Lykke: the early pioneer in the next generation of Global Digital Asset Marketplaces

Lykke has been ahead of the curve in the Capital Markets 3.0 evolution, in multiple ways. I confess it is difficult to put an order to all the aspects of the Lykke venture, simply because it is a Big Hairy Audacious one.

Lykke is open-source (if you fancy, go to Github here and download here). And maybe retail like you and me, doesn’t care, but it is a big deal in the 4th industrial revolution. Open source is the first pre-requisite to hope for network effects. Financial markets and especially, asset trading has not been used to business models with network effects. On the contrary, it has been operating in proprietary mode either on the data side or on the modeling side.

Lykke is real, live and way beyond beta mode. You can register on the Lykke App and not only get quotes for several cross pairs (from fiat exchange rates to crypto crosses) but you can also see the order book real time!

Lykke seems for now, like an FX trading app that keeps adding more crosses. True that it keeps adding more “assets” to its menu of capabilities; the most recent one being Ether crosses. True that it also has some commodities like Gold, Palladium etc; and some less known colored coins like the Solar colored coin, the Tree colored coin etc.

Lykke isn’t just another trading app using the colored coins protocol. Lykke wants to become a global marketplace for all digital assets. All the magic is hidden in the new understanding of “Digital assets” and “marketplace”.

Coming from an upbringing in the old world, we can imagine mapping “Digital Assets” to fiat currencies, all sorts of financial instruments typically issued by businesses (currencies, public or private equity shares or bonds from corporates or governments ect.). Such thinking is a linear extrapolation from current reality; i.e. take shares in a public company or gold in a vault and create a digitized version of it.

But Lykke is going after the new world that is allowing for the creation of new asset classes, the true digital assets, the tokenization of all: e.g. utility tokens in the protocol layers that are being built as we speak (e.g. Tezos TEZ, Golem GNT etc), or tokenized values like the TREE colored coin which entitles the holder to a Mangrove tree CO2 certificate or the TIME colored coin from Chronobank which is a labor market; or tokenization of business processes like the IATA token.

Lykke wants to be the global marketplace with the new understanding. They want all business to be launched and executed on their app. When I say all, I literally mean all. The Lykke app wants to be the center of the world. Whether you are a retail individual (investor, trader in the old sense, or not) or a business (to be built or grown up with complex business processes) or a government; Lykke wants to serve your needs. The accelerator they launched recently, will grow the ecosystem and have the desired network effects. Lykke is open of course, to all sorts of business partnerships, for example, the recent partnership with Splendid, a Swiss student loan lender, for servicing international students via blockchain transfers, a process which cuts costs of such cross border transactions and simplifies the process.

Lykke is using the colored coins protocol, not the ERC20 token standardization which has become the most popular software during the recent ICO boom. The colored coin protocol is of open-source and requires programming to be used (one of the reasons that the ERC20 standard has been massively adopted is the ease of use).

The colored coin foundation started in 2013 and is based on the Bitcoin ecosystem. Currently, there are 4 entities that have joined the consortium: Lykke, Colu, Bitt, and Etoro. Bitt is the venture focused on the launch of the Barbados Dollar on the blockchain with the local central bank. Colu is an Israeli venture focused on standardizing the colored coin protocol and the development of their mobile wallet. EToro the social trading platform just recently announced a pilot crypto-wallet that aims to tap into the ICO market.

Lykke’s approach

The exchange that Lykke has created is running on the colored coins protocol. What differentiates it from the newly launched (only beta version running) Bancor venture which broke the record in terms of ICO funding, is that it Lykke’s exchange is based on a P2P matching process whereas Bancor claims to have a secret sauce that creates liquidity and allows for automatic price discovery without requiring a counterparty (which is a breakthrough). Lykke is on the colored coin protocol and Bancor is using the ERC20 standard.

BNT (the $153million ICO) are utility tokens for their exchange (to be built). LKK the colored coins trading on the Lykke app (for now) are not utility tokens but equity shares. 100 LKK coins represent one share in the Swiss registered and regulated company. Lykke is going international in Asia but is not yet available in the US.

