Community-first operator Lolita Taub is launching her own venture capital firm

Driven by and for the community that she’s spent years building up, entrepreneur Lolita Taub is launching Ganas Ventures, an early-stage venture capital firm. The debut fund has a target of $9.99 million, and Taub has so far raised $1.2 million from investors, including Backstage Capital’s Arlan Hamilton, Vitalize Ventures’ Gale Wilkinson and Hustle Fund’s Elizabeth Yin.

After building in stealth for months, Taub tells TechCrunch that she is launching Ganas Ventures today to line up with International Women’s Day, a nod to her interest in backing historically overlooked individuals. The goal with the first fund is to back 75 pre-seed and seed-stage companies based in the U.S. and Latin America, writing checks around $100,000.

The years-long strategy leading up to the formation of Taub’s fund offers a window into one route that an emerging fund manager can take in today’s distributed world.

Taub got her start investing as an intern for K Fund, a Madrid-based venture capital firm that backs Spanish startups. She then spent time as a principal and director of strategic initiatives at Backstage Capital, which she did while getting more experience making investments for Indie.vc and NextGen Venture Partners.

Ganas Ventures is Taub’s second swing at launching a fund, albeit her first time doing it solo. In 2020, Taub co-founded The Community Fund with Jesse Middleton and Flybridge. The $5 million venture fund was a part-time commitment, with Taub simultaneously working as a corporate development executive at Catalyte. She left after one year.

It was difficult, she recounts, given the legal and other paperwork involved. Taub credits the Flybridge team for the “opportunities that they create.” However, she says she is intent on building her own franchise, one that, like that community fund, is focused on early-stage startups.

The common denominator throughout all these endeavors has been Taub’s focus on community. For example, in May 2020, she and her partner Josh Taub began a free startup-founder matching tool, leading to over 2,000 introductions (and 50 known checks) to date. Taub has also created online guides priced between $10 to $165 that specifically address topics such as first-time fundraising and LatinX founder support, as well as a slew of free resources.

Now, she plans to raise the rest of her debut fund from the community, too.

“Instead of go-to market, to me, the future is go-to community,” Taub said in an interview with TechCrunch. Community, she says, can lower customer acquisition cost, help with recruitment, lead to higher retention and foster loyalty.

Because Taub doesn’t have a paycheck right now, she is making money by hosting Twitter Spaces, providing startup consulting services and selling sponsorships for her biweekly startups newsletter.

Oftentimes, general partners invest up to 2% of their own money in cash into a fund to show that they have skin in the game. But for emerging managers that don’t come from money, such as Taub, 1% of her fund is $100,000 — which is more cash than she has available. Taub is doing a cashless GP commit to show that she is committed to the fund, basically taking money that she would otherwise receive as part of the management fee (used to operate the fund) and putting it back into the fund. Put another way, Taub described, she is reducing her salary to manage the fund, and using the difference to fuel her commit over time.

It’s work that some investors think only strengthens Taub’s brand. “It’s a huge edge to already be known in the startup community and be great at building a community,” Hustle Fund’s Elizabeth Yin, an investor in Ganas, said. “It takes most fund managers years to do this well, and Lolita has already done that, so I’m excited to invest.”

At the same time, what Taub is building can be misunderstood, she suggests. Last month, she was questioned on Twitter about charging founders to review their pitch decks. While Taub ultimately clarified her services and explained that those who paid her would not be considered for eventual investment, some thought the conflict of interest could create a pay-to-play environment that disproportionately impacts historically overlooked folks.

A silver lining, perhaps, is that the controversy began a conversation about small fund economics and why investors like Taub, who says she grew up in a low-income family and became the patriarch of the family at an early age, are finding ways to both help founders while also making a living.

“I don’t know any other industry where I can lean on my skill set, my magic sauce of being community and sales, and literally create generational wealth within my lifetime,” she said. “It’s a whirlwind and it’s just the beginning, but like I’m holding tight on this VC mechanical bull and I’m not getting fucking off.”

Welcome to the it’s-so-subtle pivot season

Welcome to Startups Weekly, a fresh human-first take on this week’s startup news and trends. To get this in your inbox, subscribe here.

As late-stage tech startups face the changing environment in the public markets, their early-stage counterparts are in a different world altogether. The cohort has had access to ample capital in recent quarters, giving them a bubble of venture capital that somewhat protects them from rapid changes in the greater economy.

But while the bubble is not popping, it’s changing shape.

While we may not see early-stage startups go through aggressive rounds of layoffs or experience immediately slashed valuations due to shifting market conditions, there’s a different signal worth tracking: pivots. Pivots — a change in business strategy based on a new insight or market trend — are somewhat inevitable for young companies still chasing product-market fit. I’d argue that pivots are more important to track than a financing round because they give a snapshot of a startup reacting to a new tension in the market. Plus, unlike a funding round, a pivot is a definite signal that something is changing, a tension other than a cadre of investors affirming that a founder is onto something big.

