1010Computers | Computer Repair & IT Support

Homebuying startup Flyhomes closes $150 million Series C

Amid a recent tear in residential real estate investment, venture capitalists are looking to get a piece of homebuying startup Flyhomes.

The five-year-old startup announced today that they’ve closed a $150 million Series C round co-led by Norwest Venture Partners and Battery Ventures. Fifth Wall, Camber Creek, Balyasny Asset Management, Zillow’s Spencer Rascoff and existing investors Andreessen Horowitz and Canvas Partners also participated in the round. Norwest’s Lisa Wu and Battery’s Roger Lee are joining Flyhomes’ board as part of the deal.

The end-to-end residential real estate startup says they handle “every step of the homebuying process, from brokerage to mortgage,” building financial tools that customers need throughout the process. The company has now raised some $310 million in total.

The startup is well-positioned during a historic run-up of home prices in the U.S. that has made deals more competitive than ever for prospective buyers. A recent report by Redfin notes that more than half of U.S. homes are selling above their asking price right now, up from one in four a year ago. A Zillow report notes that nearly half of U.S. homes are selling within one week of going on the market.

Flyhomes’s Cash Offer lending product allows consumers purchasing homes to make more attractive all-cash offers to sellers, with the company noting that even if a buyer ends up backing out of the deal, Flyhomes will still buy the home themselves. Central to the startup’s business is sellers being more amenable to all-cash offers, allowing consumers making them to win deals even when they aren’t the highest bidders.

The company says it has bought and sold more than $2.6 billion worth of homes since launching in 2016.

Powered by WPeMatico

What SOSV’s Climate Tech 100 tells founders about investors in the space

On Earth Day, April 22, SOSV published the SOSV Climate Tech 100, a list of the best startups that we’ve supported from their earliest stages to address climate change. There are always valuable insights embedded in a list like the 100. A TechCrunch story captured the investment perspective, and an SOSV post went deeper into the companies’ category breakdown and founder profiles.

But what can founders learn from the list about climate tech investors? In other words, who invested in the Climate Tech 100? We dug into the “who’s who” of the list, which had more than 500 investors, and here’s what we found.

An active but fragmented landscape

If you think 500 investors in 100 companies is a lot of investors, you’re right. There are clearly a lot of investors interested in climate tech, and most are generalists just testing the waters. For the Climate Tech 100, about 10% of investors put their money in more than one startup and only seven (less than 2%) wrote a check to four or more. These included Blue Horizon, CPT Capital, EF, Fifty Years, Hemisphere Ventures and Horizons Ventures.

That pattern tracks well with data from PwC, which found that 2,700 unique investors had backed 1,200 startups in its State of Climate Tech 2020 report covering the 2013-2019 period. The report found that only 10 firms out of 2,700 made four or more climate tech deals per year, on average, over the 2013-2019 period. The most active firms are listed in the table below.

Most active investors in SOSV Climate Tech 100

Image Credits: PwC, 2020; additional research by SOSV

Capital deployed in climate tech grew at five times the venture capital overall growth rate over the 2013-2019 period.

There is reason to believe that the fragmentation will diminish with the launch of more funds focused on climate tech. Four funds worth more than a billion dollars each have launched since 2020 that fit the description (see chart below).

It’s also encouraging to see that capital deployed in climate tech grew at five times the venture capital overall growth rate over the 2013-2019 period.

Even so, climate tech still only represented 6% of total venture capital deployed in 2019, so there is plenty of room to grow.

Powered by WPeMatico

Messenger adds Venmo-like QR codes for person-to-person payments in the US

This spring, Facebook confirmed it was testing Venmo-like QR codes for person-to-person payments inside its app in the U.S. Today, the company announced those codes are now launching publicly to all U.S. users, allowing anyone to send or request money through Facebook Pay — even if they’re not Facebook friends.

The QR codes work similarly to those found in other payment apps, like Venmo.

The feature can be found under the “Facebook Pay” section in Messenger’s settings, accessed by tapping on your profile icon at the top left of the screen. Here, you’ll be presented with your personalized QR code which looks much like a regular QR code except that it features your profile icon in the middle.

Underneath, you’ll be shown your personal Facebook Pay UR which is in the format of “https://m.me/pay/UserName.” This can also be copied and sent to other users when you’re requesting a payment.

Facebook notes that the codes will work between any U.S. Messenger users, and won’t require a separate payment app or any sort of contact entry or upload process to get started.

Users who want to be able to send and receive money in Messenger have to be at least 18 years old, and will have to have a Visa or Mastercard debit card, a PayPal account or one of the supported prepaid cards or government-issued cards, in order to use the payments feature. They’ll also need to set their preferred currency to U.S. dollars in the app.

After setup is complete, you can choose which payment method you want as your default and optionally protect payments behind a PIN code of your choosing.

