<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" 
      xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0">
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php" />
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/atom.xml" />
  <id>tag:,2009:/1/tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691-</id>
  <updated>2009-11-23T17:11:08Z</updated>
  <title>Comments for VC Investment in Internet Deals Did NOT Fall Off A Cliff</title>
  
  <generator uri="http://www.sixapart.com/movabletype/">Movable Type 4.23-en</generator>
  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691</id>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php" />
    <link rel="service.edit" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-atom.cgi/weblog/blog_id=1/entry_id=14691" title="VC Investment in Internet Deals Did NOT Fall Off A Cliff" />
    <published>2009-04-18T06:58:41Z</published>
    <updated>2009-04-18T04:35:25Z</updated>
    <title>VC Investment in Internet Deals Did NOT Fall Off A Cliff</title>
    <summary>This data comes from the MoneyTree™ Report from PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) and the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA), based on data provided by Thomson Reuters. Their press release sounds kind of gloomy:...</summary>
    <author>
      <name>Bernard Lunn</name>
      <uri>http://www.readwriteweb.com/about_bernardlunn.php</uri>
    </author>
    
    <category term="A-team" />
    
    <category term="NYT" />
    
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.readwriteweb.com/">
      <![CDATA[<p><img src="http://www.readwriteweb.com/images/vc_cliff_apr09a.jpg" width="150" height="180" />This data comes from the  MoneyTree™ Report from PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) and the National Venture Capital Association (NVCA), based on data provided by Thomson Reuters. Their press release sounds kind of gloomy:</p>]]>
      <![CDATA[<blockquote> 
<p>"Venture capital investment plummets in Q1 2009 to 12-year low"</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Now, you may read a lot of doom-and-gloom headlines. Our headline is more like, "The dog did <strong>not</strong> bark". Yes, we know that does not sell newspapers! Read on, though, if you want to go beneath the headlines and see what is happening in web technology investing.</p>

<p>We have been interviewing investors every week for the last 2 months, and been tracking Series A deals since October 2008 ("meltdown month"). On both scores, we are seeing signs to be at least cautiously optimistic. The data we get is mostly anecdotal, so we wanted to see how this compared to the rigorously compiled data from MoneyTree.</p>

<h2>Neither Boom nor Bust</h2>

<p>That is the headline. Boring, huh?</p>

<p>The MoneyTree data is all about VC investment in America. That is, <em>only</em> in America. It does <em>not</em> record deals done in Europe or Asia. But it does record deals in all fields -- biotech, clean tech, etc. -- and all stages, from early to late.</p>

<p>What interests us at ReadWriteWeb is the small subset that is (a) seed- and early-stage, and (b) Internet-specific. So we drilled into those numbers. Q1 2009 saw 34 deals, with a total of $138 million invested. Is that good or bad? Well, 34 companies getting their first investment round is one helluva celebration for 34 entrepreneurs, their teams, and their investors. Every one of those has high and reasonable hopes of becoming a big and successful company. So take a moment to celebrate with them.</p>

<p>But those numbers are down from 55 deals worth $196 million in Q4 2008 (presumably, the deals closed before the financial meltdown but were executed and recorded afterward). In Q3 2008, there were 80 deals worth $286 million. So, the trend is down. But you did not need me to tell you that, right?</p>

<h2>Remembering Booms and Busts in Cold Numbers</h2>

<p>When you look at the charts, you see the insane spikes in 1999 and Q1 2000. How about 486 deals worth $4,533 million in Q1 2000? Yes, that is 486 ventures that got their first round funding in those 3 months!</p>

<p>Obviously, we will never see that again. Nor should we want to. There was a horrible destruction of capital, and those who worked through it called it the technology nuclear winter because of the loss of confidence it bred for years. How about 15 deals worth $76 million in Q2 2003? That was actually the lowest in the 53 quarters tracked by MoneyTree.</p>