After having conversations with a number of investors and founders, it’s clear that the coming weeks and months will include a lot of subtle shifts in how early-stage startups do business. Some may re-prioritize objectives to reduce risk, while others may pursue new, more near-term business models to finally get some revenue in the door.

For my full take on this topic, check out my TechCrunch+ column: “It’s pivot season for early-stage startups.” In the rest of this newsletter, we’ll talk about an Epic deal, fintech going full stack and why one firm is going self-funded. As always, you can support me by sharing this newsletter, following me on Twitter or subscribing to my personal blog.

Deal of the week

Epic, the gaming creator of Fortnite, bought Bandcamp, a music marketplace where any musician can sell their music and keep 82% of the profits. The acquisition comes amid a broader conversation of the role (and power) of platforms in creators’ lives, making platforms like Bandcamp stand out simply due to alignment of incentives. Now that it is within Epic’s comfortable embrace, there’s a new chapter to analyze.

Here’s why it’s important, via Amanda Silberling:

“When artists see that a platform they use to make a living is being acquired, their usual reaction isn’t, ‘Oh, cool, they will have more funds to produce better features to help me monetize my creative work!’ They think, ‘Oh shit, not again.’

It happened when Google bought YouTube, and when Spotify bought Anchor. Artists recognize that when a platform changes ownership, even the smallest tweaks can impact their livelihoods. Why would artists trust Big Tech companies when Spotify payouts are dismal, OnlyFans temporarily made career-endangering decisions for sex workers, and Patreon flirts with the idea of crypto payments, a move many of its creators are strongly against?”

I wonder, of course, if the buy is in light of community, or just in pursuit of capitalism. We’ll talk about it on Equity next week, so tweet us your suggestions!

Honorable mentions:

Image Credits: Bryce Durbin/TechCrunch

Is fintech playing offense or defense today?

On Equity this week, I spoke with Alex and Mary Ann about the state of fintech. It was partially inspired by Ramp’s expansion into travel, and Pipe’s acquisition of an, um, entertainment company (?!).

Here’s why it’s important: Beyond continuing the conversation of fintech going full stack, we worked through our biggest questions on fintech’s maturation at the moment. For example, if all fintechs become the same company over time, how do you differentiate when initially fighting for the same user cohort? The market made the conversation even more relevant, as public market repricings may be one trigger for fintech’s to pursue more proven revenue streams.

So what, SoFi?

Multi Colored Bling Bling Dollar Sign Shape Bokeh Backdrop on Dark Background, Finance Concept.

Image Credits: MirageC / Getty Images

Homebrew goes self-funded

Homebrew has a new cup of tea (or coffee, or beer, or beverage of your choosing). The venture capital firm is leaving its strictly seed-stage roots — and its traditional venture structure — and pursuing a more stage-agnostic evergreen model that is funded solely by Satya Patel and Hunter Walk, Homebrew’s general partners.

Here’s why it’s important: Homebrew’s pivot is happening at a crucial market moment for tech startups. Public tech stocks are being hammered regardless of sector. And while early-stage private startups seemingly remain largely unscathed, owing to an influx of venture capital, later-stage companies are finding themselves in a tougher position right now.

The move is also notable in a market where raising larger and larger (and larger) funds has become routine. Of course, the perennial challenge that comes when raising more capital is that an investor then has more pressure to deliver on those outcomes. You may have been able to provide outcomes at a 5x rate on a $15 million fund, but can you still hit venture-like targets when you ask them to back a $150 million fund? What about $1.5 billion?

Returns on returns:

Image Credits: Cometeer

Across the week

We get to hang out in person! Soon! Techcrunch Early Stage 2022 is April 14, aka right around the corner, and it’s in San Francisco. Join us for a one-day founder summit featuring GV’s Terri Burns, Greylock’s Glen Evans and Felicis’ Aydin Senkut. The TC team has been fiending to get back in person, so don’t be surprised if panels are a little spicier than usual.

Here’s the full agenda, and grab your launch tickets here.

​​Also, follow our newest producer for Equity: Maggie Stamets!

Seen on TechCrunch

Putting the autonomous cart before the robotic horse

YC-backed Blocknom wants to become the ‘Coinbase Earn of Southeast Asia’

Snowflake acquires Streamlit for $800M to help customers build data-based apps

Carl Pei’s Nothing is working on a smartphone

Seen on TechCrunch+

After 2 rejected deals, Zendesk considers its next steps

Corporations are scrambling to get into the venture game

Waabi’s Raquel Urtasun on the importance of differentiating your startup

Just how wrong were those SPAC projections?