The QR code is also available from the Facebook Pay section of the main Facebook app, in a carousel at the top of the screen.

Facebook Pay first launched in November 2019, as a way to establish a payment system that extends across the company’s apps for not just person-to-person payments, but also other features, like donations, Stars and e-commerce, among other things. Though the QR codes take cues from Venmo and others, the service as it stands today is not necessarily a rival to payment apps because Facebook partners with PayPal as one of the supported payment methods.

However, although the payments experience is separate from Facebook’s cryptocurrency walletNovi, that’s something that could perhaps change in the future.

Image Credits: Facebook

The feature was introduced alongside a few other Messenger updates, including a new Quick Reply bar that makes it easier to respond to a photo or video without having to return to the main chat thread. Facebook also added new chat themes including one for Olivia Rodrigo fans, another for World Oceans Day, and one that promotes the new F9 movie.

Powered by WPeMatico

Apple’s StoreKit 2 simplifies App Store subscriptions and refunds by making them accessible inside apps

If you’ve ever bought a subscription inside an iOS app and later decided you wanted to cancel, upgrade or downgrade, or ask for a refund, you may have had trouble figuring out how to go about making that request or change. Some people today still believe that they can stop their subscription charges simply by deleting an app from their iPhone. Others may dig around unsuccessfully inside their iPhone’s Settings or on the App Store to try to find out how to ask for a refund. With the updates Apple announced in StoreKit 2 during its Worldwide Developers Conference this week, things may start to get a little easier for app customers.

StoreKit is Apple’s developer framework for managing in-app purchases — an area that’s become more complex in recent years, as apps have transitioned from offering one-time purchases to ongoing subscriptions with different tiers, lengths and feature sets.

Image Credits: Apple

Currently, users who want to manage or cancel subscriptions can do so from the App Store or their iPhone Settings. But some don’t realize the path to this section from Settings starts by tapping on your Apple ID (your name and profile photo at the top of the screen). They may also get frustrated if they’re not familiar with how to navigate their Settings or the App Store.

Meanwhile, there are a variety of ways users can request refunds on their in-app subscriptions. They can dig in their inbox for their receipt from Apple, then click the “Report a Problem” link it includes to request a refund when something went wrong. This could be useful in scenarios where you’ve bought a subscription by mistake (or your kid has!), or where the promised features didn’t work as intended.

Apple also provides a dedicated website where users can directly request refunds for apps or content. (When you Google for something like “request a refund apple” or similar queries, a page that explains the process typically comes up at the top of the search results.)

Still, many users aren’t technically savvy. For them, the easiest way to manage subscriptions or ask for refunds would be to do so from within the app itself. For this reason, many conscientious app developers tend to include links to point customers to Apple’s pages for subscription management or refunds inside their apps.

But StoreKit 2 is introducing new tools that will allow developers to implement these sort of features more easily.

One new tool is a Manage subscriptions API, which lets an app developer display the manage subscriptions page for their customer directly inside their app — without redirecting the customer to the App Store. Optionally, developers can choose to display a “Save Offer” screen to present the customer with a discount of some kind to keep them from cancelling, or it could display an exit survey so you can ask the customer why they decided to end their subscription.

When implemented, the customer will be able to view a screen inside the app that looks just like the one they’d visit in the App Store to cancel or change a subscription. After canceling, they’ll be shown a confirmation screen with the cancellation details and the service expiration date.

If the customer wants to request a refund, a new Refund request API will allow the customer to begin their refund request directly in the app itself — again, without being redirected to the App Store or other website. On the screen that displays, the customer can select for which item they want a refund and check the reason why they’re making the request. Apple handles the refund process and will send either an approval or refund declined notification back to the developer’s server.

However, some developers argue that the changes don’t go far enough. They want to be in charge of managing customer subscriptions and handling refunds themselves, through programmatic means. Plus, Apple can take up to 48 hours for the customer to receive an update on their refund request, which can be confusing.

“They’ve made the process a bit smoother, but developers still can’t initiate refunds or cancellations themselves,” notes RevenueCat CEO Jacob Eiting, whose company provides tools to app developers to manage their in-app purchases. “It’s a step in the right direction, but could actually lead to more confusion between developers and consumers about who is responsible for issuing refunds.”

In other words, because the forms are now going to be more accessible from inside the app, the customer may believe the developer is handling the refund process when, really, Apple continues to do so.

Some developers pointed out that there are other scenarios this process doesn’t address. For example, if the customer has already uninstalled the app or no longer has the device in question, they’ll still need to be directed to other means of asking for refunds, just as before.

For consumers, though, subscription management tools like this mean more developers may begin to put buttons to manage subscriptions and ask for refunds directly inside their app, which is a better experience. In time, as customers learn they can more easily use the app and manage subscriptions, app developers may see better customer retention, higher engagement, and better App Store reviews, notes Apple.