The shares of the company have surged in the past months (read more about this from the CEO Richard Olsen here).

Screenshot_20170619-155044

Lykke was early in using the ICO funding mechanism. They placed their first public shares last October and raised CHF1m and in February-March this year they innovated in placing 1yr forward Lykke shares (LKK1Y colored coins) raising CHF2m. They are leading the way in showing others how Capital markets 3.0 can work on their app. I expect that they will be innovating more going forward.

Their most recent innovation already operational (for now only for Bitcoin) is the Offchain Settlement integration on their exchange. This makes the network faster but still has the safeguards of the blockhcain.

Disclosure: I am a shareholder of the LKK coins and look forward to the experience of the first Digital annual shareholder meeting on the 29th of June, were more than 3000 shareholders from 87 countries will come together and vote. Stay tuned.

The race has picked up speed at the protocol layer and at the Dapps layer (payments, exchanges etc). Lykke was live early with a stunningly simple UX and will now has to compete with the recent “white papers” and “MVPs” that are getting piles of funding to accelerate their development. The Lykke “Go-to-Market” strategy is taking the regulatory route (i.e. obtaining exchange licenses in Singapore and the US, payment licenses and even investment licenses in Europe) and aiming to become the center for exchanging value for everybody (from consumers to businesses).

The invitation to join the great global conversations referring to Lykke on the Fintech Genome, is open. Join to learn and contribute here.

Efi Pylarinou is a Fintech thought-leader, consultant, and investor. 

Get fresh daily insights from an amazing team of Fintech thought leaders around the world. Ride the Fintech wave by reading us daily in your email.

 

A great Fintech DogFooding story in SME equity fundraising: SparkUp

logo new

The future has arrived and the pipeline of ICOs is active. Keep in mind that this glove does not fit all.  Capital Markets are being re-shaped left and right. We are following the process as it evolves.

How to raise funding, especially for small businesses, remains “The challenge” for the entrepreneurs involved at all stages of their business development,

despite the multiple alternatives, like Alt loans from Kabagge or Sofi, equity crowdfunding from Angel List or Circle Up, equity financing from investment boutiques like FT Partners or Zelig Associates, or equity financing from Corporate VCs like Google Ventures or Citi Ventures, or traditional VCs like Accel Partners or Bessemer.

SparkUp’s value proposition is empowering small business owners to raise funding

whether it is at the early stage or even later when ready to tap into the public markets. It is also empowering investment managers that are looking to leverage their data.

Jeremy Ley is the French young co-founder and CEO of Sparkup, whose disruptive energy one cannot ignore. I spoke to Jeremy last week because SparkUp caught my attention, as they are

“Eating their own Dogfood”, which means they are fundraising using their own AI sales technology that taps into their own network to quickly and effectively do the fundraising.

SparkUp is not an investment bank. SparkUp is not a crowdfunding platform. SparkUp is a sales technology tool with a focus on financial securities.

It is in the same space as CustomerMatrix or Salesforce with their AI CRM system. However, these technologies have a broader scope and are used mostly to improve revenues and sales pipelines in businesses. SparkUp has a laser focus on the sale of financial securities for SMEs, which is a multi-billion dollar opportunity.

SparkUp can tap into your existing business network with their AI CRM and generate leads faster and more effectively. They received their pre-seed funding in 2015 (1.1M€). They are operational currently in France, the UK and Norway. They have contributed to 7 equity public offerings, signed 8 Investment Managers with 3 Bn+ in assets under management and facilitated the equity fundraising of 40+ SMEs.

The average size of equity financing for SMEs is currently around 150k€ and rising. The value that SparkUp brings to the SME market is obvious since it remains a hugely untapped opportunity. SparkUp has its own online diagnostic test that allows SMEs to very quickly (3min!) estimate their fundraising potential, a digital process that improves the efficiency of SparkUp in serving prospects (i.e. not wasting time on SMEs that are not worthy clients).

