Verizon, Vodafone Reach Agreement In $130 Billion Verizon Wireless Deal

VERIZON-WIRELESS-LOGO

Verizon and Vodafone have reached an agreement on a $130 billion deal that gives Verizon total control of Verizon Wireless, the Wall Street Journal is reporting. Verizon has taken Vodafone’s 45% stake in Verizon Wireless, which was founded as a joint venture between the two companies in 2000.

Verizon and Vodafone’s boards were set to vote on the deal this weekend, which Reuters reported is the third largest corporate acquisition ever and one that removes Vodafone from the US market. The terms of the deal are now waiting on board approval and could be announced as early as Monday afternoon, WSJ reported.

News of this deal goes back to April, when it was reported that Verizon was preparing a $100 billion cash and stock bid. The company, which is the biggest cell phone carrier in the US, already had operational control of Verizon Wireless.

On Saturday, Reuters reported that Verizon planned to pay for the purchase with its own stock and a mixture of bonds and bank loans raised with the help of JPMorgan Chase & Co, Morgan Stanley, Barclays Plc, and Bank of American Merrill Lynch. As to Vodafone, top investors were split on wanting to return the cash and dividends and wanting to invest it.

A potential sale of its Verizon Wireless stake has been on the table for Vodafone since 2004, when the company was considering an exit from the US market leader in order to buy AT&T wireless. Cingular ultimately outbid Vodafone and bought AT&T wireless for $41 billion.

GigaOM’s Om Malik pointed out that Vodafone could make use of that money as it builds its European broadband business. The company acquired Kabel Deutschland for $10.1 billion in May and Cable & Wireless Worldwide for $1.7 billion in April 2012. In early July, Vodafone signed an agreement with Telefonica that gave it access to the Spanish company’s broadband fiber optic network.

Upon its exit from the US, Vodafone maintains a strong presence in Europe, its largest market, Africa, Turkey, and India, among others.

Five Forces Fueling Frontback’s Fame

FrontBack

Editor’s Note: Semil Shah is a contributor to TechCrunch. You can follow him on Twitter at @semil.

Not another photo-sharing app!” is an oft-heard or tweeted phrase. After Instagram combined the power of a networked camera, nostalgic filters, and snappy sharing to various networks to create a mobile phenomenon before selling to Facebook, and after SnapChat created a new behavior with more private photosharing that never touched the web (or Facebook), a new iPhone photosharing app is taking over my Twitter feed and, I believe, it’s just a matter of time before it takes over yours, too.

By now you may have heard of Frontback, the app that combines one shot from the regular iPhone camera with one shot from the front-facing camera to create one image showing what you’re seeing on top with a self-portrait of you at the bottom. It appears Frontback is a project born from Checkthis, a NYC-based company that hasn’t raised much funding. Frontback sounds simple enough, and yet that may be all that’s needed to quickly grow. A few months ago, TechCrunch’s Romain Dillet wrote a piece about the app, and since then, investors from Lerer Ventures began using the app a lot (how I noticed it), and then MG Siegler posted about it on his blog (he’s usually right on the money for new photo apps), and then…I was hooked.

The front-facing camera hasn’t been leveraged by most photo apps. Yes, there’s SnapChat, but it took a bit longer for the quality of the front-facing camera on the iPhone to be close to the regular (back) camera. In this video discussion I recorded with K9 Ventures’ Manu Kumar, an expert in computer vision and a prolific investor in such startups, he discusses how it’s usually changes in mobile hardware that opens the doors for software developers to build new experiences. (For instance, future mobile phones may include depth-sensing cameras to record and recognize gestures.)

Before Frontback, Daily Booth tried to leverage the front-facing camera, but it was too early. Back in 2010, MG wrote a great piece on TechCrunch about a talk given by Brian Pokorny, who back then built Daily Booth (which also used the front-facing camera). In the talk, Pokorny talks about how most mobile photosharing apps use the regular camera and focus on “objects,” but the front-facing camera focuses on the cameraman and camerawoman, thereby creating an image which can be immediately engaging for an audience.

Frontback’s in-the-moment images are unblemished by filters and create a more intimate, real-time media feel. When I see Frontbacks appear in my Twitter feed or when I’m surfing through the app, the photos shared on the network oftentimes make me feel as if I’m there with the folks I know. Instagram users shared all sorts of images on the network, images taken in the moment, but also images that were saved to the camera roll earlier, images that were lifted from the web or other apps, or even mobile web or phone screenshots. One result of this ability to share any image is that Instagrams often don’t feel intimate or real-time, whereas Frontbacks mostly do.

“Selfies” have gone mainstream after SnapChat and people love seeing and sharing themselves on camera. Not to be taken the wrong way, though I’m sure Frontback will have its own Chatroulette moment, the up-and-coming generations not only communicate mostly through images and pictures, they want to be in the shots they’re taking as well. One of my favorite creative and commercial applications of this was the brilliant Snoopify app by Snoop Lion, which is a clever app to jazz up your pictures with Snoop stickers, some of which now sell for $99!

Word-of-mouth virality happens when people use it with friends and show their friends the app, right there, live and in person. This is the “soft” part of what makes the app special. I can’t prove it with data, but can only say that when I’m with friends or my family and take a Frontback, I immediately show it to them and they all light up. Just today, a friend who just bought his first iPhone ever and doesn’t really use apps remarked to me, upon seeing an image I created: “that’s clever.”

It is indeed clever, and I suspect many users feel the same way. Now as summer ends, and people come back from vacation, or settle into campus, an app like Frontback is positioned to grow quite fast if the stars align (and if it can release an Android version quickly before it’s copied). And for those who bemoan photo apps, I’ll share a quote from Elon Musk earlier this year at D11: “I actually am not dismissive of things like photosharing apps. There’s a lot of things that provide a small amount of value to a lot of people…Sharing with friends and family is great; if that puts a high value on a company, so be it.”

Cybersecurity, NSA Spying, And Silicon Valley To Take Center Stage At Disrupt SF

7977061934_ae3741c929_z

Strap on a tin foil hat and dust off your VHS tape of Hackers because a thrilling, civilized discussion of contemporary cybersecurity is coming to TechCrunch Disrupt SF. I’ll be joined onstage by some of the leading security experts to discuss cyber threats from hostile foreign governments, rogue hacker groups, corporate espionage, and complications of the surveillance state.

Heather Adkins was head of cybersecurity at Google at just 25 years old and is now a veteran in securing one of the most sought-after Internet companies in the world.

Kevin Mandia, CEO of Mandiant, made front-page headlines around the world after unmasking China’s infamous cyber army. Within the industry, it’s known that if you have to call Mandia, you have serious problems from the toughest cyber criminals on the net.

Ted Schlein of Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers knows as much about the business of cyber security –both defense and offense — as anyone in Silicon Valley. Governments have big money to throw at cyber defense and it’s Schlein’s job to identify the most profitable private partners.

When the National Security Agency made headlines this summer, media outlets turned to arguably the most knowledgeable journalist on the secret spy organization, James Bamford.

Now, imagine all the contentious ethical quandaries and business pressures that come from cybersecurity. We’ll be discussing all of these, sometimes with fierce disagreement, with people who have staked their reputations on being right. This panel kicks off at 11:30 on Tuesday, September 10.

General-admission tickets and exhibitor packages are currently available. Buy tickets here.

Our sponsors help make Disrupt happen. If you are interested in learning more about sponsorship opportunities, please contact our sponsorship team here [email protected].

Watch Smartwatch Space For Continued Consolidation As Samsung Gears Up To Kick Off The Race

pebble-shots

Last week, geek-focused early smartwatch player WIMM Labs was revealed to have been acquired by Google, lending strong support to earlier speculation that the search giant would enter the watch-based computing fray with a wearable-device follow-up to its ambitious Google Glass project. Consider it the opening bell as the race begins to own consumer wrists, and expect more targets of opportunity to get cleared off the board this coming Wednesday once Samsung gets the ball rolling with what will likely be the first smartwatch entry from a major player.

