Search

This week, we take a look at the top SSTI Weekly Digest stories from 2016 and give you an idea of what to look for in the coming months.

In last week’s Digest article – Alternatives to VC: Reconsidering the Startup Financing Paradigm – SSTI examined the conventional venture capital (VC) model as well as its advantages and limitations. In this installment, we will highlight alternatives such as revenue-based financing, venture debt, crowdfunding and a new financing model for cleantech proposed by Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) researchers. We also take a look at the potential that these alternatives have for the field of tech-based economic development.

Venture capital (VC) financing is a highly competitive process that backs only 1 percent to 2 percent of all startups that apply for funding, leaving many searching for financing alternatives.  In this two-part feature, SSTI examines the typical VC model, its advantages and limitations, and next week will highlight alternatives such as revenue-based financing, venture debt, crowdfunding and a new financing model for cleantech proposed

Despite Brexit and political uncertainty in the U.S., stability is returning to the global VC market as investors shift from new unicorn chasing and a renewed interest in global initial private offerings (IPOs) by late-stage startups, according to a new report from CB Insights – Venture Pulse Q3 2016.

While the number of companies receiving venture capital (VC) backing continues to decline, the amount of money invested remains near record levels. As of Q3, the annual investment total for 2016 is approximately $56 billion invested across 6,000 companies.

After an extremely strong venture capital market in 2015, the industry seems to show the signs of a decline driven by both cautious and fatigued investors. Three recent studies from Pitchbook and CB Insights indicate that there are several reasons why venture capital firms and other investors have been more cautious so far in 2016 including: mixed economic growth numbers; a volatile political climate; and, more security in private markets.

A spate of recent news challenges many common perceptions of venture capital. Academic researchers have identified critical shortcomings with widely used industry data. Major investors have revealed smaller than anticipated returns. An analysis of thousands of investments indicates fund success requires superstar deals of well more than 10x. These articles should drive new evaluations of public policy and programs to support early stage capital.

Startup failure is the rule, not the exception. However, much startup ”failure” includes businesses that made a workable product and grew — just not fast enough to attract venture capital. A hybrid venture capital-private equity approach is trying to identify these slower-growing businesses as part of an investment model that may provide an exit strategy for spurned startups throughout the country.

For the 10th consecutive quarter, the venture capital (VC) industry invested $10 billion in a single quarter after investing $15.3 billion in Q2 2016, according to the MoneyTree™ Report from PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) and the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA).

At the end of 2015, there were concerns that the Venture Capital (VC) industry had peaked and there would be a quick return to 2013 VC investment levels.

The University System of Maryland (USM) recently announced a $25 million fund to invest in USM-affiliated companies or startups created by students, faculty and recent graduates.  Companies already based in USM research parks or university incubators are also eligible for funding.

In the lead-up to the Biotechnology Innovation Organization’s (BIO) International Convention held this week, the organization released a series of reports on the health of the industry. Collectively, the reports indicate that the bioscience industry is seeing greater employment with better wages, increasing venture investment, but university and federal funding, patent filings and clinical trial success are leveling off or decreasing.

Coming off a record setting year, industry analysts contended that there would be a more cautious U.S. venture capital industry (VC) in 2016 with discussion of a VC bubble. However, in Q1 of 2016, venture capitalists invested more than $10 billion for the ninth consecutive quarter with little concern over a bubble. In total, VCs invested $12.1 billion in 969 deals in the Q1 of 2016, according to the MoneyTree Report from PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) and the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA). At the same time, U.S. venture capital firms raised $12.0 billion for 57 funds during Q1 of 2016, making it the strongest quarter for funds raised since Q2 of 2006, according to the Fundraising Report by Thomson Reuters and NVCA. A review of the data indicates continuation of trends in where venture capital is being invested, the decline of investment in seed stage companies, and increasing corporate venture capital activity with 20.6 percent of funds invested in Q1 of 2016 coming from corporate venture capital.

