Google brings in BERT to improve its search results

Google today announced one of the biggest updates to its search algorithm in recent years. By using new neural networking techniques to better understand the intentions behind queries, Google says it can now offer more relevant results for about one in 10 searches in the U.S. in English (with support for other languages and locales coming later). For featured snippets, the update is already live globally.

In the world of search updates, where algorithm changes are often far more subtle, an update that affects 10% of searches is a pretty big deal (and will surely keep the world’s SEO experts up at night).

Google notes that this update will work best for longer, more conversational queries — and in many ways, that’s how Google would really like you to search these days, because it’s easier to interpret a full sentence than a sequence of keywords.

2019 10 25 0945 1The technology behind this new neural network is called “Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers,” or BERT. Google first talked about BERT last year and open-sourced the code for its implementation and pre-trained models. Transformers are one of the more recent developments in machine learning. They work especially well for data where the sequence of elements is important, which obviously makes them a useful tool for working with natural language and, hence, search queries.

This BERT update also marks the first time Google is using its latest Tensor Processing Unit (TPU) chips to serve search results.

Ideally, this means that Google Search is now better able to understand exactly what you are looking for and provide more relevant search results and featured snippets. The update started rolling out this week, so chances are you are already seeing some of its effects in your search results.


Source: Tech Crunch

Meet Bespoke Financial, a lender for cannabis companies backed by Snoop Dogg’s Casa Verde Capital

Bespoke Financial wants to provide cannabis businesses with the same kind of financial services that other businesses get, but that dispensaries and growers can’t yet access.

The regulations around cannabis operations are so stringent at the local level — and so nebulous at the federal level — that national banks won’t give businesses in the cannabis industry the same basic services (like short-term loans).

That’s why one former Goldman Sachs banker has partnered with two entrepreneurs from the traditional agriculture industry to create Bespoke Financial. And it’s why the company has raised $7 million in financing led by Casa Verde Capital — the investment firm launched by legendary cannabis aficionado, Calvin Broadus (AKA Snoop Dogg).

In some ways, George Mancheril is the new face of the cannabis business. The former banker hails from Goldman Sachs and Guggenheim Partners and worked on the desks that dealt with alternative lending.

A transplant to Los Angeles roughly six years ago, Mancheril says he saw the migration of legally sanctioned cannabis begin for recreational use and knew there would be opportunities for new lending businesses.

“Cannabis will become a broad, mature industry just like any other, and if that is going to happen, there needs to be a debt structure that can support that,” Mancheril says.

The biggest impediment to the industry’s growth is the one that Bespoke Financial wants to tackle first — and that’s access to debt.

To build the company’s first product, Mancheril looked to his co-founder’s Pablo Borquez-Schwarzbeck and Benjamin Dusastre. Borquez-Schwarzbeck and Dusastre previously launched ProducePay, a fintech platform focused on produce farmers that has financed roughly $2 billion in perishable commodities throughout 13 countries. It’s backed by around $200 million in venture capital and debt financing.  

What Mancheril and his co-founders have done is take ProducePay’s underwriting model and apply it to the cannabis industry. The financial instrument that they’re starting with is known “in the business” as factoring.

It’s basically advancing money to businesses for a contract that’s signed in exchange for a cut of the money once a company gets paid for the goods or services they’ve rendered.

BF Website Diagrams Final 02

“While the US legal cannabis market is forecasted to grow over 20% annually, reaching $23B by 2022, the industry’s true growth potential is limited by long cash flow cycles throughout the supply chain and a lack of scalable and efficient capital sources,” says Bespoke Financial co-founder and chief executive, George Mancheril, in a statement. “Our approach will dramatically improve cash flow cycles across the supply chain and provide scalable working capital to fuel our clients’ growth.”

The $7 million infusion from investors, including Casa Verde, Greenhouse Capital Partners and Outbound Ventures, will be used to build out the company’s business and establish its first credit lines with customers. Mancheril says it already has around $3 million worth of loans revolving through its business. Right now, the company is focused on California, but says it could expand to other regions that are embracing legalization. 

