What’s next for billionaire Twitter?

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen

At a time when the social networking bubble is quickly deflating, micro-blogging startup Twitter seems to be living in an alternative universe. We are, of course, referring to the much-publicized $1bn valuation the San Francisco-based company received in a recent round of funding. The rich funding dwarfs even the kinds of valuations we saw during the height of the short-lived social networking bubble last year. And it’s pretty difficult to justify Twitter’s valuation based on its financial performance, since the money-burning startup has absolutely no revenue to speak of, nor a clear plan of how to change that. It seems the entire valuation is predicated on the impressive user growth it has experienced over the past year, as well as the charismatic founders’ wild dreams of ‘changing the way the world communicates.’ That’s pretty thin, particularly when compared to LinkedIn’s funding last year at a similar valuation. That round, which was done at a time when the social networking fad was near its peak, nonetheless had some financial results to support it. Reid Hoffman’s startup was profitable on what we understand was about $100m in revenue and a proven and lucrative business model.

The interesting development from this latest funding is that it makes a sale of Twitter less likely, we would argue. This may be fine with the founders, who have drawn in some $150m for the company and will (presumably) look to the public market to repay those investments at some point in the future. But without any revenue to speak of at this point, any offering from Twitter is a long way off. Also, an IPO by Twitter in the future hangs on successful offerings from Facebook and LinkedIn, which are far more likely to go public before Twitter. If both of those social media bellwethers enjoy strong offerings, and Twitter actually starts to make money off its fast-growing base of users, then a multibillion-dollar exit – in the form of an IPO – might not be farfetched. But we should add that there are a lot of ‘ifs’ included in that scenario.

An offering looks all the more likely for Twitter because the field of potential acquirers has gotten significantly slimmer, since not many would-be acquirers have deep-enough pockets to pay for a premium on the startups’ already premium valuation. As we know from Twitter’s own embarrassing leak of some internal documents, Microsoft, Yahoo, Google and Facebook have all shown an interest in the startup at one point or another. But we’re not sure any of those companies would really be ready to do a 10-digit deal for a firm that’s still promising – rather than posting – financial results. Moreover, we wonder if any of the four would-be buyers even need Twitter. Yahoo and Microsoft seem focused on other parts of their business. Meanwhile, Google is hard at work on Google Wave, and Facebook appears to have moved on already with its much-cheaper acquisition of Twitter competitor FriendFeed in August.

Recent high-profile social networking valuations (based on last known valuation event)

Date Company Valuation/exit value Revenue Revenue to value multiple
September 2009 Twitter $1bn $0* N/A
Summer 2009 Facebook $8bn $500m* 16x*
June 2008 LinkedIn $1bn $100m* 10x*
May 2008 Plaxo $150m* (acquisition by Comcast) $10m* 15x*
March 2008 Bebo $850m (acquisition by AOL) $20m* 42.5x*
July 2005 MySpace/Intermix $580m (acquisition by NewsCorp) $90m 6.5x
December 2005 FriendsReunited $208m (acquisition by ITV; divested to Brightsolid in $42m fire sale in August 2009) $20* 10x*

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase *451 Group estimate

Will Adobe-Omniture marriage prompt online video M&A?

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen, Jim Davis

When Adobe Systems and Omniture announced the details and rationale behind their $1.8bn tie-up in mid-September, some interesting items emerged. Highlighted was the obvious benefit from a combination of Adobe’s popular Flash video platform and Omniture’s analytics capabilities. As the Web analytics market has become more saturated, Omniture has recently been expanding into higher-margin niches such as online video analytics. Combining online video content management with analytics is an area in which some early startups have carved out a profitable niche over the past few years as video has finally started to move to the Web.

However, if the newly bulked-up Adobe truly moves into the space – as we suspect the company will – it will undoubtedly present an enormous challenge to an industry previously dominated by a few well-funded startups. As a consequence of other larger players wanting to get a piece of the booming sector and startups being more inclined to strengthen their position, we believe consolidation in the market is inevitable. With that as our premise, who might be buying, and who are the potential prime targets?

Among a slew of startups in the space, the two primary ones we think could be in play in this scenario are market leaders Move Networks and Brightcove. The two have each taken in roughly $90m in venture capital. It is worth noting that both Microsoft and Cisco are strategic investors in Move Networks, and we think the company would make a great fit for either one since both have a strong focus on video moving forward. Meanwhile, both IAC/InterActive and AOL are strategic investors in competitor Brightcove. While we don’t think AOL is in a position to make an acquisition like this now, we would not put it past IAC. Google with its more consumer-oriented YouTube makes a logical acquirer as well, particularly as a way to add a business-friendly enterprise offering.