Publicly trading companies that could benefit from a boost in retail demand or companies IPOing, are the ones using SprakUp. SparkUp can “smartly activate their databases” which results in improved retail distribution in a cheaper way than ads on online brokers or other digital strategies. In addition, brokers can use the SparkUp sales technology on a revenue sharing basis, to leverage their databases and sales people.

Investment managers have been using SparkUp to cross-sell more of their products with the smart use of their databases.

SparkUp is already operating in France, the UK and Norway. They are currently looking to fundraise funds for the R&D development of their algorithms and their scaling up. SparkUp will accomplish this by tapping into its own network and through algorithms identifying contacts at the right level, emailing them, managing the project of fundraising with its own technology. They are an AI CRM that serves the specific purpose of raising funds and currently, demo-ing live its use. This is a great example that we have not seen neither in the crowdfunding space (i.e. still looking for a crowdfunding platform that has crowdfunded itself) nor in the Market place lending space (i.e. an MPL financing its growth by borrowing on its own platform).

Efi Pylarinou is a Fintech thought-leader, consultant and investor. 

Get fresh daily insights from an amazing team of Fintech thought leaders around the world. Ride the Fintech wave by reading us daily in your email.

 

 

 

 

Crypto equity via ICO and the other innovation chasm

 

chasm.png

Are you a bull or a bear on this question?

– Crypto equity via ICO is the secret to unlocking innovation capital and is the bridge across the chasm between crowdfunding and public market liquidity. This is the bull case.

Or:

– Crypto equity via ICO is a haven for scamsters and needs to be heavily regulated. This is the bear case.

Today we shine a light on that question. First we outline the bull and the bear case. Then we ask some experts to give their views. Bias disclosure: I am a bull, but having seen a few waves of disruptive change I know that change takes a LOT longer than people think and that the early unregulated wave of any disruptive change has a lot of what are politely referred to as “sketchy characters” and less politely as scamsters.

The other innovation chasm

The old saw is “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.

The corollary, for entrepreneurs, is “if it is broke, find a way to fix it”.

The innovation capital business is broken.

Most entrepreneurs understand the chasm between MVP (Minimum Viable Product) and PMF (Product Market Fit). The low cost to build MVP increases supply, but real demand does not change that fast, so lots of MVP ventures fall into the chasm (i.e. they fail).

The next chasm is less well understood. This is the chasm between PMF and Liquidity (via an IPO on the Public Markets and failing that via trade sale).

Today, we don’t see this chasm so clearly because there is a very expensive bridge across it – in a few locations. The very expensive bridge is provided by the big PE/VC Funds. Uber has raised over $8 billion and is still supposedly not ready for an IPO. That is an expensive bridge a) for the Limited Partners (aka the LPs aka the real investors who pay the PE/VC Fund Manager their 2 and 20 cut) and b) for the entrepreneurs (faced with all those preferential equity terms that toss founder and management equity to the bottom of the stack).

Not only is the bridge very expensive, but it is only available in a few choice locations. If you are in Silicon Valley, no problem, there are lots of expensive bridges. If you are in New York, London, Singapore, you have a few bridges. Outside those centres you are scrambling and doing so in the knowledge that some entrepreneur in Silicon Valley just raised 10x what you raised and is planning on using that to crush you.

It gets worse. Unless you do your IPO on NASDAQ or NYSE, you will face a discount. Look at the valuation discount of great companies trading on reputable stock exchanges all around the world. So now you have a second very expensive bridge operated by the “bulge bracket” investment bankers (such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley) who you use to “take you out to IPO”.

So, yes it is broken. The innovation capital business does need fixing. Whether some variant of the ICO is the fix is what we now turn our attention to.

Crypto equity via ICO 101

ICO = Initial Currency Offering.

It makes you think of IPO. That means it also makes regulators think of IPO.

Yet it is C for Currency, not company shares. You buy a Crypto Currency Token that you can use on the network.

Some examples of ventures that have been funded in this way include:

  • Storj
  • Lykke
  • Ethereum
  • ZCash

In all cases, traditional VC were not in control. Sure they could invest alongside everybody else. But they had no information advantage.