“In general, in the cannabis industry overall, it’s difficult to access any part of the financial system,” says Karan Wadhera, a managing director at Casa Verde. “Now that we’re moving into a place where equity financing is getting expensive, a company like Bespoke plays an important and valuable role in the ecosystem to help young brands and mature brands get access to working capital when they need it the most.”


Source: Tech Crunch

Stewart Butterfield says Microsoft sees Slack as existential threat

In a wide ranging interview with Wall Street Journal global technology editor Jason Dean yesterday, Slack CEO and co-founder Stewart Butterfield had some strong words regarding Microsoft, saying his company represented an existential threat to the software giant.

The interview took place at the WSJ Tech Live event. When Butterfield was asked about a chart Microsoft released in July during the Slack quiet period, which showed Microsoft Teams had 13 million daily active users compared to 12 million for Slack, Butterfield appeared taken aback by the chart.

Microsoft Teams chart

Chart: Microsoft

“The bigger point is that’s kind of crazy for Microsoft to do, especially during the quiet period. I had someone say it was unprecedented since the [Steve] Ballmer era. I think it’s more like unprecedented since the Gates’ 98-99 era. I think they feel like we’re an existential threat,” he told Dean.

It’s worth noting, that as Dean pointed out, you could flip that existential threat statement. Microsoft is a much bigger business with a trillion dollar market cap versus Slack’s $400 million. It also has the benefit of linking Microsoft Teams to Office 365 subscriptions, but Butterfield says the smaller company with the better idea has often won in the past.

For starters, Butterfield noted that of his biggest customers, more than two-thirds are actually using Slack and Office 365 in combination. “When we look at our top 50 biggest customers, 70% of them are not only Office 365 users, but they’re Office 365 users who use the integrations with Slack,” he said.

He went on to say that smaller companies have taken on giants before and won. As examples, he held up Microsoft itself, which in the 80s was a young upstart taking on established players like IBM. In the late 1990s, Google prevailed as the primary search engine in spite of the fact that Microsoft controlled most of the operating system and browser market at the time. Google then tried to go after Facebook with its social tools, all of which have failed over the years. “And so the lesson we take from that is, often the small startup with real traction with customers has an advantage versus the large incumbent with multiple lines of business,” he said.

When asked by Dean if Microsoft, which ran afoul with the Justice Department in the late 1990s, should be the subject of more regulatory scrutiny for its bundling practices, Butterfield admitted he wasn’t a legal expert, but joked that it was “surprisingly unsportsmanlike conduct.” He added more seriously, “We see things like offering to pay companies to use Teams and that definitely leans on a lot of existing market power. Having said that, we have been asked many times, and maybe it’s something we should have looked at, but we haven’t taken any action.”


Source: Tech Crunch

Why per-seat pricing needs to die in the age of AI

Pricing is the most important, least-discussed element of the software industry. In the past, founders could get away with giving pricing short shrift under the mantra, “the best product will ultimately win.” No more.

In the age of AI-enabled software, pricing and product are linked; pricing fundamentally impacts usage, which directly informs product quality. 

Therefore, pricing models that limit usage, like the predominant per-seat per month structure, limit quality. And thus limit companies.

For the first time in 20 years, there is a compelling argument to make for changing the way that SaaS is priced. For those selling AI-enabled software, it’s time to examine new pricing models. And since AI is currently the best-funded technology in the software industry — by far — pricing could soon be changing at a number of vendors.

Why per-seat pricing needs to die in the age of AI

Per-seat pricing makes AI-based products worse. Traditionally, the functionality of software hasn’t changed with usage. Features are there whether users take advantage of them or not — your CRM doesn’t sprout new bells and whistles when more employees log in; it’s static software. And since it’s priced per-user, a customer incurs more costs with every user for whom it’s licensed.

AI, on the other hand, is dynamic. It learns from every data point it’s fed, and users are its main source of information; usage of the product makes the product itself better. Why, then, should AI software vendors charge per user, when doing so inherently disincentivizes usage? Instead, they should design pricing models that maximize product usage, and therefore, product value.