Samsung’s Galaxy Gear appears to be a decent enough lead-off batter for the smartwatch line-up; rumors suggest it’ll have a decent internal processor (1.5GHz dual-core), 1GB of RAM, a 4 -megapixel camera with 720p video capture, a 2.5-inch OLED display and 10 hours of battery life. @evleaks has offered up screenshots that purportedly show the Android phone for controlling the Gear and its settings, and it looks like a lot of what we’ll see in the Gear in terms of functionality will resemble what we’ve already seen from devices like the Pebble.

There’s a decent amount of consumer interest in devices like Pebble, which had sold 275,000 devices to date as of July through pre-orders and Kickstarter, and the Hyetis Crossbow, an absurdly expensive smartwatch from a Swiss watchmaker that has already managed to rack up 300 sales – which sounds weak until you realize that each of those 300 people are paying $1,200 for their Crossbow. But none of these devices from smaller startups is doing anywhere near the kind of numbers that an Apple or a Samsung would require to make a product sustainable.

Others like MetaWatch haven’t revealed just how well they’ve been doing yet, but the Fossil spin-out did have a successful Kickstarter run for its Strata smartwatch. MetaWatch and Pebble (whose creators have been building smartwatch devices since the inPulse) in particular look like choice acquisition targets as OEMs like Samsung and Apple look to bolster their smartwatch expertise ahead of a device launch.

Some big companies. like Sony, have a head start in terms of in-house experience. It built a Bluetooth watch back in 2008, and followed that with the Sony Smartwatch, which is getting a sequel soon. But others including LG and the countless additional OEMs probably investigating this space following all the hype that’s been generated have good reason to be on the lookout for an easy talent acquisition.

Hardware startups are difficult in terms of making something sustainable and making something that can scale with demand while keeping costs low for end users. It’s a challenge that convinced MakerBot it was better to partner up with a larger, more experienced company through acquisition, and it could eventually do the same for Pebble and its ilk. The only problem now might be whether it’s too late to join up with anyone who’s looking to build such a device, or whether the bulk of the talent/expertise land grab has already taken place.

After Raising $10M, Customer-Funded Naked Wines Launches Investment Bond

rowan-gormley

Only this August, wine retailer NakedWines, the customer-funded online wine retailer, announced it had raised $10 million in a third round of investment from a German group of direct wine-selling companies and founder shareholders. The money will be used to expand in the U.S. and Australia from its UK base. Now it’s launching of a new bond for retail investors, The Naked Fine Wine Bond. There have been a few corporate bonds of this type (hotel chocolate, John Lewis and the Jockey club) but not a wine bond so far.

The company intends to raise £3 million through the bond. The minimum subscription level will be £1 million and the maximum £5 million. The funds will be invested in independent winemakers over a minimum of three years. Naked Wines says this will allow for the financing of new wines in the next stage of the development and, and of course, grow the Naked Wines Group.

Based in Norwich, England, NakedWines.com’s business model allows customers to sponsor independent winemakers in return for about 25% to 50% off a wine’s retail price and exclusive promotions. The site currently has 150,000 Angels (customers who fund winemakers) who have invested over $40 million in 130 winemakers around the world and ships over 10 million bottles of wine each year.

Customers subscribe £20 a month to its service to provide the funds to invest in winemakers, in return for lower prices. Earlier this year it announced an annual operating profit of over £1 million following a 57% rise in sales to £34.9 million.

Rowan Gormley, Naked Wines’ Founder and and CEO says fine wines “require more time to mature, meaning we also need a longer-term source of funding in order to give the winemakers the financial assistance they need. Doing it this way means the winemakers can focus on what we want them to do – make great wines – rather than spend their time and money selling. Meanwhile investors in the Fine Wine Bond will benefit from an attractive rate of interest along with the opportunity to acquire a premium product competitively priced.”

Shutterfly Has Acquired Photo Printing Company R And R Images

photostory-app

Shutterfly has acquired R and R Images. Terms of the deal were not disclosed.

R and R Images, a private company that was founded in 1986, specializes in digital printing and photo products. Shutterfly focuses on photo books, stationary, wedding invitations, and other personal goods.

Shutterfly said the acquisition will “enhance the company’s enterprise and consumer product innovation, design and printing capabilities.”

Shutterfly CEO Jeffrey Housenbold also noted:

“As Shutterfly continues to grow, we are making additional strategic investments in our manufacturing footprint focused on providing our customers with innovative, high quality personalized products while efficiently scaling and managing our costs. We are excited to combine R&R Images’ product innovation and expertise in premium, flexible printing with Shutterfly’s manufacturing scale and infrastructure to enhance our capabilities and continue delighting our enterprise clients and consumers.”

The company announced that it gave an inducement grant to R and R Images’ founder Rod Key. The grant consists of up to 38,492 shares of Shutterfly stock vested over three years as long as Key stays with Shutterfly. At the time of publication, Shutterfly’s stock was at $51.96 per share, making the total shares worth about $2 million.

Earlier this year, Shutterfly acquired cloud-based photo and video storage platform ThisLife. We heard Shutterfly shelled out around $25 million for ThisLife, although he company did not disclose details of that acquisition either.

Stealth Startup Fantex Wants To Make It Possible For Celebrities To IPO

photo (9)

If corporations can be people, why can’t people be corporations? A stealth startup called Fantex aims to allow celebrities and professional athletes to file for initial public offerings (IPOs).

The quoted text and screenshots in this article are from the Fantex app the company had launched in the iTunes app store on August 27, in what was an apparent beta test. Fantex removed the app yesterday after the company declined to comment for this story.

Fantex describes itself as “the world’s first marketplace that lets consumers invest real money in stocks linked to the value and performance of the brands of the world’s top athletes.”

And here’s the kicker: Fantex says “all tracking stocks are offered pursuant to a registration statement that has been filed with the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC).” A SEC filing from July shows the company was delivered a notice of effectiveness,  which is typically done when the company has filed to register for sales to the public (as Fantex is doing), but the documents that the SEC deemed effective for sale are not publicly available.

Fantex offers a disclaimer on the app that hints a bit at how the business on their end works:

“Each Fantex Inc. tracking stock is intended to track and reflect the separate economic performance of a specific brand contract that Fantex has signed with an athlete. However, holders of shares of a Fantex Inc. tracking stock will have no direct investment in that brand contract, associated brand or athlete. Rather, an investment in a tracking stock will represent an ownership interest in Fantex, Inc., as a whole. These tracking stocks are offered only through Fantex Brokerage Services (FBS). FBS cannot assure you as to the development or liquidity of any trading market for these stocks.”

This means there are two separate markets within Fantex. Fantex strikes deals with professional athletes who give up a certain percentage of their income (presumably over an allotted period of time, like the length of their active career) in exchange for the proceeds of the IPO.

Some screenshots of the app. Take numbers in these images, and the ones below, with a grain of salt, as some of them appeared to be placeholders (e.g. another player’s gross IPO Proceeds were penciled in for over $18 billion).

People can then buy shares of that player’s brand, like a stock, in the Fantex-consumer market. Presumably, if San Francisco 49ers tight end Vernon Davis has a monster year and looks like he’s going to get a bigger endorsement deal or a larger contract in a few years, his stock would rise and a fan could sell their Davis stock and cash out with a real, monetary profit. People would own tracking or targeted stocks in Fantex that would depend on the specific brand that they choose; these stocks would then rise and fall based on their own performance, not on the overall performance of Fantex.

At the time of publication there were nine athletes, all NFL players, available for Fantex IPOs in the now-removed app, including high profile stars Arian Foster and Vernon Davis.

Dave Butz, the agent for New Orleans Saints wide receiver Lance Moore, said he wasn’t sure if his client was working with Fantex. Representatives for the other eight players did not respond to multiple requests for comment before publication, so we’re not positive if these athletes have signed on with Fantex or if they are merely placeholders in the app. However, they would be incredibly random choices for placeholder players, as some are superstars, some are solid but unnoticeable players, and others are fighting for NFL roster spots (one is a free agent longsnapper). If they were merely placeholders, I’d assume the company would fill the app with more high profile, noticeable players.

While the app only features professional athletes right now,  we’re told the company has aspirations to expand from athletes to celebrities.

Player profiles show the performance of the brand’s stock on Fantex, as well as real world information about the player’s performance on the field, financial details, and news about them.