And finally, we might put forward rich content delivery networks (CDNs) such as Akamai and Limelight Networks. These vendors have been buying their way into premium verticals recently to escape the rapid commoditization of their core business and would be wise to consider acquiring into the space. From the estimated $40m or so in revenue that we understand Brightcove brings in, a large part of that comes from reselling bandwidth through CDNs.

id Software exit signals continued consolidation in gaming

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen

While we have been expecting continued consolidation in the gaming sector for a long time now, we didn’t see this combination coming. Id Software, a staunchly independent, Mesquite, Texas-based shop best known for founder John Carmack and the Doom franchise, sold recently to Rockville, Maryland-based ZeniMax Media. ZeniMax is a relatively small, privately held publisher, having picked up Bethesda Software in 2001. However, the firm has wealthy backers. It raised $300m in 2007 from private equity shop Providence Equity Partners and according to a US Securities and Exchange Commission filing, raised another $105m in debt financing on July 7, which was specifically earmarked for the acquisition of id. Given that ZeniMax undoubtedly wants to retain id’s employees (even giving a seat of the board to id CEO Todd Hollenshead), we suspect ZeniMax also had to tap into its equity to cover the purchase price, which wasn’t revealed.

This deal makes us wonder about the outlook for the remaining independent legacy videogame studios. Specifically, we’re referring to Bellevue, Washington-based Valve Corp and Cary, North Carolina-based Epic Games. Not that we’re suggesting any formal shopping is taking place. But if the id exit shows us anything, it is that in a time when development costs are skyrocketing and financing is harder to come by, it might be wise for studios to join forces with a larger publisher. That’s particularly true as the current economic slump has painfully shown that the videogame industry is not as ‘recession-proof’ as some people had hoped. Shares of Electronic Arts, which serve as a kind of proxy for the entire videogame industry, have been cut in half over the past year, compared to a mere 6% decline in the broader software stock index during the same period.

Videogame-related M&A by the big four, 2006-present

Acquirer Number of acquisitions Total known deal value
Activision Blizzard 10 $5.69bn (includes merger with Vivendi)
Electronic Arts 9 $771m
Microsoft 4 $235m
Sony 6 N/A

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase

Adknowledge inks super deal for social advertising dominance

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen

Rumors of the sale of Super Rewards (also known as SR Points) have been swirling for quite some time. On Wednesday, acquisitive Adknowledge announced that it is indeed the winning bidder in a competitive sales process for Vancouver-based Super Rewards, a bootstrapped, 40-person incentives-based online advertising startup. (We understand that Super Rewards is profitable and generating approximately $60m in gross revenue – a number the firm says could hit as much as $100m this year. Of course, the company’s net revenue is much lower, likely in the neighborhood of one-fourth the gross amount after revenue share.) The purchase of Super Rewards marks the sixth acquisition for Adknowledge in less than two years, and we estimate this transaction is by far its largest yet. The deal also marks a shift in the M&A strategy of the Kansas City, Missouri-based online advertising giant, which has typically been more inclined to pick up heavily discounted distressed assets.

Nonetheless, Adknowledge, which we estimate was running profitably on close to $200m in revenue prior to the acquisition, has made a smart purchase in reaching for Super Rewards. Incentives-based advertising companies like Super Rewards have received quite a bit of attention recently because they seem to have found a way to actually make money off of social networks. (The fundamental business principle of profitability has largely eluded the social networks themselves.) Much like other online advertising niches, it is a sector that stands as a small, faster-growing piece of a much larger overall market. But in order to reach their full potential, incentives-based advertising vendors need the scale brought by established and wealthy companies like Adknowledge, which boasts more than 50,0000 advertisers. Because of that, we weren’t surprised to see Super Rewards gobbled up – and we wonder if the same thing might not end up happening to the firm’s two main rivals.

We’re thinking specifically about Fremont, California-based Offerpal Media and San Francisco-based Peanut Labs, which have taken approximately $20m and $4m in venture capital, respectively. The largest independent startup remaining in the niche sector, Offerpal Media recently said it was doing around $40m in revenue. Potential acquirers include dominant online advertising players such as Microsoft, Google, Time Warner’s AOL and ValueClick. In particular, we suspect ValueClick could be ready to shop as a way to stand out from its larger competitors. The Westlake Village, California-based company certainly has the means to do a deal, since it has no debt and some $100m in cash. Other potential suitors for incentives-based advertising startups include large-scale application platforms such as Facebook and NewsCorp’s MySpace that would benefit greatly from bringing the ad service in-house.