Per-seat pricing hinders AI-based products from capturing value they create

AI-enabled software promises to make people and businesses far more efficient, transforming every aspect of the enterprise through personalization. Software tailored to the specific needs of the user has been able to command a significant premium relative to generic competitors; for example, Salesforce offers a horizontal CRM that must serve users from Fortune 100s to SMBs across every industry. Veeva, which provides a CRM optimized for the life sciences vertical, commands a subscription price many multiples higher, in large part because it has been tailored to the pharma user’s end needs.

AI-enabled software will be even more tailored to the individual context of each end-user, and thus, should command an even higher price. Relying on per-seat pricing gives buyers an easy point of comparison ($/seat is universalizable) and immediately puts the AI vendor on the defensive. Moving away from per-seat pricing allows the AI vendor to avoid apples-to-apples comparisons and sell their product on its own unique merits. There will be some buyer education required to move to a new model, but the winners in the AI era will use these discussions to better understand and serve their customers.

Per-seat pricing will ultimately cause AI vendors to cannibalize themselves

Probably the most important upsell lever software vendors have traditionally used is tying themselves to the growth of their customers. As their customers grow, the logic goes, so should the vendors’ contract (presumably because the vendor had some part in driving this growth). 

Tethering yourself to per-seat pricing will make contract expansion much harder.

However, effective AI-based software makes workers significantly more efficient. As such, seat counts should not need to grow linearly with company growth, as they have in the era of static software. Tethering yourself to per-seat pricing will make contract expansion much harder. Indeed, it could result in a world where the very success of the AI software will entail contract contraction.

How to price software in the age of AI

Here are some key ideas to keep top of mind when thinking about pricing AI software:

  • Start by using ROI analysis to figure out how much to charge

This is the same place to start as in static software land. (Check out my primer on this approach here.) Work with customers to quantify the value your software delivers across all dimensions. A good rule of thumb is that you should capture 10-30% of the value you create. In dynamic software land, that value may actually increase over time as the product is used more and the dataset improves. It’s best to calculate ROI after the product gets to initial scale deployment within a company (not at the beginning). It’s also worth recalculating after a year or two of use and potentially adjusting pricing. Tracking traditionally consumer usage metrics like DAU/MAU becomes absolutely critical in enterprise AI, as usage is arguably the core driver of ROI.

While ROI is a good way to determine how much to charge, do not use ROI as the mechanism for how to charge. Tying your pricing model directly to ROI created can cause lots of confusion and anxiety when it comes time to settle up at year-end. This can create issues with establishing causality and sets up an unnecessarily antagonistic dynamic with the customer. Instead, use ROI as a level-setting tool and other mechanisms to determine how to arrive at specific pricing.


Source: Tech Crunch

NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine explains how startups can help with Artemis Moon missions

At this week’s International Astronautical Congress, where the space industry, international space agencies and researchers from around the world convene to discuss the state of space technology and business, I asked NASA Administrator Jim Bridenstine about what role he sees for startups in contributing to his agency’s ambitious Artemis program. Artemis, named after Apollo’s twin sister Artemis, one the gods of Greek myth, is NASA’s mission to return human beings to the surface of the Moon – this time to stay – and to use that as a staging ground for further exploration to Mars and beyond.

Bridenstine, fielding the question during a press Q+A about Artemis, said that the program is incredibly welcoming of contributions from startups large and small, and that it sees a number of different areas where contributions from younger space companies can have a big impact.

“When we talk about entrepreneurs, there are big entrepreneurs and there are small entrepreneurs, but know this: What we’re building it the [Lunar] Gateway is open architecture, and we want to go with commercial partners,” Bridenstine said. “So there are in fact, a number of companies here [at IAC], big companies that have said they want to go to the Moon, they want to go sustainably, they want to be part of Artemis, and the Gateway is available to them.”

gateway orion approaching 1

Artist’s concept of NASA’s Lunar Gateway with the Orion capsule approaching to dock.