David Bierne, Buck French, and David Mullin founded the company. Bierne was a general partner at Benchmark Capital. French founded and served as CEO of OnLink, which sold to Siebel systems in 2000 for $609M. Mullin has been the CFO for a number of startups

The rest of the team has similarly impressive resumes, including a former CTO/COO of E*Trade, a former head of product management at Yahoo Finance, and a number of ex-Wall Street guys.

Put simply, this isn’t the pipe dream of a couple of 20-somethings who were watching the VMAs and thought, “man, wouldn’t it be cool if Miley Cyrus was a stock?”

Fantex’s board and advisors includes Hall of Fame quarterback John Elway, former NBA sharpshooter (and Villanova MBA) Kerry Kittles, and Benchmark general partner Bruce Dunlevie, among others.

The startup has raised $13 million in equity funding, according to an SEC filing from February of this year. Unsurprisingly, sources say Benchmark was in on the round.

It looks like the app was put in the iTunes store as part of a semi-public beta the company is (was?) doing. While the company’s main website domain (Fantex.com) still points to a vague site that hints at a big project on the horizon and shows off the Fantex team, links in the app directed to beta.Fantex.com.

Besides being a fun place to short Amanda Bynes’ stock, Fantex will undoubtedly arouse a wide range of reactions to and questions about its implications for society.

For most athletes, joining Fantex probably isn’t a great idea. These are individuals who are already notoriously bad with their money, and they have very unique wealth management situations in which they earn massive sums of money over a very short career. Part of the reason many athletes have money problems is that they become accustomed to a lifestyle while they are earning millions per year that is unsustainable over their lifetimes. Giving up a percentage of their future earnings to get more cash even earlier is the opposite of what they should be doing.

For the buyers and sellers of the market, it may feel uncomfortable directly evaluating other humans as financial stocks. To be fair, this betting on people isn’t particularly new. Everything from the stock market to venture capital investing to sports betting relies heavily on individuals (whether they’re CEOs, founders, or quarterbacks) who have a disproportionate impact on organizations. We’ve even covered a startup, Upstart, that lets people raise capital in exchange for a share of their future income–very similar to Fantex. But the celebrities in Fantex’ app are fairly high profile – they’re stars who we already over-fetishize.

Soon, we won’t just be stalking athletes and celebrities out of our personal interests. We’ll be keeping a close eye on our business investments.

Because Walking Saves Lives, Mobilizer Inc. Is A Startup That’s Aiming To Get Hospital Patients Moving

2b - The Solution - Mobilizer Freedom

For sedentary medical patients, one of the easiest ways to reduce the time of hospital stays and decrease the risk of complications like blood clots and pressure ulcers is simply to get up and walk around. But with medical equipment like oxygen tanks or IV drips in tow, it can take nurses up to 20 minutes to prepare a patient for ambulation, adding up to hundreds of hours of wasted time each week. This means that when patients are finally up and moving, some are only walked as far as their door before being sat back down.

Mobilizer Inc., a graduate of the ZeroTo510 medical device startup accelerator, created a six-wheeled holster for all of that medical equipment in order to make medical ambulation easier and faster. The carrier sits next to the patient’s bed so that only one attendant — rather than up to five — is needed to unplug it from the wall, release the brake, and get them moving.

Mobilizer, which launched in May, has raised $300,000 in funding from Innova Memphis and MB Venture Partners and plans to close another $400,000 in the coming year. CEO and co-founder James Bell said that so far Mass General Hospital and the Vanderbilt University Medical Center have purchased units, which cost a little under $5,000 apiece.

According to Bell’s projections, Mobilizer will be net cash flow positive by year’s end. The company has sold almost 100 units to date.

The proliferation of medical startups like Mobilizer offers an invaluable payoff: the possibility of finding ways to reduce the economic and personnel burdens on the hospital system. Medical tricorders like the Scanadu SCOUT and Teddy the Guardian, for instance, show potential to do so by putting diagnostic tools in consumers’ hands and therefore reducing the number of unnecessary visits to the doctor.

In the case of Mobilizer, getting patients’ blood flowing means turning over beds faster by speeding recovery rates, avoiding the cost of complications, and boosting staff efficiency.

Although medical tech companies often struggle to get FDA approval before they go to market, Mobilizer is a class 1 exempt service, meaning the clearance process requires proving a certain level of quality and paying a fee to register with the FDA.

Bell said that the plan is to create platforms for different hospital departments, tailoring the Mobilizers to their varying equipment needs. Outside of the hospital, it will be easy to scale into home care as well. And Mobilizer is looking to form partnerships with other medical tech companies.

“We are establishing relationships with other companies, for example with a portable ventilator company that mounts right on the Mobilizers really easily,” Bell said.

Mobilizer does have some competition in this space, but Bell pointed out that efficient solutions are not widespread in hospitals yet. He said he had heard of some centers using red Radio Flyer wagons to carry equipment, or taping oxygen tanks to walkers, which, yes, is just as risky as you might imagine.

You know what? That alone is a pretty good argument for a better equipment carrier.

CrunchWeek: iPhone Trade-Ins, The New New Foursquare, And Twitter’s Blue Lines Problem

tc-crunchweek

This weekend, summer is sadly coming to a close (in the Northern Hemisphere, at least.) But all is not lost! At least we still have CrunchWeek, the show that brings a few of us TechCrunch writers together to chat about the most interesting tech news stories from the past seven days.

This time around, Leena Rao, Anthony Ha and I discussed the ins and outs of Apple’s new iPhone trade-in program, the latest big update to the Foursquare app (and the rumors of a possible Microsoft investment), and Twitter’s latest redesign with lots of controversial blue lines.

India’s Visa Maze Ensnares Foreign Entrepreneurs

gobblers-knob-groundhog-2836606-h

Carrying all the right documentation for his five-year business visa, Alex (not his real name) embarked on what he thought would be his fourth and final visit to the Indian immigration authority. He believed his wild goose chase was almost at an end. However, his awkwardly smiling assassin, the elusive office supervisor, had other ideas.

“Sorry, you can’t get your visa now, please come back in some time,” the supervisor said, fatally.

Alex’s plight shows the difficulties entrepreneurs face in trying to access the booming market of India today. This is his story.

The economics graduate moved to India about a year ago to co-found a social business with his peers. The government made them wait the best part of a year before approving their application to be incorporated as a local not-for-profit — a vital credential to navigate the country’s Catch-22 regulatory system. With incorporation certificate in hand, Alex was confident the last piece of his visa puzzle, namely attaining a five-year authorisation to work to improve the quality of life for Indians, was about to fall into place.

How wrong he was.

Stepping into the office was like entering Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania, on Groundhog Day, endlessly waiting for a weasley little oracle to emerge from his hovel in order to deliver bad news. Alex was forced to return to the office three times because he “didn’t have the right documentation.”

On the fourth visit, the bureaucrat, ensconced in his glass bubble, again said he didn’t have the right documents and would have to come back again. At the end of his wits, Alex didn’t buy it. After failing to plead his case with the front-line worker, he asked to speak with the manager lurking in the background. The bureaucrat turned meekly, skulked over, and relayed the request to his superior who took one look at the fiery redhead on the wrong side of the counter and scurried away to his glass-walled office, deep in the bubble. The clerk returned and, as if the whole spectacle had not been witnessed, told Alex the manager was unavailable.

“The manager is right there,” he said, pointing to the anonymous office. “I just need to speak with him for two minutes. I’ve already met him before. He knows my case.”

“Sorry sir, he is not available,” the bureaucrat said, reciting a well-used line. “You’ll have to send him an email to organise an appointment.”

Email? Alex was all too familiar with India’s digital black hole, where bits may have even travelled backwards and forwards in time, even to alternate universes, because they never seemed to reach their intended destination.

He whipped out his laptop and emailed the appointment request to the teller who was sitting down before him, but also included a stern warning: “I’m not leaving until I can speak with him.”

The bureaucrat retreated to discuss the latest turn of events.

Alex briefly took a minute to survey his surroundings. The same situation was playing out at three or four adjacent counters.

“This is the fourth time you’ve asked me to come back for a five-year business visa. I have all the right documentation, I have had it all along. Why won’t you accept my application?” railed another aggrieved applicant.

Alex snapped back to attention when the manager emerged from his den. He was face-to-face with his tormentor.

“What’s the problem, sir?” the manager asked.