Adknowledge M&A

Date announced Target
July 22, 2009 KITN Media [dba Super Rewards]
March 12, 2009 Miva Media
November 6, 2008 Lookery (Advertising business assets)
November 3, 2008 Adonomics [fka Appaholic]
December 6, 2007 Cubics Social Network Advertising
November 8, 2007 Mediarun (UK and Australia divisions)

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase

What’s the outlook for mobile payment startups?

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen

The consolidation in the mobile payment market that we outlined recently is still on. Startup Boku announced on Tuesday a $13m venture capital infusion in the form of what we understand was a $3m series A round followed quickly by a $10m series B round a little over a month later. Benchmark Capital led the latest round, with Index Ventures and Khosla Ventures also pitching in some cash. The money was used to acquire two competitors, Paymo and Mobillcash. We estimate that very little of the cash was used to buy the vendors. We understand that the purchase of Paymo, which raised a reported $5m itself, was primarily done in stock. The deals were largely a way for Boku to gain customers and technology, as well as expand its international reach. It’s increasingly important for mobile payment startups to do something to stand out among the dozens of rivals also trying to crack this market. What’s unusual about Boku is that this strategy is playing out so quickly. The company only incorporated in March.

The real question for Boku and other promising startups in the mobile payment space such as RFinity is what will ultimately happen to this hyped market. Despite hundreds of millions of dollars poured into startups, they haven’t been able to generate much revenue, certainly not to the level that would make them viable businesses at this point. We believe the best outcome for these firms is an exit to a larger strategic acquirer. An example of this that may well be in the offing is Obopay, which took an investment from Nokia a few months ago. We suspect that could be a ‘try before you buy’ arrangement for the Finnish mobile company. Research in Motion and others could look to use acquisitions to catch up, as well.

However, we wonder how long it will be before other smartphone providers, platforms and mobile operators do as Apple has done. Micro-transactions are a huge selling point for the new iPhone 3.0 update and, frankly, one of the few bright spots for the mobile payment sector. However, all transactions for iPhone applications are done through Apple itself, leaving companies such as Boku out in the cold. If other vendors – including RIM, Palm Inc, Google, Microsoft and even application platforms like Facebook – stay in-house to develop the technology, there isn’t much need to go shopping. That could well hurt the valuations of mobile payment startups, even those that survive this current period of consolidation.

Could ad slump lead to ValueClick exit?

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen

Recently, we’ve covered the hardships of online advertising companies. However, for a clear example of just how tough the environment really is, we point to the weakness at ValueClick, one of the few remaining publicly traded pure-play advertising firms. Amid an advertising slump and tough competition, the vendor has seen its first-quarter revenue decline 20% from the same quarter last year and its own projections point to a similar decline for the current quarter. With the advertising market seemingly trapped in the doldrums for the foreseeable future, we wonder if an opportunistic acquirer might consider a run at ValueClick.

ValueClick trades at an enterprise value of about $800m. This is about half its 2008 high, and down about two-thirds from 2007, when Google and Microsoft were throwing billions of dollars around to secure market leadership. With $592m in trailing 12-month (TTM) revenue, the company trades at a scant 1.3x sales. This is a far cry from the multiples paid for aQuantive and DoubleClick of 10x TTM sales and 12x TTM sales, respectively.

With $100m in cash and no debt, ValueClick CEO Tom Vadnais has indicated that the company is interested in doing some shopping of its own. However, given the dire state of the economy, we think a takeout is a much more plausible outcome over the next year or so. The potential acquirers include the usual suspects such as Microsoft, Google and IAC/InterActiveCorp; soon-to-be-independent AOL; and large media companies. However, we would hasten to note that most of these vendors have full traditional advertising portfolios, so an acquisition of ValueClick would merely be for boosting market share.

Not ad(d)ing up

-Email Thomas Rasmussen

Contrary to our pronouncement last year, the online advertising industry is in a tough spot at the moment. Venture funding for these companies has been shut off as the slumping demand for Web-based advertising has hit the sector harder than it anticipated. (At least it’s not as bad as the regular advertising market. As one VC quipped recently, “While the online ad market has caught a cold, the offline ad market has caught pneumonia.”) Still, the decline in the space has created numerous opportunities for buyers looking to pick up scraps.

One such company having a field day in the current environment is Adknowledge. Just this week, the company picked up the advertising business of struggling MIVA for the bargain price of $11.6m. The division has estimated trailing 12-month revenue of about $75m, down sharply from $100m a year ago. The acquisition came after Adknowledge tucked in two small social networking ad networks for less than $2m, much less than the more than $4m the two raised in venture capital. Furthermore, Adknowledge, which has raised an estimated $45m, tells us that it is still shopping.