The StoreKit 2 changes weren’t limited to APIs for managing subscriptions and refunds.

Developers will also gain access to a new Invoice Lookup API that allows them to look up the in-app purchases for the customer, validate their invoice and identify any problems with the purchase — for example, if there were any refunds already provided by the App Store.

A new Refunded Purchases API will allow developers to look up all the refunds for the customer.

A new Renewal Extension API will allow developers to extend the renewal data for paid, active subscriptions in the case of an outage — like when dealing with customer support issues when a streaming service went down, for example. This API lets developers extend the subscription up to twice per calendar year, each up to 90 days in the future.

And finally, a new Consumption API will allow developers to share information about a customer’s in-app purchase with the App Store. In most cases, customers begin consuming content soon after purchase — information that’s helpful in the refund decision process. The API will allow the App Store to see if the user consumed the in-app purchase partially, fully, or not at all.

Another change will help customers when they reinstall apps or download them on new devices. Before, users would have to manually “restore purchases” to sync the status of the completed transactions back to that newly downloaded or reinstalled app. Now, that information will be automatically fetched by StoreKit 2 so the apps are immediately up-to-date with whatever it is the user paid for.

While, overall, the changes make for a significant update to the StoreKit framework, Apple’s hesitancy to allow developers more control over their own subscription-based customers speaks, in part, to how much it wants to control in-app purchases. This is perhaps because it got burned in the past when it tried allowing developers to manage their own refunds.

As The Verge noted last month while the Epic Games-Apple antitrust trial was underway, Apple had once provided Hulu will access to a subscription API, then discovered Hulu had been offering a way to automatically cancel subscriptions made through the App Store when customers wanted to upgrade to higher-priced subscription plans. Apple realized it needed to take action to protect against this misuse of the API, and Hulu later lost access. It has not since made that API more broadly available.

On the flip side, having Apple, not the developers, in charge of subscription management and refunds means Apple takes on the responsibilities around preventing fraud — including fraud perpetrated by both customers and developers alike. Customers may also prefer that there’s one single place to go for managing their subscription billing: Apple. They may not want to have to deal with each developer individually, as their experience would end up being inconsistent.

These changes matter because subscription revenue contributes to a sizable amount of Apple’s lucrative App Store business. Ahead of WWDC 21, Apple reported the sale of digital goods and services on the App Store grew to $86 billion in 2020, up 40% over the the year prior. Earlier this year, Apple said it paid out more than $200 billion to developers since the App Store launched in 2008.

read more about Apple's WWDC 2021 on TechCrunch

Powered by WPeMatico

TestBox launches with $2.7M seed to make it easier to test software before buying

When companies are considering buying a particular software service, they typically want to test it in their own environments, a process that can be surprisingly challenging. TestBox, a new startup, wants to change that by providing a fully working package with pre-populated data to give the team a way to test and collaborate on the product before making a buying decision.

Today the company announced it was making the product widely available; they also announced a $2.7 million seed round from SignalFire and Firstminute Capital along with several other investors and industry angels.

Company co-founder Sam Senior says he and his co-founder Peter Holland recognized that it was challenging for companies buying software to test it in a realistic way. “So TestBox is the very first time that companies are going to be able to test drive multiple pieces of enterprise software with an insanely easy-to-use live environment that’s uniquely configured to them with guided walk-throughs to make it really easy for them to get up to speed,” Senior explained.

He says that until now, even with free versions or free testing periods, it was hard to test and collaborate in that kind of environment with key stakeholders in the company. TestBox comes pre-populated with data generated by GPT-3 OpenAI to test how the software behaves and lets participants grade different features on a simple star rating system and provide comments as needed. All the feedback is recorded in a “notebook,” giving the company a central place to gather all the data.

What’s more, it puts the company buying the software more in control of the process instead of being driven by the vendor, which is typically the case. “Actually, now [the customer gets to] be the one who defines the experience, making them lead the process, while making it collaborative, and giving them more confidence [in their decision],” he said.

For now, the company plans to concentrate on customer support software and is working with Zendesk, HubSpot and Freshdesk, but has plans to expand and add partners over time. It has been talking with Salesforce about adding Service Cloud and hopes to have them in some form on the platform later this year. It also plans to expand into other verticals over time, like CRM, martech and IT help desks.

Senior is a former Bain consultant who worked with companies buying enterprise software, and saw the issues firsthand that they faced when it came to testing software before buying. He quit his job last summer, and began by talking to 70 customers, vendors and experts to get a real sense of what they were looking for in a solution.

He then teamed up with Holland and built the first version of the software before raising their seed money last October. The company began hiring in February and has eight employees at this point, but he wants to keep it pretty lean through the early stage of the company’s development.

