Posts Tagged Recession

Why Sprint’s iPhone 5 gamble is not that crazy

Posted by on Tuesday, 4 October, 2011

The word on the street is that Sprint is betting the farm on an exclusive for the iPhone 5. It will commit almost billion to Apple for 30.5 million iPhones and it won’t even start to make money till 2014. Crazy? Yes and no!

Apple has to love this deal–it basically ensures a nice revenue stream for them, even if the world goes into recession and demand for mobile phones stalls. Second, it takes away some of the Android momentum at one carrier where Android has done well. (I know T-Mobile wants an iPhone too, and too bad they are not getting it.) Now for Sprint, I agree there are risks, but they are calculated risks. The exclusivity of iPhone 5 to Sprint is what reduces the risk around this arrangement.

For starters, globally, the average revenue per user for iPhone is about 1.5 to 2 times the average ARPU for all other phones. The numbers are better in the U.S. On an average, in the U.S., average revenue per user for iPhone is about a month, according to Chetan Sharma, principal at Chetan Sharma Consulting. That works out to about ,080 a year.

Now if  Sprint manages to match Verizon’s performance (it added 2.2 million iPhones during the first two months of the launch of the iPhone 4) during the first six months and another million iPhone users in the next six months, it can attract about 3 million iPhone customers to its roster. I am presuming these will be new customers who would switch to Sprint because of the “exclusive” availability of the device on the Sprint network, or they are fed up with AT&T or Verizon.

That works out to about .2 billion in revenues. And given that analysts estimate Sprint to clock in revenues of around billion in 2012, what we are talking about a nice 10 percent bump in revenues for the company. The presence of the new iPhone would also reduce the churn on Sprint’s network and thus would provide the much-needed stability to their revenue stream.

So as I said –crazy yes, but not completely loco!

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

  • Mobile payments: forecasts, technologies and opportunities
  • U.S. Wireless Data Market: Q4 and Year-End 2008
  • Mobile Q1: All Eyes on Tablets, T-Mobile and AT&T



alt=''
border='0'
/>


GigaOM


Ray Lane: Kleiner is not moving away from greentech

Posted by on Wednesday, 27 July, 2011

Kleiner Perkins Partner Ray Lane will be driving the 5 miles home from work tonight in a brand new, shiny, silver 0,000 electric Fisker Karma. Lane showed off the second production Karma (rumor has it #1 when to Leonardo DiCaprio) at an event outside of Kleiner’s offices on Tuesday. But the Karma is not just a personal luxury item for Lane.

Fisker represents one of between six to eight greentech companies that Kleiner thinks will deliver big returns for the firm (out of its 70 or so greentech portfolio companies), and potentially make back a good portion of the hundreds of millions of dollars it’s invested into greentech over the last several years. Lane thinks over the next two years some of Kleiner’s half a dozen top bets will start to bear fruit via IPOs.

While there’s been a perception that Kleiner has been moving away from greentech investing, Lane told me in an interview after the Karma event that Kleiner is not pulling back from greentech investing. We’ve committed a third of our 12th, 13th and 14th funds to greentech, we have 14 active greentech investors, and I just did two more deals this morning, said Lane.

Here’s our lightly edited interview with Lane, who discussed, among other issues, why investing in greentech isn’t like investing in the Internet, what happened to Kleiner’s Think electric car deal, and why he’s more excited about greentech than software.

Q). Have the returns been what you thought they were going to be for greentech? Did you think when you started that it would take a long time?

A). I didn’t expect them to be any different, other than that there was a recession. When we first started investing in green heavily in the ’05 and ’06 timeframe, we went to our limited partners and we said greentech is going to have longer returns than digital. Every limited partner signs onto a 10-year contract with us and 10 years is about what they expect. They are not in a hurry, by the way.

In the VC industry, we’ve gotten used to investing in software companies, which is a lot easier development process. You get a couple of programmers, you get a product out in the first six months, and for the Internet you get customers really fast. And in a year you have a company. Google was 4.5 years. So in digital, they are used to thinking 4 to 5 years.

But when we got into greentech, we said we think it will be longer than digital, it will be more capital-intensive than digital, there will be more government policy involved, and also the fact that we’re trying to replace an existing infrastructure like coal, gas, and oil. And you have to scale it first. For the internet, like Google, Facebook, Twitter, they start small and they just keep going. But you can’t do that with a gas plant, or a car plant. The first car that comes out – my new car for example – can’t kill anybody. Facebook doesn’t risk killing anyone when it first comes out. You can’t build a car company in 3 to 4 years, it’s impossible.

Then you stick a recession in the middle of it. I don’t want to blame the recession, but it did slow everything down. Capital raising was tough. People just went to sleep and left the market. There is no question.