The Lunar Gateway is a station NASA intends to put in orbit around the Moon to act as a staging ground for its vehicles, a key step to ensure the process of landing things on the Moon once they reach lunar orbit is more easily accomplished. Bridenstine pointed out that in the Broad Agency Agreement (BAA) that NASA originally put out for the Artemis program, it went further still and said that it welcomed proposals from private space companies that involve going directly to the Moon, bypassing the Gateway entirely .

Actually getting to the Moon has been taken on by some of the deeper-pocketed and more well-established entrepreneurs among the so-called ‘New Space’ companies, including SpaceX . But Artemis participation goes well beyond the high-priced task of building vehicles capable of getting from Earth to lunar orbit, according to Bridenstine.

“We’re going to need cargo on the surface of the Moon,” he said, noting that the Space Launch System (SLS) and Orion crew capsule Artemis will use to take humans to the Moon in 2024 will lean on advance payloads to better ensure mission success. “[W]hen we talk about aggregating a lander at the gateway – when we talk about, maybe even putting hardware on the surface the Moon, including science hardware, like the Viper neutron spectrometer, an IR spectrometer helping us understand the regolith and the water ice, what’s there on the surface of the Moon, where it is and in what quantities […] we’re going to need those science instruments delivered to the surface of the Moon.”

Blue Origin’s Blue Moon lander.

Indeed, there are companies poised to deliver cargo via lunar landers in advance of, or in time with, NASA’s 2024 target for a human landing, including Astrobotic’s Peregrine Moon lander, which is looking to launch in 2021, and Blue Origin’s Blue Moon lander. Both these landers, and the payloads they carry, could include startup-designed equipment and systems to pave the way for sustainable human occupation of our large natural satellite. In fact, Bridenstine suggested some potential payloads that could be even more wild than advance data-gathering hardware.

“Maybe even – again it depends on budgets, and I’m not promising anything between now and 2024 – but maybe even an inflatable habitat on the surface of the moon so that when our astronauts get there they have a place to go, and they can stay for longer periods of time,” he said. “Is that in the realm of possibility? Absolutely.”

Bridenstine continued that the agency is already working with many smaller, entrepreneurial businesses, and intends to continue exploring partnerships with more. There’s a clear and growing need for lunar cargo from NAA, in increasing volumes, the Administrator pointed out.

“On top of SLS and Orion we need additional capability, there are opportunities there for all kinds of commercial companies entrepreneurs,” he said. “We also have small business investment and research that NASA is involved in, and we’re on-ramping small businesses all the time. In fact, right now we have the Commercial Lunar Payload Services [CLPS] program underway. We have nine companies that have signed up […] two of them now have task orders to deliver to the Moon in 2021 […] We’re on-ramping, not only those nine companies, but we want to on ramp additional companies, and maybe even bigger companies for larger landing opportunities because like I said, we’re going to have a lot more needs in the future for cargo on the surface of the Moon.”


Source: Tech Crunch

Fair, the SoftBank-backed car subscription startup, lays off 40% of staff, sacks CFO

As the market continues to turn against the wave of highly valued, venture-backed startups operating with little end in sight to their huge losses — Uber and WeWork being two prime examples — another startup is taking a proactive step to get ahead of the story, by cutting costs and restructuring before public opinion forces the issue on them.

Fair.com, a startup building a flexible car ownership business that is valued at $1.2 billion — backed by some $500 million in equity from Softbank and others, plus billions more dollars in debt funding — said today that it will be laying off 40% of its staff. On top of this, it is removing its CFO, Tyler Painter, the brother of the CEO and co-founder (and car business veteran) Scott Painter. He’s being replaced in the interim by Kirk Shryoc.

It’s not clear how many people 40% translates to in terms of headcount, nor which areas of the business will be affected. Fair’s CEO Painter is not disclosing the full number of employees that the company has across the US, or which parts of the business are going to be restructured. (As a marker though, there are some 539 employees listed on LinkedIn, which would work out at about 215 people.)

He did note that the business is not planning on shuttering any specific operations: leasing services for those driving for on-demand services, and its consumer-focused service will both remain operational, even as certain geographies and certain segments of the markets that Fair is serving are proving to be unprofitable.