Even at this early stage, the company is already taking a diverse approach to hiring. “Already when we have been working with recruiting firms, we’ve been saying that they need to split the pipeline as much as they can, and that’s been something we have spent a long, long time on. […] We spent actually six months with an open role on the front end because we are looking to build more diversity in our team as quickly as possible,” he said.

He reports that the company has a fairly equitable gender and ethnic split to this point, and holds monthly events to raise awareness internally about different groups, letting employees lead the way when it makes sense.

At least for now, he’s planning on running the company in a distributed manner, but acknowledges that as it gets bigger, he may have to look at having a centralized office as a home base.

Powered by WPeMatico

Slintel scores $20M Series A as buyer intelligence tool gains traction

One clear outcome of the pandemic was that it pushed more people to do their shopping online, and that was as true for B2B as it was for B2C. Knowing which of your B2B customers are most likely to convert puts any sales team ahead of the game. Slintel, a startup providing that kind of data, announced a $20 million Series A today.

The company has attracted some big-name investors, with GGV leading the round and Accel, Sequoia and Stellaris also participating. The investment brings the total raised to over $24 million, including a $4.2 million seed round from last November.

That’s a quick turnaround from seed to A, and company founder and CEO Deepak Anchala says that while he had plenty of runway left from the seed round, the demand was such that it seemed prudent to take the A money sooner than he had planned. “So we had enough cash in the bank, but investors came to us and we got a pretty good valuation compared to the previous round, so we decided to take it and use that money to go faster,” Anchala said.

Certainly the market dynamics were working in Slintel’s favor. Without giving revenue details, Anchala said that revenue grew 5x last year in the middle of the worst of the pandemic. He says that meant buyers were spending less time with sales and marketing folks to understand products and more time online researching on their own.

“So what Slintel does as a product is we mine buyer insights. We understand where the buyers are in their journey, what their pain points are, what products they use, what they need and when they need it. So we understand all of this to create a 360-degree view of the buyer that you provide these insights to sales and marketing teams to help them sell better,” he said.

After growing at such a rapid clip last year, the company expected more modest growth this year at perhaps 3x, but with the added investment, he expects to grow faster again. “With the funding we’re actually looking at much bigger numbers. We’re looking at 5x in our revenue this year, and also trying for 4x revenue next year.”

He says that the money gives him the opportunity to improve the product and put more investment into marketing, which he believes will contribute to additional sales. Since the round closed six weeks ago, he says that he has increased his advertising budget and also hopes to attract customers via SEO, free tools on the company website and events.

The company had 45 employees at the time of its seed round in November and has more than doubled that number in the interim, to 100 spread out across 10 cities. He expects to double again by this time next year as the company is growing quickly. As a global company with some employees in India and some in the U.S., he intends to be remote-first even after offices begin to reopen in different areas. He says that he plans to have company gatherings each quarter to let people gather in person on occasion.

 

Powered by WPeMatico

Microsoft plans to launch dedicated Xbox cloud gaming hardware

Microsoft will soon launch a dedicated device for game streaming, the company announced today. It’s also working with a number of TV manufacturers to build the Xbox experience right into their internet-connected screens and Microsoft plans to bring cloud gaming to the PC Xbox app later this year, too, with a focus on play-before-you-buy scenarios.

It’s unclear what these new game streaming devices will look like. Microsoft didn’t provide any further details. But chances are we’re talking about either a Chromecast-like streaming stick or a small Apple TV-like box. So far, we also don’t know which TV manufacturers it will partner with.

It’s no secret that Microsoft is bullish about cloud gaming. With Xbox Game Pass Ultimate, it’s already making it possible for its subscribers to play more than 100 console games on Android, streamed from the Azure cloud, for example. In a few weeks, it’ll open cloud gaming in the browser on Edge, Chrome and Safari, to all Xbox Game Pass Ultimate subscribers (it’s currently in limited beta). And it is bringing Game Pass Ultimate to Australia, Brazil, Mexico and Japan later this year, too.

In many ways, Microsoft is unbundling gaming from the hardware — similar to what Google is trying with Stadia (an effort that, so far, has fallen flat for Google) and Amazon with Luna. The major advantage Microsoft has here is a large library of popular games, something that’s mostly missing on competing services, with the exception of Nvidia’s GeForce Now platform — though that one has a different business model since its focus is not on a subscription but on allowing you to play the games you buy in third-party stores like Steam or the Epic store.

What Microsoft clearly wants to do is expand the overall Xbox ecosystem, even if that means it sells fewer dedicated high-powered consoles. The company likens this to the music industry’s transition to cloud-powered services backed by all-you-can-eat subscription models.

“We believe that games, that interactive entertainment, aren’t really about hardware and software. It’s not about pixels. It’s about people. Games bring people together,” said Microsoft’s Xbox head Phil Spencer. “Games build bridges and forge bonds, generating mutual empathy among people all over the world. Joy and community — that’s why we’re here.”