“You know what my problem is! We’ve already spoken about it, you told me to come back with more information and I did. I’ve come back four times with the correct documentation and you’re still telling me I won’t be approved?!” he said.

“I’m sorry sir but we can’t process this visa application now, please come back in some time,” he said, wearing a weak smile.

“Why not?”

“I’m sorry sir but we can’t do this now, please apply in some time,” he repeated, like a broken record.

No matter how he always received the same answer and result but despite the frustrating experience he plans to come back and try again. He’s chasing that sweet feeling of victory that can only be earned by simultaneously exerting extreme amounts of effort and patience to achieve ordinarily routine tasks.

The Red Tape At The Finish Line

For an entrepreneur, there’s a lot to like about India. The subcontinent’s diversity, population, and economic disparity offers near endless problems to solve, as well as the scale to make a meaningful impact and return. But if you get too far ahead of yourself, the red-tape woven noose dangling around your neck will rein you back in. The rope becomes dangerously short as you enter the government maze, where searching for the right approvals demands long wait times, repeated visits, and constant apprehension as to whether the application will even be received. It’s an exercise in humility.

Saju James, partner at Fragomen Global Immigration Services, said the visa process was straight forward — if you know the procedures. This means that you must give the consulates the right information, right down to using the correct vernacular in the application.

“If you don’t stick to the template, exactly what the consulate is looking for, the chances of getting denials are much higher,” said James, whose firm has processed close to 1,000 work permits, less than two percent of which have been rejected.

This is a legacy of the way that visa offices were run before 2009, James said, when the Indian government didn’t have direct oversight of the approval process. Previously, each visa office and consulate operated as its own fiefdom; and a single supervisor served as judge, jury, and executioner.

“It was very arbitrary and the consulate officers had the power to decide, simply based on the interview,” he said. “They would say, ‘no, I’m not convinced this candidate should go on a work permit, he needs to apply for a business visa,’ and the reverse would happen as well.”

That changed as the government took direct control of the process and released specific guidelines and processes to be followed. Most importantly, it started measuring workers on how many visa applications they actually processed, as opposed to simply documenting the number of hours they worked.

It was a vast improvement.

“The only difference is that they have not published the formats for when you apply for a visa application, so some offices still give a difficult time to applicants.”

James said it was difficult to track the efficiency because the agencies themselves did not record the rejection rates. However, he estimated that the number of unsuccessful applications previously ranged into the double-digit percentages.

This is all little comfort to Alex, who still goes to bed every night in fear of being woken up by that same Sonny and Cher song and seeing his visa application, as complete as it always was, lying unapproved on his cheap desk.

[Image via Flickr]

How Amazon Is Tackling Personalization And Curation For Sellers On Its Marketplace

313126v1-max-250x250

When it comes to personalization, Amazon has been one of the pioneers in mining and using data to create a more curated e-commerce experience for consumers. But by now, nearly all e-commerce companies and marketplaces have caught on and are using more personalized recommendations to enhance the user experience when shopping and browsing.

Amazon has been particularly focused over the past few years on extending its personalization features for its sellers on the marketplace, both on the front-end consumer experience and on the backend.

We sat down with Peter Faricy, vice president and general manager of the Amazon Marketplace, to talk about how he and his team are approaching personalization for the company’s 2 million third-party sellers worldwide across 10 global marketplaces. Read our Q&A, which begins with Faricy providing some background information about Amazon Marketplace.

Peter Faricy: We have over 2 million sellers around the world selling across Amazon Marketplaces in 10 different countries around the world, and serving more than 200 million customers all over the world. So it’s that business that me and my team are responsible for. What we specifically do is we provide all of the technology and the products and services that sellers need around the world to run their business on Amazon.

So we are sort of your e-commerce engine, if you will. And the technology we develop helps them run their business on the Amazon Marketplace and reach customers and grow their business very successfully. So that’s kind of the quick background, if you will.

Leena Rao: So, one of the things that Amazon has been known for is being the pioneer of personalization and data mining to make the consumer shopping experience a much more curated type of shopping experience. So I am curious, sort of your view on this, and then how has that personalization strategy changed over time?

PF: Well, in the case of the Marketplace, we think about customers in two ways; we obviously think about the Amazon-buying customers and what they need and everything kind of starts with those customers in mind. But we also think of sellers on the Amazon Marketplace as our customers.

And sellers years ago began asking us questions around, what are the things that they can do to improve their business? How can they manage inventory better? What products should they be adding? How do they serve customers better?

So what I think you are referring to in this personalization, we developed some super-innovative technology three or four years ago that makes proactive, data-driven recommendations to each and every seller on the platform. And they range from suggestions on inventory quantities to new selections they should consider adding, to products they should consider fulfilling using a different surface than they use today.

We developed some super-innovative technology three or four years ago that makes proactive, data-driven recommendations to each and every seller on the platform.

And we have had great success with our sellers. We get a lot of positive feedback from developing these recommendations. And most of all, the way we kind of judge how helpful these are to sellers is how much they are used, and we know that sellers are actively using these recommendations to run and grow their business.

The part that’s been interesting for me is that it’s all self-service. So there is– when you mention how has it changed over time, we make every single day tens of millions of recommendations across all those different sellers. And on average a typical seller might have 100-plus recommendations in their queue in these different categories we have talked about before.

So we send them emails with recommendations. They can also take a look on our portal called Seller Central. On the Gateway page there is a platform called Selling Coach or Seller Coach and all the recommendations are also stored there.

And then we have many sellers that also plug into our business reports in different ways, and the recommendations are also available on our business reports. So we have got to serve up the recommendations in the manner that’s most effective for each seller, but try to give them the benefit of the data we have, our evaluation of their performance, and try to help make recommendations on what they can do to grow their business.

LR: When did you start doing this?

PF: Yeah, I think we started our first test in 2009, and probably went full-scale in 2010, and now it’s available in every country that we run a Marketplace in across the world, and every one of our sellers can access these recommendations.

LR: So what about the data and the signals you are using to help sellers personalize the Amazon experience for the end user, for me, who is, say, buying diapers on Amazon. How are you helping sellers then kind of draw the customer in through personalization?

PF: Yeah, I will try to give you a couple specific examples. I mean, as a customer one of the things that you rely upon is making sure that every product you are searching for is in stock.

And so sellers really value, they have told us, our guidance on when they are about to run out of stock and how much inventory quantity they should carry. And depending on the season of the year, particularly during the holiday season, it’s difficult to know how much inventory to have in stock, as the sales ramp up closer to the holiday season, in November, December.

So one example is that we give — one of our most popular recommendations is called straightforward enough, almost out of stock. So we take a look at how much you are selling; we take a look at the inventory that you have in stock on Amazon, and we make a recommendation based on what we think the forward-looking demand for your product will be, how much more you should add to inventory.

So that’s a super simple one, but honestly one of the most powerful ones for serving customers better, managing your inventory in e-commerce is very, very challenging, and sellers tell us they really find our recommendations useful.

LR: What are some of the other way’s that you are using data to kind of serve up additional recommendations which then brings traffic to sellers?

PF: When customers go to search for something on Amazon, and either they can’t find the product at all, which we call no search results, or the search results are of low relevancy, we have a way to measure how relevant the results are we return. We take that information and immediately surface it back up to sellers who already sell similar products and recommend that they also begin to carry these products that customers are looking for.

LR: It sounds like Amazon wants to go beyond just providing the kind of access around the stock or in the fulfillment, but also help them on the backend with their sales and business and things like that.

PF: Yeah, exactly, I think that’s a good way to say it. I mean, right now the most popular areas we are helping sellers on are things like inventory, which we talked about; helping them find new selection, new products to add to Amazon. We’ve got a lot of positive feedback on those recommendations.

Also, the fulfillment recommendations are super-critical, because we do offer a service called Fulfillment by Amazon, which is very popular with sellers, and some sellers choose to keep some inventory that they manage the fulfillment on their own. But for some of the more challenging inventory to fulfill for example, they may use Fulfillment by Amazon. And so we make recommendations based on the characteristics of how difficult these products are to fulfill or the seller’s own performance of doing a great job on serving customers and getting the products there fast and easily.

And so for sellers who have a more challenging time doing that we make recommendations in fulfillment. And then you know the area that’s been really growing quite a bit in popularity, is we are beginning to help sellers identify areas where they can improve the sharpness of their pricing.