The Howey test (from an SEC legal case from 1946) is basically – if it looks and acts like an equity it probably is. Many ICOs fail this test, putting them in the regulatory cross hairs.

Crypto Equity Bear Case

It is very simple to raise money via an ICO. This will bring out honest entrepreneurs who are fed up with the current way of raising capital. It will also bring out crooks. It already has. So far the losers have been people playing with found money. For example if you invested in Bitcoin in 2009, putting some of those profits into Ether in 2014 seems pretty easy, even if you follow it up by losing on the DAO in 2016. It is quite different when Joe Q Public is invested from earnings that took 40 years to accumulate and which he is banking on for a comfortable retirement. If ICO scales, more crooks and more Joe Q Public actors get involved.

Crypto Equity Bull Case

Crypto Equity – done right helps ventures get across both chasms:

  • Chasm 1 between MVP and PMF. The investors are often also the users. They use the tokens on the network. So they help get the venture to PMF.
  • Chasm 2 between PMF and Liquidity. The Crypto Currency Token is traded. Speculators provide liquidity.

The fat protocol thin app thesis

This thesis was articulated by Fred Wilson of Union Square Ventures in August 2016. I urge you to read the whole post and the very informed comments from the community. If you don’t have time, these two pictures paint a thousand words:

IMG_1153

IMG_1154

 

 

The original thinking, from 18 months earlier and, amazingly prescient being  a few months even before the Ethereum ICO, was from Naval Ravikant (founder of Angel List who we have written about here, here and here).

What do the experts say?

The experts we reached out to are in what I call the “Other BBC” space (Bitcoin Blockchain Crypto), so they will be inclined to a bullish case. If you have an alternative view, please let us know in comments.

My questions to them are:

  • Use Case Suitability. Is ICO only suitable to businesses at what USV call the fat protocol layer? This will be very few companies. Or could the ICO, with some modifications and regulations, be used for any company? If yes to the latter, what do you see as the essential modifications and regulations?
  • ICO Lessons. What key lessons should entrepreneurs, bankers and regulators draw from the ICOs that have happened so far?

Use Case Suitability

From Fabio Federici

“I think we need to distinguish between two types of tokens. On one hand, we have the tokenization of equity, where the token does not serve any specific purpose in the product/protocol but rather represents a digital form equity as we know it today. While this will improve liquidity and efficiency, I don’t believe this to be a paradigm shift.

On the other hand, we have decentralized blockchain-assets, ranging from currencies (BTC), over commodities (ETH) to application-specific tokens like Golem (a decentralized AWS) or Storj (a decentralized Dropbox) (see @ARKblockchain). These are just some examples blockchain-based assets, where the value of the network is captured by its users, rather than a centralized entity – and that is what will power the next phase of the Internet. I believe that the most exciting use-cases are yet to come. Just like it was hard to imagine Google, Snapchat or Uber in the early days of the Internet, it is impossible to predict the applications that decentralized blockchain protocols will enable.”

From Oscar Jofre  (see our review of his Korecox venture here).

“I am a bull/bear crossover on this subject because of the lack of oversight even by the industry to make sure proceeds are used in a manner that will not cause a domino affect of disgruntled coin holders in an empty network.

Not everything needs regulations but given that the retail market is just learning of the crypto currency, the industry needs to mature so this can be a very viable method for companies to utilize.  Unfortunately at the moment we are not seeing that and my bear comes out because I am seeing first hand, how companies are using ICO as a form of equity raise and not having a care if the person purchasing their coins makes any return on that investment.”

Richard Olsen of Lykke:

“In future, any company will be able to take advantage of the ICO route. No regulatory changes will be necessary, because Lykke will acquire the necessary legal licenses and future ICOs can happen under the Lykke umbrella, www.lykke.com

ICO Lessons

From Fabio Federici:

“I think it is important to distinguish between the tokens representing pure equity, and blockchain-based assets that serve a purpose in a protocol. While the first is just a digital version of what we know today, the latter represents a new type of asset class.