Of course, it’s not all gloom and doom for the online ad market. One area where there’s actual growth – and at least the promise of rising valuations – is in online video advertising. VCs have put hundreds of millions of dollars into this sector. Their bet: More Web surfers will increasingly look to online videos for information and entertainment. Granted, it’s still a small space. (Consider the fact that YouTube probably contributed only a few hundred million dollars of revenue to Google’s total revenue of $21.8bn in 2008.) Still, the promise is there. Also encouraging VCs in this market is that the online ad giants (Google, Microsoft, AOL and so on) may well need to go shopping to get video ad technology. We recently published a more-thorough report on that, matching potential buyers and sellers.

Online video: boom and bust

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen

The over-hyped world of online video is going through massive turmoil at the moment. While most investors and companies agree that online video is likely the future of broadcasting, no one has been able to make any money from it so far. And it’s likely to get even harder due to tighter venture funding, the closed IPO window and next-generation Web 2.0 entrants such as Hulu and even Apple’s iTunes. These factors have left the online video players scrambling toward any exit, no matter how cheap.

Consider the case of CinemaNow, which was picked up by Sonic Solutions for a mere $3m last month. The portal never managed to turn a profit and had estimated revenue of less than $4m. Yet it secured five rounds of funding (totaling more than $40m) and brokered partnerships with major studios, VCs and strategic investors. When CinemaNow went to investors begging for another round a few months ago, it found that there was no money to be had and a quick exit became the only alternative. That’s a common occurrence these days, and may well have driven rival MovieLink to sell for a paltry $6.6m to Blockbuster last year. (Expect more of these types of deals next year. According to corporate development executives who completed our annual M&A outlook survey, lack of access to VC will be the major catalyst for deal flow in 2009.)

If this sounds eerily familiar, it’s because a similar situation played out during the music industry’s awkward and reluctant switch to digital a few years ago. Several startups, even major ones backed by large studios, tried to become the distributor of choice. Yet, many of those went away in scrap sales or had the plug pulled on them (Viacom’s Urge, Napster and Yahoo’s music service, to name just a few high-profile failures). We’re now left with just a handful of dominant distributors: iTunes, RealNetworks’ Rhapsody, Amazon and, to an increasing extent, MySpace’s heavily funded music effort. Many of these companies are likely to also dominate online video. In fact, add in Google and Microsoft, and you have a list of the companies that are likely to be buyers for the few remaining online video startups.

Recent online video M&A

Year Number of deals
2008 12
2007 10
2006 5

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase

M&A ramp-up for Facebook?

-Contact Thomas Rasmussen

Facebook’s rumored offer for micro-blogging site Twitter had the Web all atwitter recently. The $500m bid was reportedly rejected because it came in the form of a stock swap, with Facebook inflated to the infamous $15bn valuation that the social network got in Microsoft’s investment a year ago. Judging from our talks with insiders throughout the year, everyone knows this is a ludicrous valuation. Still, we wonder why some people – including big media – are still bandying this around, and more to the point, why Facebook thought Twitter would buy into the valuation. (More realistically, bringing the valuation down to earth, the offer amounts to $100-130m.) Nevertheless, the rumored run at Twitter confirms our speculation in June that Facebook, which has hardly ever dabbled in M&A, is gearing up to go on a substantive shopping spree. If that’s the case, it could do a whole lot worse than roping in Loopt.

When we first reported on this possibility, we had heard that initial talks were under way. However, the less-than-stellar adoption of the overhyped location-based services (LBS) applications probably put a damper on the enthusiasm. Nonetheless, recent developments have made LBS an attractive area again: Android devices have hit the market, the iPhone continues to sell well and Nokia is rolling out its own sleek new smartphone. Granted, the degree to which people are interested in having friends and family track their every move is debatable. But for Facebook and other social networks, which essentially base their entire business models on our instinct to pry into each other’s business, adding Loopt’s service to its currently static desktop and mobile offering is a no-brainer. And if Facebook was willing to hand over north of $100m to acquire Twitter, spending the same amount on Loopt, which is roughly where we pencil out its valuation, would make a lot more sense.

Social network M&A, 2006-2008

Period Number of deals Total known deal value
2008 YTD 32 $98.3m
2007 12 $149.7m
2006 8 $31.1m

Source: The 451 M&A KnowledgeBase

Google and Yahoo break up

-by Thomas Rasmussen

The Department of Justice announced this morning that it would file suit to block the planned advertising pact between Google and Yahoo. Google followed quickly by axing the deal. YHOO is up 8% in mid-day trading while the overall market is down sharply. The Google/Yahoo breakup has sparked renewed hope among shareholders that Microsoft could return to the table. It also opens up the possibility of a long rumored partnership between Time Warner’s AOL and Yahoo.