So, for example, on the pricing world we surface up the sellers of all the different products you carry on Amazon, which of the products that you knot the lowest price on, and that allows them to go back and take a look at those products easily and determine whether or not it makes sense for their case to lower the price for customers.

LR: When it comes to social data, I am curious how sellers are responding to that sort of data when it comes to commerce. And do you feel like additional data from the customer is something that sellers are becoming more excited about?

PF: Yeah, I think, clearly “social” being a kind of a broad term certainly in an area that sellers understand how important that is to customers. And one of the ways that we try to connect customers and sellers on the Amazon detail page, is a new feature we introduced earlier this year called Ask, A-S-K, and you could see now, but if you go down some of our detail pages, we do something really interesting which is that we allow customers to ask a question about a product.

One of the things that our sellers love about selling on Amazon is they are really in complete control of their business.

Let’s say they are buying a camera and they want to know how good this camera is for shooting their children’s sporting events. And it’s kind of one of those questions, it isn’t exactly covered by the data that is provided about the camera, but it’s kind of a more “ask a friend” kind of a question. And we serve those questions up in an anonymous way to both the sellers of the items and also customers who previously purchased that item.

And so far we’ve had a great response rate. We’ve had answers come back very, very quickly and very, very thoughtful for people who already own the product or are selling the product.

So in the case of sellers who participate in this I think they have been pleased that they can, in this case, use kind of a more social angle to help customers find the product that’s best for them.

LR: Do you think that social data is something to allocate from Facebook, and are there different types of social data that work and some that don’t?

PF: Well, we don’t publicly discuss what kind of data we use for the recommendation, but certainly social data that’s publicly available like you are describing is certainly one of the inputs we use.

LR: From the sellers’ standpoint, Peter, how do you balance serendipity versus discovery? I think that a lot of sellers want, I am imagining, their product to be discoverable. How do you balance that need for discovery with also having millions of sellers on the platform?

PF: Well, one of the things that our sellers love about selling on Amazon is they are really in complete control of their business. So when it comes to these data-driven recommendations we allow them to opt in and opt out. We make over 50 different recommendations today and they can choose which recommendations we service up to them based on the ones that are most important to them or most important for their product.

We challenge ourselves and we measure how useful they are. We know the majority of our sellers actually use our recommendation today, because we measure and track that. Then we also track how much improvement to their business did they get from using our recommendation and we hold ourselves accountable.

LR: What would you say the most popular tool that sellers using when it comes to personalizion? using some of these personal additional tools you offer?

PF: The No. 1 is an email called the Almost Out-of-Stock email. So those words “Almost Out-of-Stock” are almost like their own brand in the seller world. So that still remains by far the most popular type of recommendation we make today, because you could imagine for sellers who either sell a lot of products in total or who are trying to manage their inventory through different types of seasonality or who are also trying to manage their inventory across multiple marketplaces. Many of our largest sellers sell on other marketplaces in addition to Amazon.

So they have a really big challenge to keep up with the demands of managing their inventory well. So, the “almost out of stock” set of recommendations, this has been the most popular.

But I will say what’s been increasing dramatically, is the appetite from sellers, and our ability to help them in adding new products to Amazon. And so we have millions of unique products at Amazon today and yet, I can tell you we have an opportunity to add millions more.

Our goal is to make it very easy for them to come join Amazon and very easy for [sellers] to make money, and we know that it’s really a win-win.

And so we surface up recommendation for sellers and we kind of do it in a way that’s smart and effective for them. So, if there is a seller who is selling lacrosse goals, and lacrosse sticks, and we notice there is an opportunity to add lacrosse jerseys and lacrosse balls, I obviously make those recommendations to them and so sellers really find, from the feedback they’ve given us, really find our selection recommendations to be really, really helpful and help them grow their business.

LR: What else is on a seller’s mind and what are you thinking about when it comes to future products?

PF: One of the things that sellers give us very positive feedback on is that we don’t charge sellers extra in order to receive these recommendations, and so you may see other participants in e-commerce taking other strategies here. But, we’ve for as long as the marketplace has existed, we don’t charge sellers listing fees and we don’t charge sellers fees for our recommendation.

So our goal is to make it very easy for them to come join Amazon and very easy for them to make money, and we know that it’s really a win-win. If we could help sellers to serve customers better, our customers will be happy, sellers will get to grow their business and of course that creates a great Amazon Marketplace.

So, the fact that this is a really innovative service free of charge I think is also kind of unique even in today’s world of e-commerce.

On the forward-looking front, I think without question there is a couple of topics that are on sellers’ minds; one is that many of them see the opportunity to grow their business beyond the current geography or country they are in.

So we’re beginning to make more and more recommendations for sellers on products they can sell outside their home country. And I think this is a game-changer, Leena, because if you think about the history of business, the only way you could experience it geographically was to maybe go plant the flag and open up a new office and add lots of capital and lots of overhead trying to figure out how to serve a new country. Being able to reach 10 countries on the Amazon Marketplace alone, plus customers from all over the world who shop those 10 marketplaces, is becoming a bigger and bigger opportunity for sellers. So that’s one.

And then I think the other is back to this topic of selection. I think there are a lot of interesting categories at Amazon that customers are really happy with and want to find more and more selection. And one example would be softlines; so clothing, apparel, accessories, shoes. That’s an area where we’re beginning to have really great customer experience, and we’re able to provide sellers with better and better recommendations of new products and new brands we love to see them add to the marketplace.

Gillmor Gang: Contextual Adults

gillmor-gang-test-pattern_excerpt

The Gillmor Gang — Robert Scoble, John Taschek, Kevin Marks, Keith Teare, and Steve Gillmor — settle in for the Labor Day weekend with a tour of a busy news week. Stops along the way include iBeacon in iOS7, Twitter’s thin blue line, the politics of twerking, and devices, devices, devices.

Short takes on Bill Gates’ unlikely return, Apple’s iTrade-In offer, why Chromecast will change our habits, and Google’s Chromebook move in classrooms round out a lively end to summer. It’s a world where software is free and we spend our time saving up for the next shiny dongle.

@stevegillmor, @scobleizer, @jtaschek, @kevinmarks, @kteare

Produced and directed by Tina Chase Gillmor @tinagillmor

Live chat stream

Coinchat Is A Chatroom Where Talking Sense Earns You Bitcoin

Coinchat

Coinchat is a Bitcoin-incentivised browser-based chatroom where you can shoot the breeze with strangers online and earn Bitcoin in the process. Where’s the catch? Well, there isn’t really one. The Bitcoin you’re earning through chatting with other users comes from the site’s own revenue generation — funded by ads and also a transfer fee it charges when users send Bitcoin tips.

In addition to earning fractions of Bitcoin for chatting, Coinchat users can tip each other/individual messages, if they like the cut of each other’s chat, and also tip particularly useful bots (which users can create) — so that’s another way to earn a little cryptocurrency on the site.

Coinchat also supports scripted games (mostly betting-type games) where you can spend a little Bitcoin for the chance to earn a little more (or lose it all). Users can also plough their Bitcoin earnings into chatroom furniture like additional font colours, if they so desire.  And if you want to take your earnings/winnings away to spend elsewhere the site lets you withdraw BTCs to Inputs.io: a Bitcoin wallet service run by the same developer behind Coinchat.

Coinchat’s founder, a 28-year-old male freelance web developer based in Australia who (in keeping with Bitcoin’s shadowy origins) wishes to remain anonymous to avoid any Bitcoin associated “drama” or the threat of “doxxing”, tells TechCrunch the service has been up and running for about five months. In that time it has amassed around 8,000 registered users — mostly in Western nations, with a sizeable community of cash-strapped school age/college age folk among its user-base. There’s also an active Spanish community of Coinchat users.

The largest amount of BTC withdrawn in one go is 10BTCs (around $1,288 at current exchange rates), according to the founder. As for the chatting, the site has played host to around 3.5 million messages since April. He says users display a variety of behaviours, including some who’re obviously just there just to earn free Bitcoin, and — at the other end of the spectrum — Coinchat regulars who participate in the community, hanging out and collaborating on their own projects, Reddit-style. “There was a collaborative horror story being worked upon by coinchatters earlier for instance,” he says.