What US startup founders need to know about the R&D tax credit

Until next time,

N

One decade in, Homebrew says it’s becoming self-funded

Homebrew has a new cup of tea (or coffee, or beer, or beverage of your choosing).

The venture capital firm is leaving its strictly seed stage roots — and its traditional venture structure — and pursuing a more stage-agnostic evergreen model that is funded solely by Satya Patel and Hunter Walk, Homebrew’s general partners.

“When we sat down together in 2021 to plan for Homebrew’s future, the most obvious choice was raising a larger fund with even more capital to invest since that’s the way the industry has moved,” co-founders Hunter Walk and Satya Patel wrote earlier today in a blog post. “But we never started Homebrew to be capital accumulators and have never optimized for assets under management as a business model.”

With it’s new evergreen approach, Homebrew will have an open-ended fund structure with no termination date. The strategy should also allow the co-founders to recycle capital from realized returns without constraints. Asked for more specifics about how much the team plans to put to work and the size checks it intends to write, Walk said that there’s no fixed amount of capital that Homebrew intends to deploy and suggested that while he’s uncomfortable sharing a specific investing range, Homebrew will be making a “meaningful commitment, at least for us,” when it invests in startups.

Homebrew’s pivot is happening at a crucial market moment for tech startups. Public tech stocks are being hammered regardless of sector. And while early-stage private startups seemingly remain largely unscathed, owing to an influx of venture capital, later-stage companies are finding themselves in a tougher position right now, with deep-pocketed investors like Tiger Global and D1 Capital reportedly backing away from the megadeals for which they’ve become known and flocking instead to younger and less mature companies, according to The Information.

It’s a notable shift for Homebrew, which has stakes in companies such as Winnie, Stir, Mercury and Plaid. Since inception, Homebrew has closed three core funds and two overage funds to support breakaway winners in its core funds. The change also comes at a natural point for the firm, which is no longer making new investments out of Fund 3.

The move is also notable in a market where raising larger, and larger (and larger funds) has become routine. Of course, the perennial challenge that comes when raising more capital is that an investor then has more pressure to deliver on those outcomes. You may have been able to provide outcomes at a 5x rate on a $15 million fund, but can you still hit venture-like targets when you ask them to back a $150 million fund? What about $1.5 billion?

Walk, in an e-mail, told TechCrunch that their return target isn’t changing from “what a good early stage fund should strive far” sticking to shooting for 5x.

Homebrew isn’t the first evergreen fund and it won’t be the last. One reason why more seed-stage focused investment firms may choose the same path is that it alleviates the pressure a firm may feel to be in constant fundraising mode. It also allows investors to take their time; with a traditional venture capital fund, the clock starts ticking when a fund is raised and it’s expected that investors will put the money to work in a relatively short amount of time, no matter the market conditions.

There are downsides to evergreen funds, however, including unstable cash flows, confusion from co-investors, and potential impact from illiquidity, per TopTal. In other words, by continuing a fund indefinitely a team may enjoy more flexibility with less pressure to exit but face other challenges.

Either way, it’s  becoming more difficult for smaller firms to raises subsequent funds, per analyst sources in the venture industry. As an investor, the best way to de-risk your next fund might be to not raise in a traditional way at all.

Walk says that “capital was not the limiting factor here” when considering the change in strategy.

“Our LPs told us they were happy to experiment with us and would be happy to be a part of whatever Homebrew evolves to,” Walk said in an email. “So, [they are] a little disappointed maybe but overall happy and eager for us to experiment. And to be in business together.”

He continued on to write that there will be “different ways” that Homebrew will work with the limited partner base in the future, and that he and Patel are keeping LPs updated on the new fund’s investments.

Hire, then wire with a twist

Welcome to Startups Weekly, a fresh human-first take on this week’s startup news and trends. To get this in your inbox, subscribe here.

Since launching the venture firm Backstage Capital in 2015, Arlan Hamilton has invested millions in more than 195 companies led by underrepresented founders, from a duo taking on auto insurance to a team rethinking how we virtually learn. Despite the breadth in the business, Hamilton says she is consistently asked two questions by her portfolio companies:

“Can you help us raise money? And, “Can you help us with hiring?”

While Hamilton’s fund is a response to the former, her latest bet — built by Hamilton herself — is a startup that explores the latter. Runner is a labor marketplace that connects startups with operations people looking for part-time work. It seeks to combat some of the largest tensions in early-stage startup building, such as deciding when it’s time to hire your first head of talent, or figuring out what to contract out, or what to build in-house when it comes to staffing. It’s launching with an explicit focus on operations roles.

“There are so many places you can go if you want to learn how to code or if you want to get a job as in the more technical side of things,” Hamilton says. “But where do you go right now if you want to be someone’s right hand, the COO, etc. … it’s sort of an afterthought for most [companies].”

