembly of the Social (Bruno Latour's spin) that were going thru.

            Ultimately, this NYT journalist has no understanding whatsoever of networked systems, their future, and their value metrics. But then again, little of the tech buzz is based on the underlying science developed decades ago. So, when these acquirers find mgmt teams that understand the underlying science, and can deliver on it, they scoop them up. The cost in cash and equity is a secondary consideration.
            The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge ~D Boorstin

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: The Logic (or Lack of It) in Appraising Start-Ups

              Originally posted by reggie View Post
              Additionally, these companies are being evaluated and valued based upon their underlying comprehension of network science and their ability to deploy applications that leverage that understanding.

              For example, Summly's value is based upon it's management team members understanding of machine learning and natural language processing and their ability to deliver on this knowledge, building a powerful filter so that users can attenuate the vast variety of content available online. Essentially, they're matching interfacing subsystem capabilities using Cybernetic principles. While tech media isn't talking about filters yet, they will be. Summly obviously understands the underlying system needs and was able to convey that need in their narrative to investors and via their functional application specs.
              Additional background on how Summly ended up on Yahoo's radar.
              "Acquiring Summly seems to have been an almost incidental side effect of a deal Yahoo made with SRI for a piece of "summarization technology.""
              http://www.businessinsider.com/why-m...startup-2013-4

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: The Logic (or Lack of It) in Appraising Start-Ups

                Originally posted by reggie View Post
                For example, Summly's value is based upon it's management team members understanding of machine learning and natural language processing and their ability to deliver on this knowledge, building a powerful filter so that users can attenuate the vast variety of content available online. Essentially, they're matching interfacing subsystem capabilities using Cybernetic principles. While tech media isn't talking about filters yet, they will be. Summly obviously understands the underlying system needs and was able to convey that need in their narrative to investors and via their functional application specs.
                Not quite. Summly is a simple frontend that connects to an API powered by technologies developed at Stanford:

                Let's be clear. Young Nick d'Aloisio and his fledgling company haven't really written amazing new language-processing software. They've written a straightforward iOS application that links to natural language processing (NLP) software licensed from SRI International, an organisation spun out of Stanford University in 1946 to develop science and technology for "knowledge, commerce, prosperity, and peace". Translation? "Winning the Cold War for America."

                SRI International has been doing NLP for decades. Some of its earlier work helped CIA analysts trawl through thousands of Soviet engineering documents by rewriting them into helpful summaries — just as Summly now does for news stories. More recently, it created a personal assistant that could respond to natural-language requests and called — well, how would you abbreviate "SRI International"?

                Now look at Summly's about page, and notice the solid mix of experienced internet executives and celebrity-name advisers like Ashton Kutcher and Yoko Ono. Note, too, that there are other investors, so, despite the media impression, d'Aloisio didn't just pocket $30 million.
                http://www.zdnet.com/summly-sale-sto...hs-7000013222/

                Yahoo! was really after the parent company -- the one that holds the IP to the Stanford-developed technology.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: The Logic (or Lack of It) in Appraising Start-Ups

                  Originally posted by Munger View Post
                  Not quite. Summly is a simple frontend that connects to an API powered by technologies developed at Stanford:

                  ...Yahoo! was really after the parent company -- the one that holds the IP to the Stanford-developed technology.
                  Thanks, I didn't realize that the backend was separately owned IP.

                  My larger point still stands, those that understand the science behind the network and can convey that understanding are the ones who will garner the acquisition attention and big valuations.
                  Last edited by reggie; April 14, 2013, 02:12 PM.
                  The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge ~D Boorstin

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X