Chat-based earnings on Coinchat accrue as fractions of a BTC (earnings can range from 0.02mBTC to 2mBTC per message). The rewards rates are also varied behind the scenes, presumably to keep pace with Bitcoin’s (sometimes wildly swinging) exchange rates.

“There’s an algorithm that determines how much coins you earn based on a variety of factors,” says the founder, who clearly doesn’t want to go into too much detail to avoid gaming of the system. Obvious stuff like spamming, posting gibberish and cutting and pasting swathes of text to try and ramp up your earnings won’t work, though. “Make sure what you say has some quality to it,” is one basic piece of advice for newbs.

For an idea of how much you can earn, about an hour’s chatting (and one 0.25 mBTC tip) earned me 0.535 mBTC on the site.  ”As long as you don’t waste your money gambling, you will earn BTC surprisingly fast,” chips in one Coinchat user when I ask about the rewards system.

As for tips, as well as some pre-set tip rates, tip amounts can be set by individual users — so it’s possible to hit it big if you impress the right Coinchatter. “A few days ago someone gave away 800 mBTC (almost an entire Bitcoin!),” says another user. “I’ve seen a few times over the past month where people have given out around a Bitcoin to random people.”

While Coinchat users rack up their BTC earnings, the site isn’t making its founder filthy rich yet but that’s not a concern for him; the ability to cross promote his other Bitcoin services is clearly worth the minimal running costs. “Coinchat is making a slight amount of money — even if it lost a bit of money, I’m happy to keep it running as a ‘loss leader’,” he says. “My goals are for it to become a popular chat network — everything starts out small.”

Android and iOS apps for Coinchat are currently in the works, but it’s possible to run the chatroom on a smartphone in the browser as an HTML5 web app. The native apps will be faster, and include features like push notifications plus a more streamlined UI, the founder adds.

The Decline And Fall Of Flowtab, A Startup Story

2013-08-30_16h32_37

It started with an idea: How can we get our drinks more quickly at the bar? Dreamed up at 2 a.m. in Coloft, a Los Angeles coworking space, future founder Mike Townsend doodled up an iPad application mockup that he called Apptini to answer the question.

Apptini, a portmanteau of application and martini, wouldn’t last, but the product later known as Flowtab had been born. Its life became a startup story that most don’t tell: A company that didn’t make it. Technology as an industry worships success — the bigger and splashier the better. What’s often left unsaid or swept under the rug or buried under the guise of a micro acqui-hire is failure. And lots of it.

Young companies die by the hundreds in Silicon Valley, but you would hardly know it by reading your local blog. Flowtab, now a shuttered product, did something following its demise that I’ve never seen before — released a death chronicle of sorts. Their timeline and notes showcase the mistakes that the company made during its short life. Contracts, failed television appearances, deals that fell through, and more were published. If you work in technology, it’s a compelling set of documents.

I know Townsend, and have been in bars that at one point used Flowtab technology, so when the now former founders released their material, I caught up with both of them to talk through their history. What follows is the story of their dream, their company, struggle, failed pivots and an Australian mining magnate.

Beginnings

The pitch was simple: Flowtab would be a better way to order and pay for drinks. It would speed up service, as bartenders would no longer deal with payments, something that the software handled for the bar. No more bar tabs, no more lost or forgotten credit cards and IDs, or soggy receipts and dry pens. All that was replaced by an iPad behind the bar that displayed drink orders as they were logged by folks pecking on their smartphones. Customers then picked up their drinks when they were ready. Simple.

The idea was akin to a real-time GrubHub for the bar that you were currently sitting in. Flowtab would sport menus, and allow for tipping directly inside the app. Founders Townsend and Kyle Hill wanted to help you get your tipsy on.

Townsend took his iPad mockup and a short demo to 12 bars in the Santa Monica area, pitching a product that was utterly unbuilt. Response, Hill and Townsend recount, was good enough to keep moving on the project. Following the offline testing period, in mid-May of 2011, Flowtab put together a landing page. As Internet companies go, Flowtab had planted its flag. Two months later, the first version of Flowtab, coded in HTML5, was complete.

However, Flowtab was severely understaffed, and needed far more development firepower than it currently had in-house. Money was scarce, and Flowtab wanted someone truly top-notch. This created something of a problem. A friend of Hill’s had worked with a developer by the name of Alex Kouznetsov on an application in the past. Hill flew to see him in San Francisco. Kouznetsov, who has a Ph.D. in computer science and worked in Oakland at the time, started to contribute at nights and on weekends as the company’s CTO.

The first version of Flowtab was extremely limited. You could select the bar that you were in, pick a drink, set a tip amount, and hit order. But nothing more.

Eventually, Kouznetsov helped the Flowtab crew wrap their HTML5 up into a native shell (using Appcelerator), and get it into both the Android and iOS app stores. That launch, in February of 2012, proved premature, as Flowtab had zero bars using its technology for users to actually visit. Users of the application were therefore greeted with an empty app. Well, there were a few fake bars listed.

Ironically, Apple featured Flowtab for a week, sending it users that couldn’t actually use the app. At this stage, however, Flowtab remained focused more on talking to bar owners than acquiring users. The idea behind the focus was that, in the words of Townsend, “geographic density is absolutely key for any mobile payments application.”

That fact that Apple had noticed the app at all was good augur. The Flowtab boys were now ready to land some bars.

Bar Acquisition: Commence

Flowtab held its coming out party at the Copa d’Oro bar in Santa Monica, processing around $1,200 in transactions throughout the evening. The mayor even showed up, and ordered a Coke using the app. Getting the mayor wasn’t easy for Townsend and Hill, who admitted to emailing him around 20 times, begging him to show up. It worked. Throughout the evening, customers placed 150 orders. It was a real, if moderate, success.

From left: Flowtab co-founder Mike Townsend, Santa Monica Mayor Richard Bloom, co-founder Kyle Hill and CTO Alex Kouznetsov

To get people in the door, Flowtab was picking up the bill for the evening’s revelry. But that was secondary to the event proving that, when its technology flowed properly, Flowtab had built something that worked and people seemed to enjoy.

After the launch party, Flowtab was invited to present in the LA Startup Competition, an annual event. They won, besting 14 other startups, but turned down the offered investment from VoiVoida Ventures. The location of VoiVoida was far from Flowtab’s Santa Monica digs, and the company didn’t want to move. Still, the win felt good. Townsend called it a “confidence boost.”

Still in the learning stage of their venture, Team Flowtab went to the Nightclub and Bar Convention in Las Vegas. The company didn’t acquire new bar customers for its technology, but the trip did convince them that a business model idea that they were kicking around wouldn’t work: Flowtab could not be distributed through partnership with companies that sell Point of Sale (POS) systems.

Flowtab would therefore have to build its own sales team, it realized. That meant more overhead, more staff, and more work for the little company that remained dramatically under-capitalized.

By now, Flowtab had worked its way into three bars in L.A., but was seeing nothing like critical mass or organic growth. At its tender age and size, Flowtab had now decided that it needed intellectual property protection.

My IP Is My IP Not Your IP

You want to protect your IP, right? Well, maybe not. Flowtab filed a patent concerning the “ability for merchant sellers and servers in hospitality establishments to use point-of-sale applications to send one-click/one-touch order-status notifications to mobile devices of their customers.” It wasn’t a good move.

Looking back, founders Hill and Townsend describe the effort as a waste of time, and a drain on their finances. It burned “lots of energy” and yielded nothing more than an “investor talking point,” they told me. Hill explained that the largest “value that [Flowtab] got out of the patent was convincing investors that it actually meant something.”

At this early stage in its corporate life, with only a few bars on its platform, and a user base in the hundreds, Flowtab spent and invested scarce resources into something that would eventually yield it nothing.

Better Apps, So Let’s Party Our Faces Off

Landing July 1, 2012, the second version of Flowtab was done. Still coded in HTML5 that was wrapped into native code, the second iteration was a dramatic improvement on its predecessor. The bar-facing iPad app could now load drink orders asynchronously, limiting meaningless refreshes. The new version of Flowtab, like the two before it, was aimed more at responding to bartender requests than answering users’ needs.

With the new app in place, Flowtab wanted to bump up its usership figures, which meant that it planned another party. Flowtab wasn’t attracting many users on its own in the bars it was installed in, so it wanted to bring more to its locations, and do it in a very public fashion. The resulting event was a comical cockup.