It’s worth noting that Microsoft says it’s not doing away with dedicated hardware, though, and is already working on the next generation of its console hardware — but don’t expect a new Xbox console anytime soon.

Powered by WPeMatico

Payments giant Stripe launches Stripe Tax to integrate sales tax calculations for 30+ countries

On the heels of acquiring sales tax specialist TaxJar in April, today Stripe is making another big move in the area of tax. The $95 billion payments behemoth is launching a new product called Stripe Tax, which will provide automatic, updated sales tax calculations (covering sales tax, VAT and GST) and related accounting services to Stripe payments customers initially in some 30 countries and across the U.S.

Stripe Tax is a separate service from TaxJar, but the two are not unconnected. As Stripe Tax was being built out of Stripe’s offices in Dublin over the last several months, Stripe’s business lead for EMEA Matt Henderson told me that the team had identified TaxJar as a strong company in the field. That ultimately led to M&A between them.

Sales tax — and specifically a more seamless way to deal with charging and tracking sales tax — is a painful issue for people doing business online.

Digital and physical goods are taxed in over 130 countries, Stripe said, and within that there can be a huge amount of variation and compliance complexity, since codes get updated all the time, too. Mishandled sales tax, meanwhile, can result in pretty hefty fines, sometimes up to 30% interest on past-due amounts.

Unsurprisingly, a sales tax tool has been the most-requested feature from Stripe’s customers, Henderson said, a call that presumably only got louder in the last year, as e-commerce and digital transactions went through the roof with COVID-19.

Arguably, that makes Stripe Tax one of the company’s more significant product launches, not to mention the first since announcing its monster funding round earlier this year.

Previously, Stripe customers would have resorted to using a third-party service (like TaxJar) to work out sales tax. Or, more typically, those Stripe customers would have opted to limit the number of places they sold goods and services, in order to minimize the pain of dealing with multiple, complex and usually quite localized tax codes.

“No one leaps out of bed in the morning excited to deal with taxes,” said John Collison, co-founder and president of Stripe in a statement. “For most businesses, managing tax compliance is a painful distraction. We simplify everything about calculating and collecting sales taxes, VAT, and GST, so our users can focus on building their businesses.”

Stripe said that a survey of its customers found that two-thirds of respondents said the challenge of implementing sales tax actually limited their growth.

TaxJar has built a strong system for handling that, but the company — based out of Massachusetts but with a remote team — is primarily focused on the U.S. market, which has sales tax that is complicated enough (there are 11,000 different tax jurisdictions in the country).

That leaves a lot on the table for building out sales tax tools for the rest of the world: The wider focus of Stripe Tax thus fills a particular geographical gap for the company, regardless of how well TaxJar and Stripe integrate over time.

There is another key difference worth noting between the two.

TaxJar came to Stripe’s attention with an established operation — 23,000 customers at the time of the announcement. Stripe (wisely) bolted that on as a standalone business, which means that new and existing customers that use TaxJar can continue to use it as is. That is to say, at least for now, they do not need to be Stripe payments customers in order to use TaxJar, even if the integration between the two platforms will only improve over time.

Stripe Tax, on the other hand, is being built from the ground up as a product aimed specifically at increasing touchpoints and stickiness with Stripe customers.

Stripe Tax provides real-time tax calculation based on customer location and product sold; transparent itemizing for customers; tax ID management in areas (like Europe) where business customers can provide their code and get a reverse charge on tax if they are under a certain turnover threshold themselves; and reconciliation and reporting across all transactions to make filing and remittance easier.

But there is for now no way to use Stripe Tax outside of Stripe payments.

This could pose some problems for some customers. These days, many of the strongest retailers will take an “omnichannel” approach that might cover selling through marketplaces, selling through websites, selling through social media and more — and not all of those experiences may be powered by Stripe. It will be worth watching whether future iterations of Stripe Tax can account for that.

Stripe’s most significant product launch prior to Stripe Tax — Stripe Treasury last December — underscores how the company is currently very focused on diversifying outside of its basic payments business and opening the platform to much wider, more scaled transactions.

Treasury, which is still in invite-only mode, saw Stripe partner with established banks to provide a business banking service, providing a way for its customers to handle money that they generate from their Stripe-powered businesses.

The full country list where Stripe Tax is launching is Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United States and the United Kingdom.

Updated to correct the number of customers TaxJar has to 23,000.

Powered by WPeMatico

BukuWarung, a fintech for Indonesian MSMEs, scores $60M Series A led by Valar and Goodwater

BukuWarung, a fintech focused on Indonesia’s micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs), announced today it has raised a $60 million Series A. The oversubscribed round was led by Valar Ventures, marking the firm’s first investment in Indonesia, and Goodwater Capital. The Jakarta-based startup claims this is the largest Series A round ever raised by a startup focused on services for MSMEs. BukuWarung did not disclose its valuation, but sources tell TechCrunch it is estimated to be between $225 million to $250 million.