Conceptually, Runner isn’t contrarian. Upwork and Fiverr have built solid businesses atop the freelancer economy. What’s different about the startup, though, is in who it targets — operations folks in tech — and how it employs them. Every “runner,” or part-time professional who is looking to get a new gig, is employed by the company under a W-2 classification. Around 200 runners are on the platform today.

And Hamilton tells TechCrunch the approach has attracted $1.5 million in pre-seed backing weeks before Runner is set to launch on the app store. For the entire story, including how one cohort of investors in the company is raising an interesting set of questions, read my story on TechCrunch: Arlan Hamilton wants to reroute how startups hire.

In the rest of this newsletter our heart will Flutter, and then it will ride the wild wave of crypto. We’ll also get into the latest in SEC filings and notes from my calls throughout the past week. As always, you can support me by sharing this newsletter, following me on Twitter or subscribing to my personal blog.

Deal of the week

As a result of its latest financing event, Flutterwave is now the highest valued startup in Africa. The cross-border payments platform beat out OPay and Chipper Cash with its savvy API approach.

Here’s why it’s important: Africa’s tech scene may see a whole lot of consolidation. As Tage Kene-Okafor reports, “in the future, Flutterwave will look at acquisitions that will further consolidate its authority in the fintech space. And as the payments giant continues to deepen its influence in the SMB and consumer fintech space, we can speculate that smaller startups — including those it has backed, like CinetPay — may become acquisition targets.”

Honorable mentions:

Do you want your paycheck in crypto?

In our latest episode of Equity, we chatted through Deel’s recent launch, which gives businesses the option to run their payroll in crypto. As reported by our own Mary Ann Azevedo: “Specifically, companies that hold their money in USDC can make a payment directly to Deel via their Coinbase account to cover payroll and payments for their global team. Once the business has paid the money into Deel, contractors can withdraw in over 150 currencies, including crypto.”

Here’s why it’s important: This is yet another step in the mainstreamification — if that’s actually a word — of crypto. Also, India going back and forth in a matter of weeks is volatile, sure, but it’s also a signal that the asset is being taken seriously enough to have debate. Which is different from where it was just a few years ago.

When even a turbulent tide lifts all boats:

In the DMs

  • Kapor Capital managed a first close for its third fund at $97.5 million, targeting a total of $125 million, as TechCrunch reported last year.
  • Edtech investors are telling their “tier 2 and tier 3” portfolio companies to consider holding off on a next raise until they can improve metrics; suggesting that some of the buzziness has left the once-spotlighted sector.
  • The latest thing every tech CEO is having nightmares about.
  • Hopin CMO has resigned.
  • Nothing else scoop-y from my end this week, other than my piece about Hopin’s layoffs. I’d love to work on a follow-up story, so if you are a current or former employee at Hopin, or just recently laid off at any tech company, contact me on e-mail at natasha.m@techcrunch.com or on Signal, a secure encrypted messaging app, at 925 609 4188. You can also direct message me on Twitter @nmasc_.

Across the week

We get to hang out in person! Soon! Techcrunch Early Stage 2022 is April 14, aka right around the corner, and it’s in San Francisco. Join us for a one-day founder summit featuring GV’s Terri Burns, Greylock’s Glen Evans and Felicis’ Aydin Senkut. The TC team has been fiending to get back in person, so don’t be surprised if panels are a little spicier than usual.

Here’s the full agenda, and grab your launch tickets here.

Also, Equity, the tech news podcast I co-host alongside Alex Wilhelm and Mary Ann Azevedo, is going live! Join us for a virtual, live recording of our show this upcoming Thursday, February 24th – tickets are free, puns will come at the cost of our producers’ sanity. Our bestie pod,

Found is also joining the live circuit, so listen to them endlessly to prepare. 

​​Seen on TechCrunch

Meta axes head of global community development after he appears on video in underage sex sting

AI acquires the power to manipulate fusion, but wait, it’s actually good news

New York’s Thrive Capital closes its eighth fund with a whopping $3 billion

Still managing engineers remotely? Okay has a performance dashboard for that

When the founder becomes the story

Seen on TechCrunch+

Did venture capitalists undervalue startups for decades?

How to find a job as a scout for a VC firm

Unit’s Itai Damti explains how the company fundraises using culture and value

Dear Sophie: Should we seek a K-1 visa or marriage-based green card?

10 fintech investors discuss what they’re looking for and how to pitch them in Q1 2022

Until next time,

N

It’s a boom! It’s a bubble? It’s a correction.

Hello and welcome back to Equity, a podcast about the business of startups, where we unpack the numbers and nuance behind the headlines.