<p>If you want to be positive, then, our position now is twice as good as it was in Q2 2003. So here is an alternative headline:</p>

<blockquote>
<p>"VC investment in Internet startups is up 100% from last downturn".</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Sounds good, but only goes to prove that headlines are just... headlines. What will really happen next quarter and the rest of the year? That is, have we reached the bottom?</p>

<h2>Have We Reached the Bottom?</h2>

<p>That is the question investors always ask in the stock market. But how about in the web technology innovation business that we report on for ReadWriteWeb: have we hit bottom? The investors we speak to are bullish and give good reasons for their bullishness. But if we are going to repeat the trend lines of the last cycle, we should be worried. Here is why...</p>

<p>The dot-com bubble noticeably burst in March 2000. Anybody paying attention could see that "it was over." That was like October 2008, clearly a transition. But it took <strong>another 12 quarters before early-stage Internet financing hit rock bottom, in Q3 2003</strong>. If we follow that trajectory, we are in for a world of pain. But investors have been giving us all kinds of reasons why we will <strong>not</strong> follow that trajectory. The most obvious reason is that the boom period in Internet deals in this cycle is way, way lower than it was in the last cycle:</p>

<ul>
<li>Q1 2000 - $4,533 million</li>
<li>Q4 2007 -  $434 million</li>
</ul>

<p>That's right. This boom cycle at its peak is 90% lower than it was in the last cycle. So we don't have as far to fall. Phew!</p>

<p>At least we'll know next quarter. But then, analysts always say that, don't they? "Wait and see."</p>

<h2>Here We Are in Q4 2004</h2>

<p>How was business for you in Q4 2004? Because that was the last time we had comparable amounts of money invested in early-stage Internet ventures:</p>

<ul>
<li>Q1 2009 - $138 million</li>
<li>Q4 2004 - $141 million</li>
</ul>

<h2>So What Did Fall Off A Cliff?</h2>

<p>Clean tech fell off. Total clean tech dollars invested:</p>

<ul>
<li>Q4 2008 - $1,141 million</li>
<li>Q1 2009 - $154 million</li>
</ul>

<p>(That includes <em>all</em> stages, not just early-stage.)</p>

<p>Yep, that is right. The clean-tech revolution that you've read about? Ouch! Just about $1 billion <strong>less</strong> invested in this quarter. Hm, did crashing oil prices have anything to do with that, and have we seen this movie before? But we digress...</p>

<h2>What Are Investors Telling You?</h2>

<p>Investors have been telling us what they think. We have been <a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/a-team/">tracking Series A deals</a> to get a sense of what is actually happening. What are you seeing? Have investors gotten slower or more cautious?</p>]]>
    </content>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691-comment:134169</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php#c134169" />
    <title>Comment from Graeme Thickins on 2009-04-18</title>
    <author>
        <name>Graeme Thickins</name>
        <uri>http://www.tech-surf-blog.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.tech-surf-blog.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Really insightful piece, Bernard. Thank you for clearing the air on this topic. It's so easy for people to get swayed by all the macro numbers being thrown around...</p>

<p>As your recent past reporting on this subject shows, deserving startups are still getting funded - optimism has not disappeared!  And I think my <a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/tough_today_being_vc_10_questions_for_two_early_stage_stars.php" rel="nofollow">recent post on RWW</a> conveys that sense as well.</p>

<p>cheers,<br />
Graeme<br />
www.twitter.com/graemethickins</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2009-04-18T12:12:03Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691-comment:134243</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php#c134243" />
    <title>Comment from Nabeel on 2009-04-18</title>
    <author>
        <name>Nabeel</name>
        <uri>http://nabeel.typepad.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://nabeel.typepad.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Thank you for actually decided to look beneath the surface and see if the panic attack about early stage investments was real. Actually questioning common assumptions is what makes great journalism.</p>