This is one area where the CFO change will play.

“As Fair has grown, the skill sets needed to drive the business forward change. Kirk has a decade of experience running treasury and capital markets for large fleet companies, and is well known on the capital markets side,” the company said in a separate statement. “We’ve been working with him over the course of this year, and given our renewed focus on our acquisition and financing approach, now was the right time to ask him to step in to manage our upstream banking relationships and the fleet management.”

The full internal memo that Painter sent out to staff is below.

Painter (the CEO) said in an interview earlier today that the reason for the move was to proactively come out to make changes to help the company become more profitable at a time when the “capital markets” are focused on profitability — perhaps more than the over-focus on growth that has fuelled a lot of the biggest investments in recent years.

“It’s hard building a sustainable company and these are the choices you have to make,” he said of the news.

Fair has been growing at a fast clip in the last couple of years, at a rate of 5x, Painter said. In 2018, ahead of its funding from Softbank, the company picked up the unprofitable leasing business of Uber; and earlier this year it picked up Canvas, a car leasing business previously owned by Ford. In both cases, the terms of the deals were undisclosed.

At the time of the Canvas deal, Fair said it had about 45,000 subscribers currently in the U.S., with 3.2 million downloads across 30 markets, adding some 3,800 subscribers coming on from Canvas.

It’s notable that Fair is backed by the same investor that helped propel both WeWork and Uber to giant valuations ahead of the companies seeing their fortunes change, Uber’s in the public markets where it’s been pounded for its losses; and WeWork before it ever got to its IPO: the company had to withdraw its filing and just this week saw Softbank scoop up 80% of its business at a cut price in order to keep the whole thing from going under.

Cautionary tales for Fair, which is only profitable in certain parts of its business and is now turning its attention to fixing that.

Painter maintained that this was a proactive move, made not because Softbank or another investor leaned on it to do so. It’s notable that the last time the company raised equity funding was close to one year ago, so this could help put it in a healthier position were it considering to raise again.

“Softbank is a big shareholder and supporting my focus, and that is the reality right now,” Painter said. “Leaning on us is not the term,” he added in response to my multiple questions of whether Softbank pressured it to make these changes. “They are supporting us. There is a big difference.

“There’s no question that the world is changing and there is a lot of noise in system, but for us we are doing this proactively, on our terms. We recognise what we are seeing so we are being proactive to avoid this. We wouldn’t have the ability were it not for capital partners like Softbank. Despite all this noise they remain a steadfast believer in Fair.”

Last week’s big story was about how Airbnb, which has reportedly been planning to go public next year, has seen a widening loss. Today’s news could be a sign that we will see more of these rationalizations to come.

Memo here:

As we discussed at our last Fair Family Lunch, today’s companies must demonstrate a path to sustainable growth and profitability. Fair is no different. As one of the pioneers in automotive fintech, we now need to focus on being a profitable company. Our technology, our simple product design, and our focus on the customer are second to none. While we are proud of our growth, we are here for the long term. This means that we’ve decided to take proactive steps now to ensure we are a profitable public company later.

With the help and guidance of our leadership team, I’ve decided to focus the company’s resources on strengthening Fair’s core technology and reducing costs associated with the capital-intensive supply side of our business. Going forward, Fair will be a smaller team, focused on doing fewer things well. As part of the process of achieving profitability, we’re reducing our headcount across the business.

While these are the decisions that every entrepreneur dreads making, these are important for us to be able to safeguard the future of the business we’ve all worked so hard to build.

I remain grateful for this team’s hard work and optimistic for the future. We have created an entirely new category that consumers love. We’ve served tens of thousands of customers. We’ve powered Uber drivers’ livelihoods. We’ve helped everyone get access to the car they want, when they want, for how long they want — all on their phone and without taking on debt. We all did this together. We should all be proud of these achievements and I am personally grateful to all those who have given their time and expertise to deliver the future we set out to build.

Now, we will set out to transform the supply side of our business over the coming months, focus on building a profitable model, and operating with the rigor of a publicly traded company.