Other participants included returning backers and angel investors like Aldi Haryopratomo, former chief executive officer of payment gateway GoPay, Klarna co-founder Victor Jacobsson and partners from SoftBank and Trihill Capital.

Founded in 2019, BukuWarung’s target market is the more than 60 million MSMEs in Indonesia, according to data from the Ministry of Cooperatives and SMEs. These businesses contribute about 61% of the country’s gross domestic product and employ 97% of its workforce.

BukuWarung’s services, including digital payments, inventory management, bulk transactions and a Shopify-like e-commerce platform called Tokoko, are designed to digitize merchants that previously did most of their business offline (many of its clients started taking online orders during the COVID-19 pandemic). It is building what it describes as an “operating system” for MSMEs and currently claims more than 6.5 million registered merchant in 750 Indonesian cities, with most in Tier 2 and Tier 3 areas. It says it has processed about $1.4 billion in annualized payments so far, and is on track to process over $10 billion in annualized payments by 2022.

BukuWarung’s new round brings its total funding to $80 million. The company says its growth in users and payment volumes has been capital efficient, and that more than 90% of its funds raised have not been spent. It plans to add more MSME-focused financial services, including lending, savings and insurance, to its platform.

BukuWarung’s new funding announcement comes four months after its previous one, and less than a month after competitor BukuKas disclosed it had raised a $50 million Series B. Both started out as digital bookkeeping apps for MSMEs before expanding into financial services and e-commerce tools.

When asked how BukuWarung plans to continue differentiating from BukuKas, co-founder and CEO Abhinay Peddisetty told TechCrunch, “We don’t see this space as a winner takes all, our focus is on building the best products for MSMEs as proven by our execution on our payments and accounting, shown by massive growth in payments TPV as we’re 10x bigger than the nearest player in this space.”

He added, “We have already run successful lending experiments with partners in fintech and banks and are on track to monetize our merchants backed by our deep payments, accounting and other data that we collect.”

BukuWarung’s new funding will be used to double its current workforce of 150, located in Indonesia, Singapore and India, to 300 and develop BukuWarung’s accounting, digital payments and commerce products, including a payments infrastructure that will include QR payments and other services.

Powered by WPeMatico

Does what happens at YC stay at YC?

Community has never felt louder in startupland. Bringing people together over a shared interest is innate to human nature, and coming out of a lonely, draining pandemic, every startup is looking to cultivate community, conversation and camaraderie.

Last week, though, the outside world got a look at how Y Combinator, one of Silicon Valley’s most famed and feared accelerators, deals with the intricacies of a scaled, yet still ultra-exclusive, community after the accelerator kicked out two founders from its internal messaging board, Bookface.

The two founders, Dark CEO Paul Biggar and Prolific CEO and co-founder Katia Damer, say they were removed from YC after publicly critiquing YC — for very different reasons. Biggar had noted on social media back in March that another YC founder was tipping off people on how to cut the vaccine lines to get an early jab, while Damer expressed worry and frustration more recently about the alumni community’s support of a now-controversial alum, Antonio García Martínez.

Y Combinator says that the two founders were removed from Bookface because they broke community guidelines, namely the rule to never externally post any internal information from Bookface.

The now-public ousting of Biggar and Damer, who turned to Twitter to first explain their experiences, is a nuanced situation. Y Combinator says that it has only removed a “dozen or so” founders in its 16 year history for violating YC ethics and Bookface forum guidelines.

Still, YC’s decision to remove these founders, especially in light of a broader reckoning around free speech and dissent within startups, has triggered a series of questions — some by YC founders themselves — around how the accelerator moderates its community, handles negative publicity and draws its own line around what can be openly said by its alumni base without consequence.

Privacy first

The best curated communities allow participants to safely, and freely, share personal experiences, debate, and even disagree. Part of that safety comes from what some see as a common rule within communities: don’t share private information publicly.

Per YC, respecting privacy is a key rule for anyone who joins Bookface, an internal messaging forum that includes some 6,000 founders of the YC community, from alumni to management to current batch companies. Founders log in daily, asking for introductions to a crypto accountant or bringing up a recent job posting for crowdsourced suggestions, among other topics.

“We ask that founders don’t share anything from the forum with anyone outside of YC, as this is a community built on trust and privacy,” Lindsay Wiese-Amos, Y Combinator head of communications, told TechCrunch.

It’s more than a polite request. Amos said that when a company is accepted into YC, the founders must sign investment documents, one of which is its founder ethics policy. Within the policy, there are guidelines around the Bookface forum, including the language: “Don’t share anything in the Forum, or any links to the content posted to it, with anyone outside of YC.”

