Few Job Cuts looks to be a trend in 2014

34,399 March Job Cuts Close Lowest Q1 Total in Nearly 20 Years

Job Cuts Continue Decline as Economy Improves

Chicago, IL, April 3, 2014 – New figures released Thursday by global outplacement consultancy Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc. show employers announced the fewest first-quarter job cuts in 19 years, providing further evidence that the economy continues to gain strength as it enters the sixth year of recovery.

The first quarter closed with 34,399 March job cuts, the second lowest monthly total since January 2013. The only month to see fewer cuts during that period was December, when just 30,623 job cuts were announced. The March total was 18 percent lower than the 41,835 planned job cuts reported in February and 30 percent lower than a year ago when March job cuts totaled 49,255.

Through the first quarter of 2014, employers announced 121,341 job cuts, down 16 percent from the 145,041 cuts tracked during the first three months of 2013. The first-quarter total was virtually unchanged from the previous quarter, when 121,667 job cuts were recorded.

The first quarter total was the lowest quarterly total since Q2 of 2013 (113,891). Even more significant, however, is the fact that it is the lowest Q1 total since 1995, when 97,716 job cuts were announced.

“The first quarter typically experiences some of the heaviest job cutting of the year. Since we began tracking planned layoffs in 1989, the first quarter is only slightly lower than the fourth quarter when it comes to the pace of downsizing, with an average job-cut total of just over 205,000. Employers are well below that pace this year, suggesting that layoffs continue to decline in a recovery that is approaching its five-year anniversary,” said John A. Challenger, chief executive officer of Challenger, Gray & Christmas.

First quarter job cuts were led by the retail sector, where employers announced 18,231 job cuts through the first three months of 2014, including 2,989 in March. The financial sector follows closely with 15,306 job cuts announced over the first three months of 2014.

Neither retail nor financial firms saw the heaviest job cuts last month, however. The top job-cutting sector in March was health care, which announced plans to reduce payrolls by 5,768, bringing its year-to-date total to 10,984, which ranks fourth among all industries.

“We continue to see downsizing in the health care sector, as hospitals adjust to lower Medicare reimbursements and cutbacks in Medicaid funding. There has also been a surge in job cuts among the workers hired to sign-up Americans for health insurance under the Affordable Care Act. With the sign-up period ending on March 31, call centers around the country have been purging their payrolls of these temporary employees,” noted Challenger.

“Call center workers are also being impacted by a series of layoffs announced by wireless carrier Sprint. While Sprint is struggling to keep up with AT&T and Verizon, at least some of the recent cuts appear to be the result of smarter consumers. A company spokesperson told one news outlet that many of the call center reductions reflect customers' growing familiarity with smartphones as well as simplified rate plans which have resulted in fewer customer service calls,” said Challenger.

Job cuts within the telecommunications industry have risen sharply this year. The 11,277 job cuts announced by these firms, to date, ranks third among all industries and marks a 225 percent increase from the 3,471 telecommunications job cuts recorded in the first three months of 2013.

Shaking the Money Tree Quarterly Report

Notes provided by Tom Scannell BOD member and AC chair for various companies: 

As usual, I feature speaker’s comments from the “Shaking the Money Tree” session with some links to interesting articles from the quarter, data from the quarterly NVCA data, and links to data/comments from WSG&R, Cooley, Fenwick and the USF VC Confidence Survey.

Comments from “Shaking the Money Tree” and some interesting articles

Some of the topics discussed were

·                 Do you put a promise of “secondary market” for top management shares in a VC term sheet?

·                 Is there a “bubble” in the market for Software Engineers in San Francisco/Silicon Valley?

·                 What’s the status of the Angel Round Bubble (aka Series A Crunch)?

·                 Is the JOBS Act finally starting to get some traction?

·                 Anything new on the “shrinkage” of the Venture Capital ecosystem?

I also highly recommend the YouTube video below of Nicola Tesla trying pitch a VC firm. It really hits home! 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zngK13FMgXM

PriceWaterhouseCoopers and the National Venture Capital Association sponsored the “Shaking the Money Tree” session this quarter. It was hosted this time at Cooley Godward

The panelists were

Gordon Ho, Cooley

Ho Nam, Altos Ventures

Ted Driscoll, Claremont Creek Ventures

Steve Eskenazi, Angels Forum

Hrach Simonian, Canaan Partners

Moderator: Steve Bengston, PriceWaterhouseCoopers LLP

Please note that these comment summaries below are mine and no particular viewpoint should be attributed to any individual speaker or their firms.