I expect everyone to have questions about what this means for them and the health of Fair, and while I can’t promise to have all the answers, I commit to keeping you informed along the way. These types of changes are painful, as I know from my previous experiences building companies. Our leadership team is responsible for the long-term sustainability of Fair, and no matter how difficult these decisions are, we believe they are the right steps in ensuring we have a bright future as a company. We thank you for being on this journey with us.

-Scott


Source: Tech Crunch

SoftBank says it has now invested $18.5 billion in WeWork, ‘more than the GDP’ of Bolivia, which has 11.5 million people

Yesterday, in addressing nervous WeWork employees at an all-hands, the company’s new chairman, SoftBank executive Marcelo Claure, told those gathered that their days of worrying are over, says Recode, which obtained a leaked recording of the meeting.

In comments that may stun industry observers who haven’t done the math — and upset at least some percentage of SoftBank investors — Claure is quoted as telling employees: “We have guaranteed the future of WeWork, but more importantly is we’re putting the future back into our hands. There’s no more days needed to go fundraising. There’s no more days needed to go prove to the investor community that we’re a viable company. The size of the commitment that SoftBank has made to this company in the past and now is $18.5 billion. To put the things in context, that is bigger than the GDP of my country where I came from. That’s a country where there’s 11 million people.”

Claure, a native of Bolivia who was named chairman as part of SoftBank’s rescue of the beleaguered co-working company, has been a SoftBank lieutenant for the last five years, and currently holds a variety of titles on its behalf, including COO of SoftBank Group Corp, CEO of SoftBank Group International, and CEO of SoftBank Latin America.

He has said he first met SoftBank founder Masayoshi Son after building up his own business, Brightstar — a  cellphone reseller — then selling 57 percent of it to SoftBank in 2013 in a deal that valued the company at $2.2 billion. SoftBank later acquired more of the company before deciding to explore a sale of the low-margin business last year for $1 billion.

By then, Claure was running Sprint, a SoftBank-backed property that installed Claure as CEO in 2014, where he presided over a massive share slide that had begun before he joined the company and ended only last year when T-Mobile and Sprint agreed to merge. (The deal has been green-lit by the FCC and the Department of Justice, but it’s still facing a lawsuit from several state attorneys general who are trying to block the deal, saying it could hamper competition and drive prices higher. Claure stepped away from running the company and into the role of Sprint’s executive chairman in May of last year to become COO of SoftBank. Sprint’s shares have meanwhile held mostly steady for the past year. )

In talking with WeWork employees, Claure painted a rosy picture of his own career. (“Masa told me, ‘You’re a great entrepreneur. You built a company from scratch, very successful.’ He says, ‘You’re a good operator. You fixed Sprint.’”)

To assuage fears, he also underscored repeatedly the gamble the SoftBank is taking on WeWork, telling employees, “We’ve had many, many endless nights with Masa in terms of what was the next thing to do with WeWork. I would say that 99 percent of advice that we got is to cut your losses and run away, but Masa absolutely is a believer in WeWork and the mission and disruption.

“You say why, right? The easy thing was just run away. There were no need. We didn’t have to come in and make an investment of this size. We’re basically betting SoftBank. We’re betting our reputation and we’re betting everything we have that this is going to be a success story. We want people to look at this move as not a failure, but we want this move as a genius move. We had many, many nights of debate. Everything that we look at the business, the more we dig, the more we love the business, the more community managers we interact with, the more we love the business.”

As for how WeWork saves the business, that’s not clear yet, said Claure.

“My goal in the next 30 days is to work with this management team, to work with Artie, Sebastian, and all the incredibly talented members of the team to basically set up a plan,” he said. “This plan is going to be very clear. We’re all going to know what each one of us is supposed to do. I’m going to make sure that it’s not an empty plan. I’m going to make sure there’s numbers. I’m going to make sure that we can measure. I’m going to make sure that we can hold people accountable.”

One possible hitch that Claure understandably didn’t raise yesterday — one in addition to the countless obvious challenges WeWork faces in trying to generate forward momentum, including convincing corporate customers not to look elsewhere for office space — is the Committee on Foreign Investment in the U.S, or Cfius.