Our expectations were always in the 6 to 7 year time frame. That time frame would really feel good to us. We’re about to get there with some of the early companies, with the ’05 investments. We expect returns, IPOs and liquidity events over the next two years. And we’re seeing them.

Q). When you look at Zynga, and they can make back the green fund in an IPO. How does that feel?

A). Sure. So can Fisker. Fisker has the potential to be the same value as Zynga.

Q). In theory you’d think it would be the car company that would be valued higher, right?

A). Not really. Software companies have been worth more than car companies for a long time. GM was worth billion, now it’s at billion. Google at 0 billion, and Oracle 0 billion. So it’s not unusual.

The reason is, the business model of the Internet and software is unique. There are no other industries like it. You can’t apply the rules of it to greentech. It’s a totally different world. Most software companies have 90 percent margins, and after you include development, and services, maybe 50 percent to 60 percent margins. You’re never going to get that with a car company. I’d be thrilled with 20 prcent gross margins for a car company.

Q). Does that make you lean more towards green software, or green IT plays, like an OPower?

A). Not exactly lean, but yes, what we want to do as many of those as we can. But there’s not enough of them. It doesn’t make a portfolio. We’ll continue to aggressively invest in the area, but there are just not enough software companies out there.

Q). What are areas that will continue to be attractive in the greentech space for Kleiner?

A). So, we started out with biofuels, solar, wind, those are some earluy ones. We did then a lot in conversion tech, coal to gas, and thermal electrics, heat to energy, waste heat to energy. Now we’re doing a lot of storage, electron storage batteries. Weve done a lot in water. Two years ago we hadn’t done anything in water and now we’ve done 3 investments in clean water. We’re starting to do a bunch in agriculture. Everything from changing the productivity of seeds to making fuels and producing sugars.

Q). What big returns are you banking on?

A). I’m not going to comment on who files and who goes public. But I think you’ll see 6 to 8 IPOs out of our cleantech portfolio. In terms of big opportunities for companies, though not forecasting IPOs, I think there are big opportunities with Bloom Energy, Miasole, Silver Spring Networks, Enphase Energy, Macoma, Fisker, and GreatPoint Energy. These companies I think will be huge. They’ll probably all IPO but I’m not forecastin when, but these companies will be huge.

I think I’d be close if out of the 70 greentech companies we’ve invested in, 20 of them will make no difference – as in we tried and it was fun, but it didn’t work and its not going to be a big company. Maybe 15 to 20. Then I think there’s another 15 or 20 that are IPOs, big outcomes, return the fund kind of thing. Then everthing else is kindof like, we don’t know — they’re too early, or we’re still removing technical risk. That’s the profile of venture capitalists. We take so much risk so early that we never expect all of our companies to make it. The Kleiner model is that 1 or 2 will return the fund.

Q). So it’s going as you expected?

A). So far, its as expected. But again with a big headache around the recession. I would have expected some early, not on time, but early IPOs. I think without a recession, we could have seen a few of these companies IPO last year.

Q). Do you feel like the greentech investing space as a whole has learned lessons. A lot of the generalist VCs that moved into greentech investing and haven’t been as aggressive as Kleiner have moved out.

A). We had all of the challenges for greentech on the first piece of paper for our limited partners: government policy, capital intensive, regulation, that it’s tough to invent a new business. The only one we didn’t put down was a recession. Actually a recession would have been fine, this was a depression. Kleiner went out and raised extra funds just as an insurance policy, but we never used a dime of that.

GreatPoint Energy is a good example. They were on a capital intensive plan to build plants in the U.S. The combo of a recession and shale gas finds in the U.S. meant that GreatPoint was looking at a very tough time building their plant in the U.S. So we sent them China to start developing partnerships there. So that is where they are going to build their plant: in China. Where they pay three times what we pay for natural gas.

If you and I sit down two years from now and we don’t have a single IPO from this group, I’d say now we are behind. But we do expect IPOs out of a bunch of companies.

There have been other funds that followed us and Khosla in and the recession took them out of it. I also think they are feeling the overall crunch of venture capital. We have always said that the VC industry is too large. It’s got too much capacity. There are 900 VC firms in US, there needs to be 300. You’re seeing this macro trend of LP passing on new funds.

Q). So for Kleiner maybe there’s more opportunities now that there are less general investors in cleantech.

A). That’s exactly it. I like it. We don’t like to have VCs that copy ideas or be me-too. Valuations go up. There’s more competition. You have to have a thesis when you are investing in greentech. When I did Fisker and another car company, my partners thought I was out of my mind. But I had a thesis. We can invest in a car company and either have a way to get the valuation high enough so you don’t get crushed on dilution or get low cost loans that are high leverage for equity investors. Or buy cheap assets, which I did not know going in. I did not know we could go to GM Disposal corp and buy a plant for M, that as a big deal for us and Tesla at the NUMMI plant.