Do you put the promise of a “secondary market” for top management shares in a VC term sheet?

·       A few years ago, a discussion of “secondary market” would have generated a heated debate and have split the panel. On one side would have been the the “old school” panelists saying absolutely “ no” to the idea that management being allowed to take some funds off the table prior to the investors, with the “new school” panelists defending the practice. The idea that an actual market place for these shares was needed would have caused even more heated discussion.

·       This time the “old school” people were gone.

·       The panel all agreed that allowing top management to take an “appropriate” amount off the table at the “appropriate” time helps them focus on the longer term and actually aligns management’s interests with the investors. The also talked about the most efficient way of doing this qs through 3^rd party market makers.

·       Several panelists said that the recruiting environment was so tough now the promise of secondary market for top management are appearing in their term sheets

·       See this article from the Wall Street Journal http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324034804578344460249529702.html#printMode?cb=logged0.6889594024249511

Is there a “bubble” in the market for Software Engineers in San Francisco/Silicon Valley?

·       The general consensus was “yes”

·       Some panelists felt that the bubble will pop by competition from India and China. Other panelist disagreed saying that you cannot do the sort of coding currently being done on an international scale. The coders have to be in the same room (the Yahoo “no working from home” effect).

·       Some felt that if the latest immigration bill in D.C. is passed it might open the spigot a bit. Others agreed, but said that the impact of the immigration bill is too far in the future to affect the current bubble.

·       Others felt that the popping of the bubble will be a secondary effect of the popping of the Angel Round Bubble (see below)

What’s the status of the Angel Round Bubble (aka Series A Crunch)?

·       Most of the panelists agreed that the reported “Angel Round Bubble” or “Series A crunch” for social, mobile and local companies (especially in San Francisco—see above) is quite real.

·       The current Shaking the Money Tree data and the Cooley data supports this view.

·       One panelist said that his firm is getting much more picky with Series A investments. He said Series A now looks much more like Series B a few years ago in regards to the maturity of the products and markets.

Is the JOBS Act finally starting to get some traction?

·       Everyone agreed that most companies approaching the public market are using the JOBS act provisions that allow them to file confidentially and/or “test the market” prior to going public. It is helping them avoid the cost/public relations hit of a “failed IPO”

·       Crowdfunding continues to be “stuck on the shelf” at the SEC awaiting regulations. Some panelist felt that this feature may never get implemented due to hard core resistance in the bureaucracy of the SEC/Congress

·       See interesting article from CFO magazine below

http://www3.cfo.com/Print/PrintArticle?pageId=33cd85a3-b5e1-4d36-a339-2cf17585dddc

Anything new on the “shrinkage” of the Venture Capital ecosystem

·       No, not really—according to the panelists it’s happening to everyone—except the folks on the panel—of course!

·       With that said, the data shows (see below) that there is still an enormous amount of money going into Venture from limited partners and from Venture firms to companies.

·       Several panelists said that the VC market is continuing the trend towards the structure of a “lopsided barbell”. There will be 20-25 “super firms” which will control 80%-90% of the money with several hundred small “artisan funds” controlling the rest.

·       A panelist suggested that only 20% of the companies funded have the goal of “building a real company” or an IPO in mind. Most companies just want to build a product and “flip” it. Other panelists disagreed-- saying that 20% was too high and 5% to 10% was closer to the truth!

·       Panelists felt that a positive sign for the VC industry is the continuing improvement in the capital efficiency of the “social-local-mobile” software start-ups. One panelist said that it only costs about $8K to get the first line of code now compared to $80K 10 years ago.

Headline data from the Shaking the Money Tree Report

The National Data

Venture Capital fundraising –The “barbell” & consolidation continue

VCs raised $4.1B in Q113 up from $3.3B in Q412, but down from a revised $4.7B in Q112. The real remarkable number was the number of “funds raised” and how few of them were first time funds. Q113 had only 35 funds raised and only 5 of them were first time funds. This compares to 44 and 18 last quarter and 53 and 14 from Q112. Q113 has the lowest number of funds raised since the early ‘00s and the last time the first time funds were this low was in ’06. The “barbell” continues with >50% ($2.2B) of Q113 funds were garnered by just 4 firms.