As Bloomberg reported last night, SoftBank will seek national security approval from Cfius for its takeover, and the committee has stymied the Japanese conglomerate before.

It put conditions on SoftBank’s majority ownership of Sprint; it restricted its control of the investment firm Fortress Investment Group for which it paid $3.3 billion in late 2017; it also held up SoftBank when it wanted to fill two board seats after it sunk billions into Uber. Indeed, SoftBank was never able to fill those spots, noted Bloomberg. Once the ride-share company went public, it voided some of its obligations to SoftBank.


Source: Tech Crunch

Legged lunar rover startup Spacebit taps Latin American partners for Moon mission

UK-based lunar rover startup Spacebit, a company developing robotic exploration hardware for use on the Moon, announced two new partners that will help it develop and finalize its technology ahead of its target mission date of 2021. The Ecuadorian Civilian Space Agency (EXA) and Mexico’s Dereum will be providing the technology that Spacebit will employ on both its deployer and the robot rover it’s preparing for use on the Moon.

This marks the first time that Latin American companies will participate in a mission to the lunar surface, and Spacebit CEO Pavlo Tanasyuk was joined by Dereum CEO Carlos Mariscal and EXA COO Ronnie Nader to talk about the news at the International Astronautical Congress in Washington, D.C.

“We have Ecuador, and Mexico as our technical partners,” Tanasyuk said. “So in addition to this being the first lunar mission from the UK, it also is the first Latin American mission with a consortium of Latin American countries participating along with the UK.”

Both the EXA and Dereum have strong technical chops when it comes to spacecraft and space-based robotics, with the EXA sousing on developing technology that is “efficient, cheap and reliable,” according to Nader, while Dereum’s Mariscal said that his organization is well-known globally for its work on building robots for use in space, with an extensive track record. Their expertise should help a lot in Spacebit’s efforts to build, test and validate its robotic lunar rover, which employs a novel walking system for getting around, whereas all rovers to date have used wheels for transportation.

Spacebit CEO Pavlo Tanasyuk

Spacebit CEO Pavlo Tanasyuk

“We are planning on doing a swarm technology exploration plan, where we have multiple small spider walking rovers deployed from a wheeled mothership, along with being able to have some redundancy and the ability to do 3D LIDAR scanning of the interior  lunar caves and lava tubes,” Tanasyuk said.

“It’s essentially a data as a service business model,” he added, explaining how they’ll seek to monetize the business. “Our primary focus for early missions are to do exploration and mapping of lunar lava tubes to be able to characterize the lunar subsurface environment for potential suitability for future human habitation.”

Spacebit, founded in 2014, is funded privately via Tanasyuk himself, along with a couple of other private investors. He said that his company is fully funded through its first mission, a berth aboard the Peregrine Moon lander being launched by Astrobotic in 2021 (which itself has a price tag of $1.7 million he said). The first mission won’t be an entire swarm, but a single rover sent up as a demonstration unit to prove out its technology.


Source: Tech Crunch

Vendr, already profitable, raises $2M to replace your enterprise sales team

Vendr has developed an enterprise SaaS solution for managing enterprise SaaS.

The new startup, founded by InVision’s former head of enterprise sales Ryan Neu, is another standout from Y Combinator’s latest batch. Contrary to the majority of those businesses, however, Vendr is already profitable.

In classic YC fashion, the company has created software to sell to other startups and as such, it was quick to gain the confidence of top venture capital investors. Headquartered in Boston, Vendr has raised a $2 million round led by F-Prime Capital, with participation from Ashton Kutcher’s Sound Ventures, Joe Montana’s Liquid2 Ventures, Garage VC and angel investors including Canva co-founder & chief operating officer Cliff Obrecht and HubSpot COO JD Sherman.

The company offers subscription-based software, priced depending on company headcount, that helps fast-growing businesses buy and manage enterprise SaaS. In short, the product cuts the human out of the sales process, allowing companies to purchase or upgrade software using software. The goal isn’t to eliminate the sales profession, rather to put an end to “persuasion driven” sales, Neu explains, and to make enterprise software purchases as easy as consumer product purchases.