This is our Wednesday show, where we niche down to a single topic, think about a question and unpack the rest. This week, Natasha and Alex asked:

What can startups learn from the rise, and now struggles, of Hopin? For companies that grew like weed, what’s next?

In the show, we talked through Hopin’s meteoric rise and why we called them the fastest growth story of the era, comparable or better than what Slack and other well-known growth stories managed during their own ascent. However, with Hopin now cutting staff after raising mountains of cash and buying a half-dozen smaller companies, it’s clear that hyper-scaling has limits.

The economy is changing, again, which is also going to shake up which startups have tailwinds, and which have headwinds. Just like it did before. Hopin is perhaps a very visible canary, but it is hardly the only startup that rode COVID-19’s economic disruptions to new heights, which means it won’t be the only company left to navigate a changed world when the winds shift.

Equity drops every Monday at 7:00 a.m. PST, Wednesday, and Friday at 6:00 a.m. PST, so subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, Spotify and all the casts.

Hopin’ into lessons from Peloton

Welcome to Startups Weekly, a fresh human-first take on this week’s startup news and trends. To get this in your inbox, subscribe here.

In the beginning of the pandemic, we learned which companies were unprepared to handle a cataclysmic event. Now, as the world slowly starts to reopen in light of vaccinations, we’re learning which companies that soared during the pandemic also lost their discipline amid it.

Over the past two years, tech rightfully became more critical than ever for the services that it provided to the average human, whether it was empowering an entirely distributed workforce or helping us get access to health services via a screen. It also became vulnerable. Pandemic-era growth has always had a caveat: The tech companies that found product-market fit, and demand beyond their wildest dreams, are the same tech companies that knew their win was at least partially dependent on a rare, once-in-a-lifetime event that (hopefully) would go away one day.

Every growth round, mega-valuation, impressive IPO pop and total-addressable-market bump gave the appearance of strength amid the crisis. But the same tailwinds that drove so much value creation also quieted money-saving conversations and planning for a future deceleration.

Yet, a reckoning, or at least a re-correction, is starting to play out, as shown by recent layoffs at Peloton and Hopin. In Peloton’s case, the layoff is less of a response to a pandemic jolt, and more of a deflation after experiencing a surge of pandemic-fueled demand. Live events platform Hopin is facing a similar mountain. On the podcast over a year ago, we called Hopin the fastest growth story of this era. This week, I heard that Hopin cut 12% of its staff, citing the goal of more sustainable growth.

For my full take on this topic, check out my TC+ column: It’s not a startup reckoning, it’s a re-correction.

In the rest of this newsletter, we’ll crawl into the metaverse and the Big Takeaway from some recent tech twitter drama. We’ll also learn about why Udemy execs left to build a better Udemy. As always, you can support me by sharing this newsletter, following me on Twitter or subscribing to my personal blog.

Deal of the week

Former president of Udemy Business, Darren Shimkus, left the edtech company months before it went public to investigate a feeling. The result, after six months of interviewing heads of data, talent development and engineering, was Modal.

This week I published a first look at the stealthy business, built by Shimkus and former Udemy CEO Dennis Yang, and its recently capitalized strategy of cohort-based learning for the enterprise. Ironically, it’s the duo’s second swing at building the world’s biggest enterprise education company, albeit with an entirely different approach from their shared alma mater.

Here’s why it’s important: At a high level, Modal’s product is simple, and refreshing workforces is clearly in demand, given the spree of financing rounds for upskilling and reskilling companies. The moonshot instead is that edtech veterans are betting on the concept of curated, cohort-based learning, instead of asynchronous learning, as the future of how people comprehend information.

Honorable mentions:

Illustration of a woman opening a large book to represent problems in education,.

Image Credits: Malte Mueller (opens in a new window) / Getty Images

The one time tech twitter drama actually taught me something

Last week, right after I finished up this newsletter, I turned to Twitter and saw controversy over whether venture capitalists should charge founders for advice on their pitch decks. The anger came from the potential that founders could get confused on whether that advice could lean to a future investment from the same VC. In other words, does offering this as a service create a “pay to pitch” type of environment?

Here’s why it’s important: It struck a chord. People were upset about what this says about ethics in a founder-friendly era, why underrepresented founders could be disproportionately impacted by these services and how important it is to be explicit when you are a person in a position of power. It made us ask how much a pitch deck is truly worth, and if we should change our expectations for emerging fund managers versus a GP at Accel.

Ultimately, the Equity team landed on the fact that this type of set up is common among small fund VCs simply as a way to monetize talent and supplement income, but specificity and clarity is necessary when offering services.

distorted twitter logo

Image Credits: Bryce Durbin / TechCrunch

Crawling toward the metaverse

Alex and I jumped on the mic this week to unpack a big question: Will work, or play, bring the metaverse mainstream? Virtual worlds aren’t anything new, but investment in a new metaverse from Facebook and Microsoft has left us scratching our heads on what the future holds.