Flowtab teamed up with Uber and Thrillist for the three-bar crawl. Each of the bars that Flowtab was installed in would be in play. Thrillist sold tickets, Uber ferried folks, and Flowtab was in charge of making sure that the drinks kept pouring.

“At this point,” said Hill, “we thought we were hot shit.” Three-hundred people were invited. The event was a catastrophe.

The app failed, the bars were understaffed, and drink orders piled up, leaving 35 in the queue at once in the second pub the group visited. That bar had a single bartender. It was stuffed with 150 patrons who were told that Flowtab could get them a drink, fast.

It’s great to go out and get your ass kicked.

Finally, Flowtab’s server went down, scuttling the entire operation. Hill started handing out margaritas by the fistful to keep everyone happy. The Flowtab team buckled under the stress. After the abortive bar bashes wound down, Hill went to the beach, wearing his Flowtab shirt, and sat down for an hour by himself. The app picked up a number of 1-star reviews following the debacle.

Looking back, Hill and Townsend have a slightly positive take on the experience: It’s great to go out and get your ass kicked, they told me. Not that they would ever want to go through the agony of being in charge of hundreds of people wanting a drink as their server failed again, but it was like middle school: good to have done once. Hill claims that the situation provided “fuel” to keep going.

The event did lead to product improvements, including limiting the number of drinks that could be placed into the iPad app queue at a time. This cut bartender confusion, and helped staunch lines where people picked up their drinks. If the queue was full, you had to wait.

Another lesson: Sometimes you need to wade into new territory slowly, instead of cannonballing in, guns blazing, servers crashing.

Money

Flowtab now needed two things: money and guidance. After applying to a number of incubators in the L.A. area, Flowtab couldn’t find an open door. Local groups found it odd that their CTO was in the Bay Area and part time. Concerns were also raised about the size and approachability of the market that Flowtab had selected.

However, Mike Jones, the CEO of L.A.-based incubator and studio Science, helped the small company out by introducing it to DexOne, which sells advertising in the Yellow Pages. It’s a public firm, with a market capitalization of over $100 million. So, Flowtab linked up with the guys who print and leave massive phone books outside your apartment each year. DexOne has an experimental arm, which would prove important for Flowtab as it was a potential answer to its distribution question.

Technologists aren’t always salesman, but founders should be.

Around this time, Hill and Townsend went on Shark Tank, the reality TV investment program. In Hills’ words, it was a “long and drawn out process” that was “very involved.” The show wanted drama, and in the end not only did Flowtab not land a deal, but their pitch session didn’t make it onto TV, depriving the group of any free advertising they might have hoped for.

After the accelerators didn’t bite, and Shark Tank had done little more than nibble, Flowtab decided to move north to San Francisco, where they hoped they would have more access to capital.

What about the bars in L.A.? Well, following the riotous bar crawl, they weren’t exactly enthused with the Flowtab product. The company cut loose, and following an endless wave of others, landed in the Bay Area.

The company raised $50,000 within the first month in the city.

DexOne: A Needed Friend

DexOne, the Yellow Pages company that sold nearly $2 billion of that product in 2012, was Flowtab’s shot at distribution. DexOne has a team of 12 that it partners with small tech companies to try out new things. Somewhat progressive, and perhaps interesting for a company so traditional, DexOne had what Flowtab did not: capital and manpower.

DexOne developed a pilot program to sell Flowtab in Colorado. It put six full-time sales people on the ground to push the new product. The partnership landed the largest strip club in Denver, Shotgun Willies, where the model worked moderately well. Culture, however, appeared to work against them. Folks in the strip club didn’t seem too excited about using their phones to order a drink.

The DexOne deal landed a few other bars, as well, but as in L.A., the growth was slow, and only garnered by firm grind. Back in San Francisco, the Flowtab team was experimenting with new ways to grab bars, and hopefully, paying customers.

San Francisco

Crowdsourcing might be a dead buzzword, but hiring out grunt work is as popular as ever. Flowtab, in a bid to reach more bars, hired a call center in the Philippines to call potential bars in San Francisco. The idea was to massively scale their initial outreach, and then send in the founders to lock down deals that the call center would set up for them.

The lesson according to Flowtab: Technologists aren’t always salesman, but founders should be.
After the call center didn’t perform, Flowtab hired Trevor Bisset, who promptly cut the call center on his first day on the job. Weeks later, he had landed the group’s first bar in the city, McTeague’s.

A short note on McTeague’s. The bar is located on Polk Street here in San Francisco. It’s a fine place to be Monday through Thursday, a low-key sports bar that won’t be too crowded unless the Giants are on a streak. But Fridays and weekends at McTeague’s are a complete zoo. Amateurs from four counties descend on the place, turning it into a part club, part bar, and complete goat rodeo. You can’t get to the bar, let alone get a drink.

So, if there were ever a bar that Flowtab should work at, it was McTeague’s. Anything to break the logjam would be welcome. McTeague’s remains the only bar in San Francisco to my knowledge that has a sign in the bathroom stating that drug use is not allowed, and that bar staff will be checking to ensure that things remain clean. People still do coke, presumably, but the place would prefer it if they didn’t.

McTeague’s was a get for Flowtab, but they had eyes on a bigger prize: the San Francisco Marriott Marquis. With 1,500 rooms, it’s massive. It has three bars. Landing the hotel would have been a coup. The team designed and pitched a presentation. But in the end, Flowtab’s lack of feature capability to integrate with the Marquis’s point of sale system (Micros) scuttled the idea.

Startups are human endeavors, and around this time, a friend of the company, Brandon Zacharie, started contributing for beer and pizza. The team credits Zacharie with getting them off FTP and onto Git where they belonged. According to Hill, Zacharie specifically helped the team “integrate web socket connection between the user app and the [bar’s] iPad” application.

Meanwhile In Denver

Three bars locked down but not doing much in San Francisco, the DexOne work in Colorado was ramping up. Little Flowtab found itself a bit more stretched than it could manage. The team would later liken the moment to tossing logs onto a small fire, choking it.

Flowtab wasn’t performing well in the bars close to its core team. How could DexOne flog the product successfully? Despite the fact that people were not organically flocking to the app in bars, DexOne wanted to press ahead and get Flowtab into even more locations. A doubling-down in Denver? Yes. Orlando? DexOne wanted to go there. Portland? Yeah.

But Flowtab, far away from the Rockies, didn’t have enough money to support that many cities, and had concerns about its business model, which at that point charged users $1 to file an order.

The handful of bars that were signed up in Denver through the DexOne deal paid $1,200 to get started with Flowtab. It wasn’t a small sum, but the cash went to providing them with the hardware that they needed to run the service (an iPad, etc.).

Worried about money and consumer reaction to the product in its current form, Flowtab declined the expansion that DexOne wanted.

Lyft

Ironically, one of the most successful efforts that Flowtab found to accumulate new users was killed by the ridesharing service Lyft. Don’t fret, Lyft had every right to do so. Flowtab recruited Lyft drivers to hand out free drink coupons to riders heading to bars that it was installed in. Drivers got $5 every time a rider signed up and ordered, and that drink was free for the new user. Around 30 drivers took part, and more than 1,000 drinks were given away.

Ask forgiveness, not permission was the idea here. It worked until it didn’t, and it didn’t when Lyft asked them politely to knock it off. Still, for three months Flowtab was picking up new users at a decent pace, a rare moment of encouraging growth for the company.

Empty Distribution

With a fresh $25,000 note from a technology investor at a venture capital group in Palo Alto, Flowtab had 12 active bars in three cities by January 2013 but little in the way of active users. The company set a small goal: By March 1, they wanted to have at least 50 active users, who were using Flowtab several times per month.

As a company, Flowtab was beleaguered by inconsistent usage; most folks just didn’t go back to the same bar every week, so a new user might enjoy Flowtab, but not use the service again for months until they were back in the bar they signed up in.

Order volume was low, and as a company Flowtab was starting to doubt its model. Were they only able to pick up new users through gimmicks? Would they always have to show up to a bar to get people to sign up? Order volume could spike over 60 orders in a day if Flowtab had a presence at a bar. But when they weren’t it would fall, sometimes to single digits.