Only 8 percent of partners with the authority to invest at 2,300 micro- and venture capital (VC) firms are women (and only 7 percent of the top 100 firms), according to CrunchBase Women in Venture, a new report providing a detailed snapshot of the state of female investors and founders. The report finds of 54 corporate VC divisions and 101 accelerators, 12 percent of partners were female.

The U.S. venture capital (VC) industry continued a gradual deflation in activity in Q1 2016, even as capital invested remained at a historically robust level according to Pitchbook’s 1Q 2016 U.S. Venture Industry Report. In Q1 2016, the VC industry also continued the trend of massive late-stage VC rounds with $9.4 billion of $17.7 billion invested in late-stage financing.

More than three-quarters of U.S. venture capital dollars went to companies in California, New York and Massachusetts in 2015, according to data from the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC)/National Venture Capital Association (NVCA) Moneytree Report. California companies received over 57 percent of all U.S. investment, about 0.5 percent down from the state’s peak in 2014. Both New York and Massachusetts received about 10 percent of U.S. dollars. Washington, the state with the fourth highest share, trailed far behind at 2.1 percent.

Despite a small decrease in venture capital deals last year, the San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont metropolitan area remains the most active investment regions on a per capita basis, according to data from the PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC)/National Venture Capital Association (NVCA) MoneyTree Report. San Francisco led all other MSAs in both total dollars and per capita activity, with its $21 billion in 2015 investment averaging about $4,500 per metro resident.

Last year, the venture capital investment hit a 15-year high, with total dollars topping every year since 2000. A slow fourth quarter brought the remarkable trajectory of the year back down to earth, but with a total of $11.3 billion invested, 2015 became the second highest year on record since PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) and the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA) began the Moneytree Report in 1995. Much of this growth was due to larger deals, and, in fact, the total number of deals was down from the previous year.

This week, leaders in Illinois and New Mexico announced new investments to help seed and early stage technology startups access equity capital. The Illinois Treasurer will launch the Illinois Growth and Innovation Fund, which would invest $220 million over the next three years in 15-20 funds across the state. No more than 15 percent of the money will be placed with any particular fund. The state’s investment will target emerging tech companies, beginning later this quarter.

Even though the total amount invested by venture capitalists (VCs) grew for the fourth straight year to nearly $77.3 invested, Pitchbook analysts contend that 2014/2015 was the peak of the VC industry for the foreseeable future. While high valuations drove up the total amount invested, the number of deals plummeted during the second half of 2015 according to new data from Pitchbook.  In addition to insights from Pitchbook, other analysts contend that the declining trends of 2015 should remain through 2016.

Corporate venture capital (VC) groups made over $2.3 billion in investments via 240 deals to the startup ecosystem during the third quarter of 2015. Corporate VC accounted for 14.1 percent of all venture capital dollars invested and 21.5 percent of all deals, according to the MoneyTree Report from PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) and the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA).

Undergraduate alumni from the top 10 universities for venture capital-backed (VC-backed) entrepreneurs launched over 3,000 companies that were able to attract $33.5 billion in VC funding from 2010 to 2015, according to the third edition of PitchBook’s Universities Report 2015-2016 Edition. Four public research institutions, UC-Berkeley, University of Michigan, University of Texas, and University of Illinois, finished in the top 10.

Bank or venture capital (VC) financing? This is one of the toughest questions that aspiring entrepreneurs and small firms must answer. A recent academic study contends that VC financing may be the superior financing structure for early stage capital. However, several other studies contend that both bank and VC financing can help create and grow successful startups. For potential entrepreneurs, each provides strengths and weaknesses that are highlighted in the studies.

To support the growth of Northeast Ohio’s entrepreneurial ecosystem, The Greater Cleveland Partnership (GCP) announced a limited-partner investment in JumpStart's new for-profit $20M venture capital fund.

The Research Foundation for State University of New York (SUNY) is seeking feedback regarding the translation of SUNY research and innovation into meaningful startup company formation, acceleration and growth through targeted venture investing. In particular, the foundation seeks ideas on how SUNY could connect research experts to entrepreneurial leaders, advisors, or mentors in order to build upon emerging industry sector strengths.