Here’s why it’s important: I vote that the most effective use case of the metaverse will thus be a little bit more nuanced than our current work stack of productivity tools, calendar, e-mail, Zoom and Slack. The metaverse is best when it feels like a place to congregate around a shared reason or event, unpack a big question or celebrate. Kind of like my Twitter DMs whenever something controversial happens in tech twitter. Check out our three views on metaverse use cases that just dropped on TC+, as well.

All the news that’s fit to tweet:

Image Credits: Bryce Durbin

In the DMs

Nothing too scoop-y from my end this week, other than my piece about Hopin’s layoffs. I’d love to work on a follow-up story, so if you are a current or former employee at Hopin, or just recently laid off at any tech company, contact me on e-mail at natasha.m@techcrunch.com or on Signal, a secure encrypted messaging app, at 925 609 4188. You can also direct message me on Twitter @nmasc_.

Across the week

Thanks to all who tuned into our first-ever Equity Live of the year. We’ll be back in two weeks, but in the meantime, how about tuning into our newest podcast and its live debut? Here’s what you need to know: 

Found, TechCrunch’s podcast that focuses on the stories behind the startups, talks to founders about the peaks and pits of running a business, including the fundraising process, hiring, leadership tactics and the reality of what it’s like to be a founder.

My favorite recent episode featured Elizabeth Ruzzo from Adyn. From the co-hosts: “Not only did she develop the only test for women to ensure they are prescribed the birth control that will be the least likely to have detrimental side effects, she also founded the company and fundraised as the sole employee of the company. She talks to Darrell and Jordan about the challenges she faced as a solo founder/employee raising money for a solution for birth control, why she decided to leave academia, and the complicated regulatory maze she had to navigate to get adyn off the ground.”

Seen on TechCrunch

A Twitter slap fight goes wrong

How Texas is becoming a bitcoin mining hub

Donation site for Ottawa truckers’ ‘Freedom Convoy’ protest exposed donors’ data

The Spotify-Rogan saga highlights the distinction between publishers and platforms

Peter Thiel to leave Facebook board, which you probably forgot he was still on

Seen on TechCrunch+

Why Affirm’s stock is getting hit, and what the selloff means for the BNPL startup market

What’s driving China’s autonomous vehicle frenzy?

3 warning signs that your investor will leave you on the sidelines

Dear Sophie: How can early-stage startups compete for talent?

Until next time,

N

Could the Great Resignation force techies to get career agents?

The Great Resignation led tech workers to realize their power. Salaries are increasing, demand for talent is high and if you’re an engineer at Stripe, there are probably at least three investors who would back your pre-seed company before it even has a kernel of an idea.

However, the hiring market’s heat doesn’t make it any easier to navigate. If you’re the creative director at Shopify or the head of product at Thrasio, you’re probably deluged with job offers.

Free Agency, a startup co-founded by Sherveen Mashayekhi and Alex Rothberg in 2019, hopes to capitalize on the mania for startup talent. The startup thinks tech workers could benefit from the same kind of advocacy Hollywood or sports stars receive from their agents. Free Agency focuses on providing representation to mid to C-level candidates across product, engineering, marketing and design. To date, the company estimates that it has helped candidates set up 4,700 interviews and secure $200,000,000 in negotiated compensation for total salary offers.

As one example, Free Agency helped a client secure a senior director of Product role worth more than $900,000 in total compensation, a 53% jump over the client’s previous pay package. In the process, the company arranged 21 interviews with companies like Snapchat, Coinbase, and Lyft without requiring the client to send out a single application or email during his job search.

“We used our network and job search engine to get him interviews while he slept,” Mashayekhi wrote in an email.

While the agent model is somewhat ubiquitous in Hollywood, tech hasn’t yet adopted the idea of career management through a third party. Mashayekhi, who founded a job marketplace and worked at recruitment companies such as Toptal and Stella.ai, says that technology solutions in HR have historically been aimed at pleasing the employer, not the employee.

“If you’re an enterprising founder in the HR tech space, it’s very easy to go to employers and say ‘pay for my tool’ or ‘pay for the marketplace’ because they understand the urgency of the problem,” he said. “Employers understand that the dollar solves a hiring and retention problem, but historically candidates haven’t really used money in that way.”

Rather than charging employers to “spam” or “pattern match” prospective employees, Free Agency is focused solely on the candidate’s goals. The startup makes money by charging a candidate anywhere from 5% to 10% of their first year’s salary.

Employers, meanwhile, can subscribe to a free service in which Free Agency will share up to five candidates per week with them.

Asking an employee to pay a recruiter to manage their career is a big ask. Also, candidates may not need their services for at least a few years, perhaps far longer, if they are happy in their role.