Q). What happened with Think?

A). I should probably explain this to the market. think did not turn out well. I did not invest in Think and I passed on it several times. And I got a call from Rockport and they had come up with an idea to invest a little bit of money, million — .5 million each — to buy the North American rights to Think if they ever come here. So right from the beginning I did not see it as an American car. I saw it as a European city car, and to this day, I think Europeans will pay ,000 for a little car to be able to park it in small spaces and scoot around the cities in it. They sold 3,000 of those – no one has sold that many EVs.

So I thought our investment was pretty cool, and we owned some of the rights for .5 million dollars if they brought it here to the U.S. Then when they were starting to restructure Think Inc, they wanted to buy the American rights back, and I said OK, for .5 million. But we ended up getting 1.5% of Think for selling that back. So I thought that was a pretty smart investment.

Q). Anything else I should know about Kleiner’s greentech future?

A). I was one of the first ones to say: this [greentech] is what I want to do. I just did two digital investments because I knew KP wouldn’t do them without me getting involve. But I’m not out there looking for digital investments. I don’t want to do them. I have no interest, I don’t go to the meetings, and I don’t follow all of those social stuff. I volunteered to lead this greentech practice. This is my day job and I like doing it.

Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.

  • A 2011 Green IT Forecast
  • Green IT Q1: Cleantech Breaking Out — and Bracing for Hard Times
  • Green IT’s Q4 Winners: Wind Power, Solar Power, Smart Energy



alt=''
border='0'
/>


GigaOM — Tech News, Analysis and Trends


A Silver Lining to the Recession: Increased Telecommuting

Posted by on Friday, 3 June, 2011

The recession flooded the job market with overqualified applicants and caused employers to count their pennies and squeeze every last drop of productivity from their employees. But how exactly did it affect the remote work space? Were employers spoiled for choice and reluctant to allow flexibility and mobility? Did lean economic times increase or decrease the number of workers looking for remote gigs?

Sara Sutton Fell, the founder and CEO of flexible and telecommuting job board FlexJobs.com, is in an ideal position to know. As the economy tanked and now waveringly rights itself, she has observed the quantity, type and behavior of both employers and job hunters on her site, sussing out the effects of the economic downturn on telecommuting. She spoke to WebWorkerDaily about her observations:

When I originally started the company a little over four years ago it was pre-recession. And that was a very different market. At the time my target audience was work-from-home moms, tapping into the idea that at least in the U.S. and probably in many other countries they’re one of the most under-employed audiences. Mainly because they’re highly educated women who have left the workforce because they can’t find something that offers them the flexibility, reduced schedule or alternative schedule that accommodates their commitment to their families. So that was definitely what I anticipated to be a large majority of our audience.

With the recession it’s very much evolved to be across the board. We’re maybe about 60/40, female to male. It’s everything from entry-level to executive level. I think the recession has raised awareness among people who were skeptical or previously wouldn’t have considered flexibility or telecommuting either in their hiring practices or their job-seeking practices. From the job seeker perspective, they’ve had to look out of the box because they haven’t been able to find the traditional, normal, full-time job that they would have looked for. The awareness has been forced by the recession, but has gained momentum both from the benefits telecommuting offers, but also from other trends that have been feeding into it for some time — technology supporting mobility, the environmental issues, things like emergency preparedness, bad weather. I could go on and on.

But it’s not just job seekers who have been forced to reevaluate telecommuting due to the dismal economic conditions. Employers have taken a fresh look at web work as well, says Sutton Fell.

It’s not how I would have wished it to happen, but I do think the recession has opened employers’ eyes to the fact that these opportunities are not just fuzzy, soft benefits for employees, but they actually offer quite a wide variety of benefits for them as well, including economic benefits, which is ultimately what it’s about.

IT and tech are the traditional sectors that utilize telecommuting, but during the recession organizations in a wide variety of sectors increasingly looked to web workers, according to FlexJobs data.

In telecommuting particularly we had an over 400 percent increase of jobs our researchers would find in the last three years alone. Our categories that have grown the most are medical and health. Sales has definitely been big. Education is a really big one with all the online education opportunities. Non-profit and philanthropy is an area that has been embracing the benefits, especially the reduced overhead benefit, and also the philosophical ones, especially with environmental organizations. IT and web and software development have always been big, but business development, account management, marketing, all of those areas have grown quite a lot in the last few years.