<p>I still think we're in the midst of a strong correction in the overall venture business that it has never had, but as you point out, that doesn't mean it's happening this month.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2009-04-19T01:34:55Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691-comment:134296</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php#c134296" />
    <title>Comment from Mohammad Al-Ubaydli on 2009-04-19</title>
    <author>
        <name>Mohammad Al-Ubaydli</name>
        <uri>http://blog.mo.md</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://blog.mo.md">
        <![CDATA[<p>Thank you for this - it's so nice the read the work of someone works at his reading.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2009-04-19T13:39:14Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691-comment:134451</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php#c134451" />
    <title>Comment from jjray on 2009-04-20</title>
    <author>
        <name>jjray</name>
        <uri>http://www.medlawplus.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.medlawplus.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Thanks for drilling down the numbers for us.<br />
"But it took another 12 quarters before early-stage Internet financing hit rock bottom, in Q3 2003."<br />
So we might not have hit bottom yet if the 2008 collapse follows the trajectory of 2000.  To be honest, I think it is a healthy thing (pullback of VC money) in the sense that today one needs to run lean and mean with a solid business plan to have a successful startup.  No funny money landing in your lap.  That leads to stronger companies in the long run.</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2009-04-20T13:22:18Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691-comment:144132</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php#c144132" />
    <title>Comment from netlog on 2009-06-26</title>
    <author>
        <name>netlog</name>
        <uri>http://www.sevdaduragi.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.sevdaduragi.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Katie loves to cuddle and encourages strangers to stop in for discreet cuddling sessions. resss</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2009-06-26T07:13:39Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691-comment:144391</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php#c144391" />
    <title>Comment from hikaye on 2009-06-28</title>
    <author>
        <name>hikaye</name>
        <uri>http://www.egzotik.org</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.egzotik.org">
        <![CDATA[<p>hadi bakalım kolay gelsin</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2009-06-28T09:07:52Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691-comment:144454</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php#c144454" />
    <title>Comment from cet on 2009-06-28</title>
    <author>
        <name>cet</name>
        <uri>http://www.kerizimcet.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.kerizimcet.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>He kind of looks pissed off. Since he appears to be a head with legs, I picture him opening a huge mouth and menitorr</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2009-06-29T04:15:39Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691-comment:144643</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php#c144643" />
    <title>Comment from bedava chat on 2009-06-30</title>
    <author>
        <name>bedava chat</name>
        <uri>http://www.chatsiteleri.net</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.chatsiteleri.net">
        <![CDATA[<p>Not having read your paper on Ecuador's shark fishery, I don't know the details of the fishery. But I'm betting it is one of those data-poor small-scale fisheries that you and Pauly characterized as "our te</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2009-06-30T13:27:22Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691-comment:147520</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php#c147520" />
    <title>Comment from Metin on 2009-07-16</title>
    <author>
        <name>Metin</name>
        <uri>http://www.kodes.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.kodes.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Not having read your paper on Ecuador's shark fishery, I don't know the details of the fishery. But I'm betting it is one of those data-poor small-scale fisheries that you and Pauly characterized as "our te</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2009-07-16T17:49:09Z</published>
  </entry>

  <entry>
    <id>tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691-comment:147521</id>
    <thr:in-reply-to ref="tag:www.readwriteweb.com,2009://1.14691" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php"/>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/vc_investment_in_internet_deals_did_not_fall_off_cliff.php#c147521" />
    <title>Comment from AzizAga on 2009-07-16</title>
    <author>
        <name>AzizAga</name>
        <uri>http://www.gekkog.com</uri>
    </author>
    <content type="html" xml:lang="en" xml:base="http://www.gekkog.com">
        <![CDATA[<p>Thank you for actually decided to look beneath the surface and see if the panic attack about early stage investments was real. Actually questioning common assumptions is what makes great journalism.</p>

<p>I still think we're in the midst of a strong correction in the overall venture business that it has never had, but as you point out, that doesn't mean it's happening this month.<br />
</p>]]>
    </content>
    <published>2009-07-16T17:50:37Z</published>
  </entry>

</feed>