Vendr 1

Boston-based Vendr graduated from the Y Combinator startup accelerator earlier this year.

“We see software sales actually going away because most people are tired of being sold to, they are tired of being persuaded, they want to transact,” Neu, who previously led sales at HubSpot, tells TechCruch. “Vendr was created to allow people to transact software without actually having to talk to people.”

Founded 14 months ago, Vendr has reached $1 million in annual recurring revenue, which, for context, has historically been amongst the benchmarks necessary for a SaaS startup to raise its Series A. Neu says the company is growing 15% month-over-month with monthly recurring revenue currently sitting at $96,500. Already profitable, Neu says they want to put themselves in a position in which they don’t have to raise any additional outside capital.

“I can’t imagine looking at the bank account every month and watching it deplete,” Neu said. “We want to be in a position where we can control our own destiny.”

Vendr currently operates with a team of six employees and 19 customers including Canva, Grammarly, GitLab, Brex, HubSpot and InVision. The company is also backed by Okta’s general counsel Jon Runyan, AppDynamics’ COO Dan Wright and YC partner Aaron Epstein.


Source: Tech Crunch

A scalable plan for onboarding your first 500 employees

Employee onboarding isn’t all desk balloons and company T-shirts — it’s a critical moment when new hires begin integrating into the culture and workflows of their new company. So, it’s no surprise that one of the most frequently-asked questions among first-time founders is how to run a successful onboarding process.

It’s a delicate balance. Founders don’t want to immediately throw new employees into the deep end. But, at the same time, they must help recent hires develop an understanding of the company’s history, vision, structure and goals, as well as introduce them to all the tools, processes, projects and information they’ll need to get started. When it’s done well, employees should find the process professional, rewarding and motivating.

Research shows that 28% of turnover happens during the first 90 days of employment and that structured onboarding programs increase retention by 82%. In my own experience working in recruiting at tech companies Twilio and AirBnb and in talent for venture firms Andreessen Horowitz and Lerer Hippeau, I’ve seen this to be true first-hand.

Onboarding looks different at each stage of a growing startup and responsibilities change hands over time. Here’s a breakdown of who’s typically in charge of the process at each phase of growth in a startup’s journey, as well as a pro tip from a company currently operating at that stage.

0-10 employees

In the very early days, the founder or CEO is the appropriate person to lead employee onboarding. It’s usually she or he that gave the employee the initial offer. This person should make sure that new employees have guidance regarding how to find their place within the lean team. The new hire should be introduced to everyone, shown how employees communicate within the company, be given the rundown on policies, shown where to sit and helped with their computer and benefits setup. Plus, they should receive a personalized, warm welcome that makes them excited to be part of the brand-new venture.

“The little things matter: the welcome email, the Slack announcement that it’s their first day, bios including fun facts about them, the company swag on their desk, buying their favorite snack for the office and more all help to make them feel welcomed, which helps support a successful onboarding process,” says Florent Peyre, co-founder of Small Door, a tech-enabled veterinary practice.

10-50 employees

At this stage, a startup is adding real headcount and its leadership team should be thinking about hiring its first dedicated HR or People person. After the company brings on a recruiter or HR manager, she or he can take over the bulk of the onboarding responsibilities, which should begin before new staffers’ official start dates.

“One typical mistake is thinking that onboarding starts on someone’s first day,” says Nora Apsel, co-founder of online mortgage broker Morty. “In the week prior to starting, we send new teammates an onboarding document customized to their role which includes everything from resources on the finance and mortgage industry to the services that we use at Morty, what their first week will look like and who on the team they’ll be working with.”

50-100 employees

Once a company starts approaching 100 employees, its HR leader will likely need additional support. That’s when it’s time to make a second HR hire—typically an HR assistant or coordinator. She or he will handle administrative tasks such as managing the HRIS (Human Resource Information System), filing paperwork, helping run onboarding for all new hires and assisting with recruiting efforts, such as posting open roles.


Source: Tech Crunch