YC claims that when a founder breaks the rules, it reaches out to them with a warning, and if the rule is broken multiple times, that individual is removed from the community.

When a startup is removed from the YC community, YC “generally” returns the shares to the company, though it says there are exceptions. In Damer’s case, says Amos, her “co-founder is still actively working on Prolific, and both he and Prolific remain part of the YC community.”

Meanwhile, Biggar’s YC startup closed eight months after graduating from the accelerator, so YC didn’t have to sever financial ties.

Garry Tan, co-founder of Initialized Capital, and a former YC partner who has stakes in alumni companies including Coinbase, thinks there is a difference between a critical discussion and breaking community rules. Tan told TechCrunch that discussions are fine, but that these “founders violated privacy expectations of other people within the community.”

“I think YC has become an institution, and institutions are viewed with high scrutiny,” he said. “That’s not a bad thing, it’s probably how it should be.”

The “‘too far’ moment is when people try to ascribe specific political viewpoints to an institution when that institution is A) a lot of people not just a few and B) probably innocent of specifically pushing one viewpoint or another,” Tan continues.

YC’s Bookface rules are seemingly cut and dried. However, in light of the actions it took against Biggar and Damer, it’s fair to wonder what happens if someone in the community disparages YC publicly, but not having to do with Bookface. Is that also an offense that would get them kicked out of the organization? And would the organization make an exception for especially promising founders?

Amos suggests that all founders are treated equally and that dissent is welcome. “We believe strongly in free speech and are open to criticism. People are allowed to criticize YC and would not get kicked out of the community for doing so,” she said.

‘I had no faith in Y Combinator doing the right thing’

Biggar went through Y Combinator in 2010. “I was like a Paul Graham acolyte,” he says. “I have a signed copy of Hackers and Painters, read every essay that he put out, and as soon as I finished my PhD, I applied to Y Combinator.”

For over a decade, Biggar says, he has been an active participant in Bookface, recently helping multiple companies with financial and relationship advice on co-founder break-ups.

When the Black Lives Matter movement was growing last summer, Biggar noticed that Bookface was relatively quiet and, as he describes it, “apolitical, but in a derogatory way” around issues such as diversity and police brutality. He compared the tone of Bookface to that of Coinbase, after CEO Brian Armstrong published a memo that banned political discussions at work.

Biggar’s frustration grew, hitting a tipping point in March when he spotted a founder bragging on the forum that he had skipped a vaccine queue and offering tips to help other founders do the same.

Soon after, Biggar tweeted: “For the second time, a @ycombinator founder has posted to the internal YC forum about how they lied to skip the vaccine queue in Oakland, with instructions for other founders to do the same. Absolutely fucking disgusted.”

Biggar left out screenshots of the founder’s post or any identifying material to protect the individual’s anonymity. But within hours of publishing the tweet, Biggar received a direct message on Twitter from Y Combinator co-founder Jessica Livingston, asking him to alert a partner at YC about inappropriate content on Bookface. She added: “You may get a faster and more thorough response than posting to all of Twitter.”

His response to her: “Hey Jessica! Truth be told, I’m so disillusioned with YC that it never even occurred to me.”

Biggar decided to leave up the tweet. Meanwhile, because Biggar was apparently not alone in his view of the content on Bookface — Amos says that “the community made its perspective quite clear in the comments: they were not in agreement with this founder” offering vaccination hacks  — YC says it deleted the post less than 24 hours after it appeared on Bookface.

The episode wasn’t even on his mind, Biggar says, when he received an email from Jon Levy, the managing director of partnerships at YC, asking to chat last week. To Biggar’s surprise, Levy told him that he was being removed from the YC community. That meant he was being removed not just from Bookface, says Biggar, but he is no longer invited to Demo Day or allowed on YC Slack.

Notably, Biggar says that YC didn’t give him a warning or the option to take down any posts before ushering him out of the broader YC community, though he suspected it was becoming stricter about its community rules. A week before he was booted, Biggar says that Y Combinator reminded founders about a “no leak” policy within Bookface.

YC offers a different recounting of the events, saying it was only “recently” notified of Biggar’s tweet through someone in the YC community and that all founders are given a warning. YC also states that a founder is removed only after violating its terms “multiple” times, while Biggar maintains that he only once tweeted about Bookface. Asked about other examples of Biggar violating its terms, YC declined to comment further.

Says Biggar now of these recent events: “I got criticized for not posting it internally, which I think is kind of bullshit. But, you know, the reason I didn’t post it internally is just that I had no faith in Y Combinator doing the right thing. I didn’t think that going public would do anything, either. I mean, I’m not someone who actually matters here.”

“This is the smallest way that one could possibly call out YC,” Biggar continues. “A couple of community members did a shitty thing, which I think is reflective of the community. That for them is, like, too much dissent — shut it all down.”