Mashayekhi argues that Free Agency can demonstrate its value to customers through not only the first placement but helping candidates through promotion cycles, intra-company job changes and up-skilling. The startup is actively building out its product and engineering team to build a Career Operating System, a platform where users can look for job search, performance reviews and compensation benchmarking.

Another question is whether Free Agency will place those who need its services the most — historically overlooked people who often don’t have access to networks or key information — or simply help already well-connected clients land better gigs.

“Candidly, our diversity breakdown on our roster of Free Agents is mediocre today,” Mashayekhi said in an email. The startup plans to deploy resources for sales, customer acquisition and go-to-market programs to change this. Currently, talent agents on the platform are 60% female, with 20% coming from underrepresented groups.

Despite these question marks, Free Agency landed a $10 million Series A last month led by early-stage firm Maveron. Tellingly, 20 Free Agency clients also invested in the round, alongside Kevin Durant’s Thirty Five Ventures, Resolute, Bloomberg Beta, Kygo’s Palm Tree Crew and others. The company had previously raised a $5.35 million seed round.

Still, the ultimate test for Free Agency will be if it can convince enough candidates to proactively pursue a more managed and outsourced job search. While the Great Resignation may have been an impetus for candidates to try out a service like Free Agency, it’s unclear whether jobseekers will be quite so confident once the cycle passes.

3 views: How should founders prepare for a decline in startup valuations and investor interest?

When the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak a global health emergency at the end of January 2020, the startup world held its breath.

Many entrepreneurs prepared for a slowdown in funding, putting hiring and expansion plans on ice as they searched for ways to continue operating in a world that had been remade by the pandemic. TechCrunch and other tech publications ran stories and interviews with investors who noisily departed Silicon Valley, screening potential investments remotely as they set up shop in Austin, Miami and elsewhere to see how the situation played out.

But the pandemic did not quell investors’ appetites: Last year saw new records set for VC funding, unicorn creation and, in some cases, far less interest in due diligence than in years past.

Money is still available for founders who have storytelling skills and timely ideas, but investors have higher expectations now when it comes to revenue and growth, which could limit the kinds of startups that receive funding.

The question under consideration this week: How should founders prepare for an eventual retreat in startup valuations and investor interest?

In this column, Natasha Mascarenhas, Mary Ann Azevedo and Alex Wilhelm, the trio behind the Equity podcast, share their predictions about what’s in store for startup funding and due diligence in 2022:

Natasha Mascarenhas: ‘The Lean Startup’ may head back to the bestseller list

When I first considered this question, I jumped to the obvious: Private startups, noting the public market slowdown, will refocus on their runway in preparation for a parallel cooldown in venture funding. But, as we’ve discussed previously, there is no shortage of venture capital in the markets today. Since all those mega-fund dollars need to go somewhere, I believe early-stage and mid-stage companies will be able to enjoy a capital-rich environment for a little longer than late-stage companies, giving them a bit of a bubble inside of a broader burst.

Is it idealistic to expect startups to build out leaner, less opulent operations in a growth-focused environment where so many enjoy lofty valuations and access to excess capital?

My thought is that, in response to a dip, we’ll see the re-emergence of lean startups that know how to stretch a dollar until it squeals. For context, Eric Ries’ “The Lean Startup” was written in response to the 2008 crisis and promoted the idea of testing, building and managing a startup all at the same time, prioritizing minimum viable products over a perfectly buttoned-up platform to create faster, nimbler organizations.

Is today’s market sad or sane?

Hello and welcome back to Equity, a podcast about the business of startups, where we unpack the numbers and nuance behind the headlines.

This is our Wednesday show, where we niche down to a single topic, think about a question and unpack the rest. This week, Natasha and Alex brought on Bessemer partner Mary D’Onofrio to chat about the public market slump, but more importantly, its trickle down impact on private companies. Our big question was a broad and important one, built off of our most recent three views column for TechCrunch+.

How is this change in market conditions going to affect startups?

As a trio, we chatted about the obvious and non-obvious impact on startups as companies like Peloton, Netflix and indexes like the BVP Nasdaq Cloud Index, flash warning signs. We asked questions like what is ahead for startups that raised at premium valuations during the market peak and how the exit market may shape up in the coming quarters. D’Onofrio gave two particularly hot takes on the future of due diligence and the nearly-shuttered IPO window, so make sure to tune in.

We don’t do too many guests on the show these days due in part to our all-virtual recording setup thanks to COVID. But D’Onofrio was a blast to have on, so we’ll be asking her back before too long. Enjoy!

Equity drops every Monday at 7:00 a.m. PST, Wednesday, and Friday at 6:00 a.m. PST, so subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, Spotify and all the casts.