I think employers in all industries have been looking for ways to save money, and they’re exploring either reduced or alternative schedules or some level where they don’t having to hire a traditional, on site full-time employee.

Will a boost in awareness of the benefits of telecommuting among both employers and job seekers be the silver lining to the grim economy of the past few years?

Image courtesy Flickr user mnsc

Related content from GigaOM Pro (subscription req’d):

  • The Future of Work Platforms: An Overview
  • The Future of Workplaces
  • The Case for Increased M&A in 2011: Actions and Outlooks



alt=''
border='0'
/>


GigaOM — Tech News, Analysis and Trends


An iPhone App for the Post-Rapture Economy [Video]

Posted by on Saturday, 21 May, 2011
The post-apocalypse recession is bound to be a doozy. If you don’t have the stomach for looting (why aren’t you in heaven, pussy?), or don’t have a gold stockpile, you’ll probably have to barter for basic survival needs. More »








Gizmodo


What Tips You Need To Know When Hiring A Rental Van

Posted by on Friday, 13 May, 2011

Many folks recruit vans for a number of differentreasons, and although it may be a necessity you will want to cut the costs as much as possible. With the rising fuel expenses and the international recession individuals are finding everyday expenses to be too much. If you discover that you do need to hire a van of any size you will need to make sure that it is as cost efficient as possible. If you have an mishap whilst in the hire van it can be very expensive so driving very carefully is essential.

Driving a van rental with self confidence is essential, and can save you cash whilst hiring it. Not only will the fuel expenses be lower due to careful driving, but also the chance of damage is far slimmer. You have to keep in mind that the van or truck that you are driving is far longer, higher, and wider compared to what you will be used to. You should always allow yourself far more room than necessary, and understand the restrictions of a van. There will be spaces that you simply cannot fit into, and these will need to be avoided.

When you initially get into the van you should take some time to find out where everything is such as the lights if driving at night. Although a majority of the controls and functions will be the same as your car, there will be other elements that are vastly different. You should listen to any safety assistance that the van hire company provide you. You should also modify your mirrors, seats, and steering wheel to make sure that you are in the very best position to drive safely.

You should plan your route well, and make sure that the roads you aim to drive down can fit a van. You will also need to consider the weather, and driving conditions. Although there may be may be serveral things to consider before you set off taking the time can save you time, and cash on your journey. Planning the route will also guarantee that you have planned the most cost effective route to travel ensuring that you use the least amount of fuel.

Hiring a van can be a great way to move objects without the need of empploying people, and vehicles. If you can drive the van on your own this will save you money, and understanding how to drive it appropriately will avoid accidents. In Dublin Ireland there is a vast range of van rental dublin agencies to choose from, with amazing special offers available on a wide range of vans and trucks.


As the Recession Wears On, Used Automobile Costs Rise Sky High

Posted by on Friday, 11 February, 2011

As 2011 begins, pre-owned car costs are shooting higher. Edmunds, the vehicle research institution, just found that pre-owned car costs are up two percent from last month and as much as 6 percent higher than one year ago on some models. As the financial decline wears on, pre-owned car costs are hitting sky-high records. Pre-owned car costs are up, here is how to play it. Car-lot recessions make the price of previously owned cars go higher. Strapped customers shy away.

Rates on used cars are expected to remain strong this year for two time-tested reasons: high supply and low demand. Pre-owned car costs are at a record high, and you can blame supply and demand. Pre-owned car costs are less costly when dealers have too many on their lots. Dealers are specialists at knowing local vehicle-purchasing customers, what they want, and when they do not have the stock, costs rise.

Costs of used cars are at a record high right now and, in some instances, are 30 percent higher than one year ago. Many customers are purchasing used cars because they are penniless, and it is not helping the way that they hope it will.

Some folks assert that the only reason pre-owned car costs are up is due to a falsely exaggerated market. Dealers make more on previously owned cars than they do brand-new ones, so they push previously owned cars. With previously owned cars so hot today, the result is that industry demand means pre-owned car costs are climbing.

Pre-owned car costs aren’t absolute values, but vary greatly depending on make and model, options, mileage, condition, position, and vehicle history.

Finding out what people are truly paying is more significant than ever now that used-vehicle prices are rising. Dealers might be tempted to trick you. Pre-owned car costs are based upon a number of things, so it pays to know which criteria are used and how. Usually the age and mileage come first. However, finding out true pre-owned car costs is rough, because they are elusive. Unlike brand-new cars, where suppliers set the price before negotiation, used-vehicle prices are all over the place.

Some folks aren’t so sure they make the connection that these inflated pre-owned car costs are going to drive brand-new vehicle sales. They say that just like the fact that pre-owned car costs aren’t set in stone goes the fact that most pre-owned car costs are overpriced.