If you are not “the people who have been elevated to part-time partners [or are] tight with the people that matter,” no one “cares what you think. No one ever asks what you think . . .You can’t have dissent internally. There are just too many disciples.”

‘YC is not soul-searching’

Damer’s own removal from Bookface might not have been publicized if not for Biggar sharing on Twitter last week that he’d just been “kicked out.” Soon after, she came forward, tweeting to him that “2 weeks ago, YC kicked me out as well” for her public critique. Specifically, says Damer, she was thrown off Bookface because she called out misogyny and the lack of diversity within the accelerator community.

It began with a memo on Bookface with the title: “Is YC an inclusive organization? If we continue like this, YC will lose its great reputation.”

In her post, Damer explained that she noticed many people defending Antonio García Martínez, the author of Chaos Monkeys who recently was invited to join Apple, then asked to leave Apple, after a petition to investigate his hiring was signed by more than 2,000 Apple employees. They were concerned about specific book passages, including one that reads: “[M]ost women in the Bay Area are soft and weak, cosseted and naive despite their claims of worldliness, and generally full of shit.”

Like the Apple employees who circulated the petition, Damer believes the book is proof that García Martínez is a “misogynist,” writing on Bookface about how “disconcerting” she found the outpouring of support for him on the internal platform.

“I care about YC and that’s why I am writing this,” Damer said. “What is happening right now is not normal, and it looks like YC is soul searching. If this doesn’t get under control, YC will start missing out on some of the best deal flow, especially from women and underrepresented founders.”

Livingston soon responded.

“YC is not ‘soul-searching’,” Livingston wrote. “Antonio participated in YC a decade ago, and I remember him as a decent person…I think if anything the YC community should be the ones defending Antonio, because many of us have first-hand knowledge of him, instead of just cherry picked quotes from a book. And we know from being in the startup world how often people are criticized unfairly by the press and in social media.”

Livingston’s post received hundreds of upvotes, while Damer’s post received a handful. Aggravated, Damer soon went to LinkedIn and Twitter to post screenshots of the interaction, “retracting” any previous praise she’d given to YC’s founders, and advising founders not to give up equity before VCs earn their trust.

Soon, a YC partner e-mailed Damer with an invitation to reach out to group partners or this partner directly about any YC concerns, according to a document shared with TechCrunch by the accelerator. The partner also explained that one of the community rules at Bookface was not to share anything from the forum with anyone outside of YC. The partner asked Damer to take down the Bookface screenshots. Damer did not respond to the email and did not take down the screenshots. 

Less than two weeks later, Damer received a second email from the partner, this time with a clear message: Because she did not delete her posts, Damer had been removed from Bookface and could reach out if she wished to re-engage.

The communication was extensive compared with the organization’s handling of Biggar’s tweet, and suggests that YC did a far better job in following its own protocols in Damer’s case.

Either way, Damer thinks that YC’s guidelines encourage complacency, especially around issues of diversity, and suggests her waning enthusiasm for the organization ties directly to its not “stepping up” for “women when given the chance.” Adds Damer, “I don’t think any one of [the partners] is malicious, I actually think they are good people. It’s more about the complacency — that is what bothers me so much,” she said.

As for whether she regrets airing her exasperation publicly, she suggests she didn’t have a choice. “People use rules when they don’t know what else to do. This is about courage, this is about actually standing up for what is right.”

Community rules can be clear, but enforcement muddy

There is plainly an argument for and against Y Combinator’s deciding to remove founders from its forum. It’s typical of investors to ask portfolio companies to agree to certain terms and conditions. In this case, YC specifically alerts those who join its organization that the privilege of using Bookface comes with its own, additional, terms and conditions.

Still, whether the terms and conditions around its community are fair or reasonable could become a question mark in the minds of founders who haven’t yet applied to the program — as could YC’s different handling of two founders who broke the rules.

Broadly speaking, people within communities who feel like they are not being heard internally — yet who are also being asked not to express their disdain publicly — are pushing back on such limits. Coinbase saw at least 60 employees leave last fall after being told that the company would no longer tolerate internal political dissent or debate. In late May, the company Basecamp reportedly lost a third of its staff following disagreements over the company’s attitude toward internal political debates. Most recently, Medium lost half its staff in July after a strategy shift and an internally criticized culture memo.

Because of its successful track record, YC may be more powerful as an institution than any one company, but rivals are always looking for weaknesses, and asking members not to air their grievances outside of YC could ultimately impair the outfit. A generation of founders and operators is showing it is less and less willing to suppress a viewpoint in the service of others, and the most talented of these individuals have no shortage of options when it comes to both mentorship and capital.

YC, with its extensive network — perhaps even because of it —  may increasingly find it isn’t immune to the trend.

Powered by WPeMatico