Mentor Collective shakes off its boots to scale student support services

Mentorship is a crucial ingredient to a student’s success. The demand for a platform to make the art of advice more accessible is thus easy for entrepreneurs to identify then pitch, but the serendipity — or the chasm between what makes someone an effective mentor versus just a speed dial for questions — is harder for them to scale.

Startups that want to scale mentorship across different industries need to build up a supply of mentors diverse, and present, enough to click with the variety of students in today’s society: ranging from the part-time graduate student who is busy with parent duties, to the burnt out, first-generation Ivy League star, to the engineer who just broke into tech but is struggling with work/life balance.

For Mentor Collective, a Boston-based startup founded in 2014, answers to the challenges and opportunities within scaled mentorship have taken time to figure out. The startup, founded by Jackson Boyar and James Lu Morrissey, began by pairing up students with mentors virtually, and over time has added more structure and management to its marketplace. It approaches the human questions of “how do you support intrinsic motivation” through participant surveys and algorithmic matching — while tackling diversity of student needs by building different curriculums for first-generation individuals, adult learners, veterans, BIPOC and others.

To date, Mentor Collective has 165 institutional, higher-education customers, including University of Colorado Denver, Penn State and Dartmouth. It also works with corporations such as Wells Fargo. On the supply side, Mentor Collective says it has trained more than 50,000 mentors since first launching.

While companies and competitors, including BetterUp and Sounding Board, have cumulatively raised hundreds of millions of dollars, Mentor Collective decided to bootstrap for the past seven years. CEO and co-founder Jackson Boyar believes the long game was necessary so they didn’t take too much money too early, like some other early-stage edtech companies he’s seen launch fast, and fail faster.

“Even though it took a really long time to get to where we are, we feel confident to spend this money and know it won’t negatively impact students,” Boyar said. “It did take us half a decade to figure this out, and if somebody thinks that it takes half a year, it’s a little audacious and not realistic…if your mission is about doing good, you probably need to adapt that mindset.”

Boyar announced today that his company has raised $21 million in a Series A round led by Resolve Growth Partners and continued investment from Lumina Foundation, an Indianapolis-based foundation focused on making lifelong learning more accessible.

Boyar initially started the company thinking that it would be a nonprofit. While that has since obviously changed, he thinks that starting a company by aggressively focusing on “product efficacy with the expectation that maybe it wouldn’t make that much money” helped build a key foundation.

“If you’re trying to convince a college dean or provost to buy something and you don’t have a randomized control trial that shows the impact on students, it’s kind of ridiculous that you’d ask me to spend $100,000 on your product,” he said.

The founder decided that it was time to take serious money when the company doubled in revenue last year, now nearing $10 million in annual recurring revenue. The more important milestone? Mentor Collective finally began offering more predictable outcomes for students, he claims.

According to an analysis conducted by Dr. Jenna Harmon, mentorship research lead and Dr. Joe Sutherland, head of data science, Mentor Collective helped power a 3.84% increase in student retention and a 14% increase in sense of belonging.

“These numbers might initially appear low, but even just 1% retention is significant in education…4% across a class of 5,000 students is 200 fewer students dropping out of school,” said Boyar. The magic metric for the company, as he just explained, is how it lowers drop-out rates for schools through giving students more subjective-based support. In money terms, if Mentor Collective can prove that a mentor increases a student’s likelihood of graduating, it cloud show that the university will gain more tuition revenue by using its service.

Another company, EdSights, has raised millions for a chatbot that connects students to resources or support services. “In a perfect world [where] we somehow had a magic wand that allowed us to collect the data on whatever we want on our fingers, what would we want to know to prevent [college] students from dropping out?,” co-founder Claudia Recchi said in a previous interview.

“Our form of mentoring is finding someone who does, or at least can, relate, and connecting them to you at the right moment in that journey, so that you can build a greater sense of belonging, that you’re more likely to graduate, that you get all the social mobility that college promises, but ultimately isn’t delivered to students who don’t look like the traditional college student,” Boyar said.

Currently, more than 50% of Mentor Collective’s mentor cohort is non-white, and 36% identify as first-generation college students. For now, the company is relying on volunteer mentors to support its mission, but now, with venture backing, could be under pressure to start paying the people it makes money off of. The COVID-19 pandemic helped the company secure 83,000 mentorships in 2021, double the year prior and up from 19,874 in 2019.

Looking back, Boyar thinks that his company could have been even more disciplined in focus during its earlier days. The demand for mentoring means that there are dozens of use cases for the platform, and the company often gets inbound from a variety of customers, from libraries to the military. While saying yes could work for short-term growth, the true efficacy of mentorship in those fields looks very different from person to person.

Now, with new incentives laid atop the company, Mentor Collective will need to make a series of choices on how to stay thoughtful and ambitious on the way it grows.