Also, one should always take a close look at each asset before making a decision, whether it’s building on it, investing in it or regulating it. Many factors play into the evaluation of these assets, from the aforementioned purpose to the fundamentals, the code, the team and many more. We are still in the early days – ontologies and (e)valuation methods have yet to be developed.

The main lesson for me is to keep an open mind and evaluate each token or asset individually. We are in the midst of the rise of a new asset class that will change the world.”

From Oscar Joffre

“ICO’s are here and need guidance. They are not used to harm but to really bridge the large funding gap we have globally for companies.  The industry can choose to be proactive and self-regulate, which in the end will be better than regulators injecting in.”

Richard Olsen of Lykke:

“The new future has started – entrepreneurs, bankers and regulators have understood that ICOs are a new reality and are essential funding tools. They combine cost efficient funding with building a motivated network of supporters.”

 Conclusion

Crypto Equity is a gamechanger – if done right.

Those three little words –  if done right – cover a lot of complex detail.

We can leave that to regulators in each jurisdiction to create their rule books. That can take a lot of time and will devalue the frictionless cross border nature of ICOs today. Or the community can create a self-regulatory code of conduct as Oscar Jofre suggests. We have opened a thread on Fintech Genome where this initiative can be crowdsourced.

http://genome.dailyfintech.com/t/crypto-equity-via-ico-self-regulation/965

 

Image Source

Bernard is a Fintech thought-leader & deal-maker.

Get fresh daily insights from our amazing team of Fintech thought leaders around the world. Ride the Fintech wave by reading us daily in your email.

T-Zero sings “Love me do” to the SEC with its Blockchain Series A Preferred Shares

t0

Wonders are still happening in America!

Who would imagine that an online retailer who started out as an e-commerce business liquidating merchandise of failed companies, would be the first publicly traded company offering Blockchain Shares.

Let me introduce to you Overstock, a Nasdaq listed online retailer (OSTK) based in Utah and founded by Patrick Byrne.

Tee-zero (t0.com) is a majority owned subsidiary of Overstock that is focused on using blockchain technology in capital markets. Last summer, we covered the issuance of a private crypto-currency denominated bond that settled on the T0 platform. It was a symbolic move, demonstrating that it is possible to issue, trade & settle (synonymous in the future T0 world), and have very fine divisibility of a bond and fast transferability. The trading activity of this bond was not the point of the implementation.

This December an even more important symbolic implementation happened. After the SEC approved in early Fall the issuance of a blockchain public stock offering; Overtstock will go down in history as the first publicly traded company that offered blockchain shares trading on an Alternative trading system (ATS).

The historic offering: Overstock Preferred Shares

Voting Series B Preferred Shares

  • 560,333 @ $15.68 (roughly $9mil)
  • Trading on NasdaQ OTCQB

Blockchain Voting Series A Preferred Shares

  • 126,565 @ $15.68 (roughly $2mil)
  • Trading on ATS under the symbol OSTKP

The above offering (total roughly $11mil) was handled by Keystone Capital, a conventional broker-dealer that worked diligently and closely with the regulators to obtain the required approvals.

Existing shareholders had the right to participate in the offering as follows: One subscription right for each 10 shares of common stock owned. Each share of the preferred stock has a preferential right to a 1 percent cumulative annual cash dividend.

The symbolic significance of the Blockchain Series A transaction is all about the

Transparency of the transaction and the fact that it boils down to the verification of two blockchain addresses.

What’s next?

I wasn’t an Overtsock shareholder on the required date and therefore didn’t participate in the offering. The broker-dealer, Keystone Capital handled the onboarding of the buyers (existing shareholders that exercised their right to buy the Series A preferred stock) of the digital securities. They created digital wallets and accounts for them and are now continuing to onboard outside buyers who will be matched on the T0 platform to sellers (those that participated in the first placement). Any individual that qualifies under the Title III Jobs Act, can participate.