It was time to prove that Flowtab could scale. With 12 bars, the company had enough market presence to test its service. It would get users to the bars, and then see if it could keep them around. Hill and Townsend came up with 12 new ways to get users, including Facebook ads. Each effort, according to  Hill, “fell flat on its face.” Nothing spurred organic growth, and Flowtab didn’t have the funds to keep buying users that were at best infrequent revenue sources.

As a final effort to see what could be done, Flowtab decided to have a much smaller party. McTeague’s and the nearby Mayes were pressed into service for the Super Bowl-themed event. About 100 attendees floated between the two bars. Unlike the L.A. pub crawl meltdown, the event cost Flowtab a modest $500.

They acquired 92 new users, which worked out to around $5.50 per. That was cheaper than the Lyft effort, which cost $5 for the drivers plus a drink for the new user.

The economics were difficult to make work. Flowtab’s $1-per-order fee meant that even at $5.50 per new account, the average user would have to make six orders in the history of their usership to allow Flowtab to break even. People were not drinking enough to make that feasible.

More Money And A New Business Model

The DexOne partnership had proven that some bars were willing to pay for Flowtab, but a few checks of $1,200 apiece were not going to float the company. Flowtab wanted to raise $300,000, but in the face of its challenges, the sum was daunting.

And with its current business model floundering, Flowtab decided it was time to pivot. So, instead of charging users to pay an extra fee to use its service, Flowtab flipped around and decided to sell advertising to alcohol companies inside of its application. About to order whiskey? Why not a Jim Beam?

It made some sense: Bars and users were not rich, but the corporate interests behind Bacardi and Johnnie Walker certainly were. And they are banned from advertising inside of a bar.

Flowtab felt that since it was a mobile application, the law did not apply to them. However, after meeting with six small and large liquor and beer companies, it became clear that Flowtab simply did not have the scale needed to land a deal large enough to matter.

Alcohol Apocalypse

February 2013 was a brutal month for the other small companies looking to execute something similar to Flowtab. BarTab, which had raised more than $1.5 million, essentially went offline. Coaster, a local competitor, in the words of Flowtab, “began losing bars.”

The shakeup of its better-funded rivals unnerved Flowtab: If folks with more money and distribution than themselves couldn’t make the model work, what shot did they have?

It was stock-taking time. Flowtab had, in its own estimation, zero organic growth and few if any regular users, and it couldn’t find a conduit to new users that would scale. New efforts would cause a minor rise that would anti-soufflé the moment the monetary influx halted.

Six weeks into the process, and given its doubts about its model, Flowtab put fundraising on ice. They had $20,000 left in the bank, and its hopes to pull off its bar model were tanking.

It was time for another pivot.

Pivot 2.0

It’s now March 2013. Flowtab had burned through a total of $110,000. It had fewer than 2,000 users, and the team had come to the conclusion that they did not have product-market fit. I suspect the team could have come to this conclusion far sooner if they knew a year prior what they knew in March.

In the end, the team decided that their problem was distance. GrubHub, which is comically successful, brings something to you that is far from you. Flowtab wasn’t saving you enough time or energy to make it a compelling experience.

However, the team had built a technology stack and had a few dollars left in the bank. They began looking for a new application for their software. After poking around golf courses, hotels, and other potential venues, Flowtab decided that stadiums were the best bet for its tech. Beer as a Service? Something like that.

In startup style, Hill and Townsend called every stadium in California — there are 114 if you were wondering — and met face to face with a few, including the Giants, Warriors, and A’s. However, even as they were starting to sour on the prospect of stadiums (too much regulation and other issues), a different company called Bypass raised $3.5 million, partially from AEG, which manages 50 stadiums. eBay-owned StubHub also took part in the raise.

If there had been a slightly open door to apply Flowtab to the stadium business, it had closed.

Flowtab was “just like……… fuck” at that point, according to its founders.

Mike Jones, Final Round

Mike Jones of Science, who had helped Flowtab land the DexOne deal, met with the company again. The team needed counsel. After explaining their stadium exploits, Jones agreed that it didn’t make sense as an avenue for the firm. The company was also all but flat broke.

“The last two years have been a huge learning experience, and we believe the real failure would be not sharing our story with the world.”

Seven days after Bypass’s raise was announced, on April 17, Flowtab was shuttered. Trevor the sales guy went to a startup in Portland. Friend of the company Zacharie went full time at a different startup, and the erstwhile CTO kept to his day job.

Jones offered to hire Hill and Townsend into Science — it was a non-monetary acquisition of sorts — where they worked on and recently launched HomeHero, a marketplace for home care of seniors.

As part of the Science deal, both Hill and Townsend are back in Los Angeles, full circle from where they started. It was a long, eventful, often ridiculous, and always stressful experience. But to hear the founders tell it, it was a rollercoaster, but one that had them grinning through nearly all of its twists and turns.

Post Script: The Australian Mining Magnate

The oddest piece of Flowtab history started with a random email that was almost deleted. A dude in Australia loved the product and the idea and wanted to chat. This was in February 2013.

The Aussie, who had made his money in mining, liked Flowtab enough to fly out to meet the fledgling firm. Three months later, a month after the company had been shuttered and the team scattered, an acquisition offer was made.

But with new roles at Science, and no team to speak of, they turned it down. Flowtab was no more. “In the end, Flowtab failed in the sense that we never IPO’d or sold the company,” Hill concluded. “But the last two years have been a huge learning experience, and we believe the real failure would be not sharing our story with the world.”

Read, examine their documents, and do not repeat their mistakes.

Top Image Credit: John Picken McTeague’s Image: Tom Hilton. Lyft Image: Alfredo Mendez Empty bar: Alexandra Zakharova Jim Beam: Jamie Giant’s Stadium: Jon Lee Clark Other Images: Flowtab

Google Confirms It Has Acquired Android Smartwatch Maker WIMM Labs

WIMM smartwatch

Google has confirmed it acquired WIMM Labs last year, a company that previously made an Android-powered smartwatch before shuttering operations in 2012. At the time a message on its website said it had entered into an exclusive partnership without releasing further details, but it’s now clear that partner was Google, rather than Apple as some had initially speculated. Google’s WIMM Labs acquisition was reported earlier by Gigaom.

Google is rumoured to be developing a smartwatch of its own, with patents turning up earlier this year (filed in 2011), and a report by the FT that claimed Google’s Android team was in the process of developing such a device. Google has also hinted at Android powering a range of wearable devices in the past, when CEO Larry Page let slip during a quarterly earnings call this year that Glass runs on its smartphone and tablet OS, and that Android is “pretty transportable across devices”. Google has also long had bigger ambitions for Android than just pushing it onto phones and tablets, with TV set-top boxes, in-car tech, home automation and wearables all areas where it’s actively encouraging Android to spread.

WIMM Labs started out building Android-based platforms for wearable displays, akin to Google Glass, and then created the WIMM One in 2011: a smartwatch powered by Android 2.1 that was aimed at developers as a sort of concept flagship ahead of a broader consumer launch. The WIMM One used Bluetooth and Wi-Fi 802.11b/g for connectivity, had 256 MB of RAM plus a 667MHz processor, and used a screen design that refreshed once per minute to conserve battery life. It also supported apps via a “Micro App Store” — installed and managed by users via a web-based dashboard. Android developers were offered custom APIs for adapting their software to the WIMM One’s tiny, 16-bit colour screen.

Google is not commenting further on the acquisition at this point, beyond providing confirmation that it picked up WIMM Labs in 2012. If Mountain View is building its own smartwatch it’s unlikely to beat its Android OEM partner Samsung to a launch, as the Korean company’s Galaxy Gear device is probably going to be unboxed next week in Berlin at a September 4 event. Plenty of other Android-powered smartwatches are also entering the frame via crowdfunding sites like Kickstarter, and also cropping up on the roadmaps of other Android OEMs. Meanwhile Apple’s rumoured iWatch remains elusive.

If Google isn’t building its own smartwatch hardware, acquiring WIMM Labs could be a way to help it develop a custom version of Android designed for wrist-mounted wearables, which it could then provide to OEMs the same way it currently does with Android proper. Given the amount of interest in smartwatches from OEMs big and small, that could be the better strategy for long-term platform growth.