Nasdaq is watching and probably nodding its head, since a large-scale adaption of such a process is not imminent. However, it is threatening to its core business.

Stock exchanges are one of the main three categories of players involved in capital markets; Brokers and Central Securities Depositaries handling settlements, are the other two main categories. The million-dollar question here, is who of them will embrace the T-zero or some such blockchain based platform and make the other two obsolete?

T-Zero is actually a viable product that targets the capital markets B2B vertical and is out there for the first mover to embrace it. Ironically T-zero is a private blockchain. In addition, this first symbolic implementation was accomplished with the participation and collaboration of market players and intermediaries that will be directly affected should this technology prove to change the capital markets infrastructure. Broker-dealers for example, which were instrumental in obtaining approval from the SEC and effectively laying the seeds for the growth of such an ecosystem of digital assets; will be cannibalized.

At the same time,

T-zero with Keystone Capital, are bringing up to speed the SEC and holding their hand towards Full Regulatory Transparency in public markets.

For me, this symbolic transaction is the first public performance of “Love me do” from T-zero to the SEC. Right at the time that the SEC has committed to a plan to spend $1.5billion to create a consolidated audit trial (CAT), T-zero is echoing loud and clear to them “Love me do”

T-zero can offer a freemium service to the SEC, if they adopt the T-zero platform which will naturally include a Consolidated Audit Trial.

If T-zero manages to seed an ecosystem of publicly traded digital assets (even if it starts small); then I foresee Lykke, the frictionless global marketplace for digital assets, accelerating its growth. Lykke, an open source platform, has started with frictionless, transparent, immediate settlement of FX, ICOs and cryptocurrencies, but is ready to broaden its assets base (anything digital can be on boarded).

The transformation in capital markets is here. Timing is uncertain but the trend is clear.

Sources: T zero news; Nasdaq news

Daily Fintech Advisers provides strategic consulting to organizations with business and investment interests in Fintech & operates the Fintech Genome P2P Knowledge Network. Efi Pylarinou is a Digital Wealth Management thought leader.

Golem and the ICO ecosystem

golem

The Golem anthropomorphic figure

The Golem deal beckons us to revisit the ICO market. Our recent coverage can be found in IPO or ICO or IEO (briefing on Colored Coins) and Transparency missing from the suppliers of Capital to Fintechs.

Golem’s ICO is over. It raised 820,000 ETH (roughly $8.6 million) in a couple hours.

As reported by Smith + Crown

Golem is backed by the Ethereum blockchain and is a platform that aims to become a decentralized hub to create global marketplace for computation.

The Golem Network Token (GNT) was created through this ICO and is the medium of exchange between “buyers” and “sellers” on the Golem hub. So, those engaging on the platform (developers creating software, providers supplying infrastructure and “requesters” ordering computing resources) will trade GNTs.

Golem is the third largest ICO deal. In the ICO market, any deal above $1mil is considered large. Not many people are aware that the ICO market has facilitated around $220mil in capital raised over the past three years. The really large deals are, Ethereum who raised $18.5mil during its ICO and the DAO with a wopping $180mil (a tragic example).

Access to capital has and will be a business essential. The IPO market was traditionally gated by the investment banks and is being disrupted by Fintechs like Angel List, Syndicate Room, OurCrowd etc.

Crowdfunding, transparency in the syndication process, cross border deal facilitation, are ingredients of the underway disruption that are leading to access to capital without being listed on an exchange (i.e. public markets) and to improved liquidity in these private shares.

So where does the ICO (Initial Coin Offering) disruption fit in to this? The basic facts and distinctions are:

  • ICOs are one way of crowdfunding.
  • ICOs offer a cheap, transparent share ownership process.
  • ICOs can be thought of as a derivative of a bitcoin or other digital currencies, because in the process the company issuing shares is creating an Altcoin typically with its name but not necessarily that is a colored, smaller part of the bitcoin (which has 100,000,000 satoshis and therefore, could be divided in that many pieces). The small denomination will also help liquidity.
  • ICOs are a way to access global capital simultaneously; whereas traditional capital raising starts in one regulatory jurisdiction and thereafter, may choose to also list in another exchange. ICOs seem more like the FX market that trades internationally, rather than the equity markets.
  • ICOs can and are launched from very early stages of business development. They are a cheap, effective way to participate in early stage ventures.
  • ICOs can and will benefit from the liquidity traction of the underlying digital currency from which it is created.

Open issues relate to whether (actually not discussed that much):

  • ICOs are legitimate and how they could be regulated?
  • Are they an investment or a speculative trading asset?
  • Will they remain confined to facilitating funding of techie types of companies?

The ICO ecosystem

The Fintech ecosystem is building up to track, analyze and service the ICO market.

Smith + Crown, is the place for news, research, and analysis of cryptocurrencies, blockchains, cryptofinance, distributed autonomous corporations..

It offers a dedicated page to monitor past ICO deals and those upcoming.

ICOstart is a new marketplace (i.e. exchange in old parlance) to issue and trade the Altcoins from these ICOs.

ICOO is another new place to go, to track pre-launch crowdfunding ICO deals and to be able to trade them immediately thereafter, on the Open Ledger platform. This is a company created by CCEDK in collaboration with Openledger. CCEDK is the Danish bitcoin exchange that closed in May and relaunched in July, more as a hub for crowdfunding, issuance of assets, escrow accounts.

Daily Fintech will continue monitoring the space and reporting.

Daily Fintech Advisers provides strategic consulting to organizations with business and investment interests in Fintech & operates the Fintech Genome P2P Knowledge Network.  Efi Pylarinou is a Digital Wealth Management thought leader.

Briefing on Colored Coins – IPO, ICO, IEO

IPO1.jpg

Image source

The new kid on the block is IEO (Initial Equity Offering). I coined that phrase because neither IPO or ICO fits.

– IPO (Initial Public Offering) implies listing shares on a regulated Stock Market such as NYSE, Nasdaq, LSE, SIX etc. 

– ICO (Initial Currency Offering) implies issuing a new Alt Coin. The problem is that Alt Coin are not getting any serious market capitalization. For students of exotica, here is the market cap of the top Alt Coins. The last thing the world needs right now is another AltCoin.

If it is broke, do fix it

A regulated Stock Market is how the market works today. The old saw is if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. The corollary is if it is broke, do fix it.  Here are the 4 big flaws with these legacy Stock Markets: 

  • legacy listing processes: post Enron, the SEC (followed by other Exchanges) layered on lots of expensive process to protect investors from scams, all of which were based on manual processes (which later got automated but they were still not native digital ie they were expensive and inefficient).
  • national boundaries: it is too hard to discover stocks on exchanges in local markets, so they either suffer a valuation discount or seek a listing on one of the global exchanges (where only mega-sized companies can do an IPO). (See here for our other coverage of this issue).  
  • declining revenue line from listing fees: Stock Exchanges increasingly make their money from selling data, co-located servers for HFT and payment for order flow. This leads to misalignment of interest with the two customers who matter – issuers and long term investors.    

This post, earlier this week by Efi, describes how things went wrong at traditional regulated stock exchanges.

Why Microsoft did an IPO

They did not need to raise money – they were already profitable. They wanted liquidity and price discovery so that they could motivate employees with stock. That is the function of a public market. Any public market 2.0 initiative has to bear that in mind. Investors want to buy shares of profitable business. Uber’s $66 billion valuation in private markets is being questioned because investors cannot figure out how they still lose money after having got to such scale. Then consider a bootstrapped business such as Microsoft at their IPO 25 years ago or a Mittlestand company in Germany. As an investor, which do you prefer to own? That is what the Innovation Capital business should be serving and is not.

Colored Coins 101 for business people

Part of our mission at Daily Fintech is to demystify jargon that obfuscates. We translate Fin for Tech and Tech for Fin. In this case we are translating Tech for Fin. There is so much innovation around Blockchain that it is hard for business executives to keep up to date. Our job is to find the stuff that matters and bring it to your attention.

We think Colored Coins is an important development in the Blockchain world. We will parse the tag line on their front page to explain why: 

The Open Source Protocol for Creating Digital Assets On The Bitcoin Blockchain

  • Open Source Protocol. This is like TCP/IP or HTML. No company controls it or makes money directly from Colored Coins. You make money by adding value on top.
  • Creating Digital Assets. You don’t buy an Alt Coin. Let me repeat that. You don’t buy an Alt Coin. You “color” an existing Bitcoin ( % of a Bitcoin or number of Satoshi, which is the smallest divisible unit of a Bitcoin) to represent an asset (stock in a company, a house or car or painting or whatever). Then you can buy and sell those assets frictionlessly across borders. 
  • Bitcoin Blockchain. This is about the public Blockchain. You can also use Colored Coins on Ethereum (another popular public Blockchain). If you believe that all Blockchains will be private, this is not for you. Using the analogy with the development of the Internet, this is about the Internet not a collection of Intranets. Open Coin transactions are validated by a consensus network (either Proof Of Work by Bitcoin Miners or Proof Of Stake or whatever Ethereum uses). 

Of course, an open source protocol is only as good as the use cases created by entrepreneurs. That is the subject of a future research note.

Daily Fintech Advisers provides strategic consulting to organizations with business and investment interests in Fintech & operates the Fintech Genome P2P Knowledge platform.

Whatever happened to…11 startups graduating from Barclays Techstars 2 years ago

charles-darwin-quote

Image source

2 years ago I attended the Barclays Techstars graduation day pitch in London. My report from then is here. I was excited and impressed, but knew the stats about startup survival rates. So I thought it would be interesting to do a Whatever happened to… followup post two years later (an eon in startup time).

I put them into 3 categories based on recency of funding as per Crunchbase (if they have it wrong for your company, please update Crunchbase and tell us in comments). Funding is a proxy for traction but only a proxy. If the company is thriving the old fashioned way by customer revenue, please tell us in comments.

Category 1. Never raised money beyond Seed in summer 2014.

They may still be in business. (If you are, please tell us in comments and update Crunchbase). Most probably they are not still in business and the best one can say is that they failed fast, losing little of their own time or their investor’s money.

ClauseMatch

Crowd estates

Gust Pay 

Try

Vieweet

Category 2. Has not raised money in last 18 months but did raise some money after the summer of 2014.

This is worse (unless Crunchbase is wrong and they are thriving) as it took longer and cost more to get to the same place as Category 1.

Glimr.io

Squirrel

Category 3. Has raised money in last 18 months.

These are the ones that may make it through that uber Darwinian process known as creating a high tech startup. Their journey will be a tale worth telling. Even these are on the early stage of this journey – they may have reached Basecamp on their way to Everest Summit. This is hard and takes time.

DoPay

Aire

Novicap

Hard to Categorise

TheMarketIQ

There is no sign of funding on Crunchbase but other signs of health indicate they may still be around but just keeping funding sources quiet.

It’s a Darwinian Process

So, How was my original analysis?

My three top rated ventures were Aire, Squirrel and Do-Pay. It looks like I may have got one out of three right – Aire is clearly raising money and getting traction.

At the event, Barclays Techstars was talking about their filtering process to get from 340 applicants to 11 that got into the program.

To get a real result for investors and founders means a liquidity event – trade sale or IPO. So even the 3 in Category 3 are only at the start of their journey.

It’s a tough Darwinian process for founders and entrepreneurs, with plenty of excitement along the way. Failing fast and trying again is the mantra for founders; investors have a portfolio so many failed ventures are OK if they get one big winner.  So tales of ventures not making it should not and will not deter those who want to give it a go.

We may see these ideas resurface

Research shows that the single biggest factor in startup success/failure is timing.Many of these maybe great ideas, but the timing was off. We may see these ideas resurface with a different name/team.

Daily Fintech Advisers provides strategic consulting to organizations with business and investment interests in Fintech & operates the Fintech Genome P2P Knowledge platform.