Venture Capital Exits—# of M&A exits down sharply while # of IPOs flat for the quarter. $ values for both down sharply.

The number of VC backed IPOs in Q113 was flat with Q412 at 8 and down from 18 in Q112.  Dollar value of the IPOs was $.7B in Q113 vs. $1.4B in Q412 and $1.7B in Q112. This meant that the average amount of the IPO was $84M in Q113 vs. $176M in Q412 and $87M in Q112.

The number of M&A deals in Q113 was 77 vs. 117 in Q412 and 114 in Q112. The average deal size ($) fell in Q113 to $98M from $130M in Q412 and $131M in Q112.

VC Investments-Nationwide

Overall – 

Nationwide there was $5.9B invested in Q113 down from  $6.4B invested in Q412 and also down from Q112’s $6.3B.

By Industry – Software takes a big jump and life sciences/med tech drop off

In Q113, software continued in its longstanding #1 slot with $2.3B. This represented 40% of the total. This compares to Q412’s numbers of  $2.1B and 33% of the total investment. Biotech continued at #2 this quarter with 15% of the total and $.9B compared to last quarter’s at 20% and $1.3B. Medical Devices was in #3 slot with 9%. Overall, investments in these two Life Sciences sectors fell 28% in dollars and 23% in the number of deals. Cleantech investments continue their shrinkage at only $368M in Q113 vs. $571M in Q412 and $947M in Q112.

By Stage of Development – VC Seed Investments almost gone but still pouring money into late rounds.

In Q113 seed stage continued at its low pace at $178M and 3% of the total compared to Q412’s $157M and $180M in Q312. Early Stage was at $1.5B down from $1.9B in Q412. Expansion was at $2B down 13% from Q412. Finally Later stage was at $2.2B up slightly from $2.0B in Q412.    

Size – 

The mean deal size inched up hitting $6.8B in Q113 vs. $6.6M in Q412 vs. $7.1M in Q312.

VC Investments-Silicon Valley

Overall –

VC Investments here in Silicon Valley were down in Q113 at $2.2B and 274 deals vs. Q412’s $2.5B and 309 deals.

 Percentage of Total –

The percentage of nationwide VC $ going to Silicon Valley in Q412 was 38% down slightly from a revised 39% in Q412 but up a couple of points from Q112. 

Series –

The dollars going to Series A in Silicon Valley was down to $264M and 86 deals in Q313 vs. $387M with 102 deals.  

Some web references:

 PWC and NVCA Shaking the Money Tree Report (https://www.pwcmoneytree.com) 

University of San Francisco Venture Capital Confidence Index http://www.usfca.edu/faculty/business/Mark_Cannice/ /Dr. Cannice noted the third quarter in a row of a slight increase in his VC “confidence index”. Not able to explain why. Triumph of hope over reality?

The Fenwick & West Venture Report: 

http://www.fenwick.com/Media/Pages/-Fenwick-Silicon-Valley-Venture-Capital-Survey-Reveals-Softer-Valuations-in-First-Quarter-of-2013-.aspx

“At the big picture level, it was a tough quarter for the venture environment, with venture investing, acquisitions and IPOs all down compared to the last quarter of 2012. And while valuations were reasonably healthy this quarter, they declined from last quarter. But with the macro environment appearing to stabilize, and Nasdaq up both in the first quarter and second quarter to date, there is reason to believe that the venture environment will improve”

The Cooley-Godward Venture Report:

http://www.cooley.com/venture-financing-report-Q1-2013

  

Their report focuses on deals in which Cooley was directly involved. The issued a mildly discouraging report:

“Overall, our data pointed to a quarter marked by decreasing deal volumes and aggregate dollars raised. Median pre-money valuations decreased across all deal stages with the exception of Series A transactions. In fact, valuations for Series A deals rose to a level not seen in over a decade. We also saw a slight decrease in up versus flat/down rounds from the prior quarter. Up rounds represented 75% of all financings in Q1… Deal terms in Q1 2013 moved away from the company-friendly terms we observed through much of 2012. We observed increases in the use of participating preferred and pay-to-play provisions in Q1, compared to the prior quarter. The data also pointed to increased utilization of greater than 1x liquidation preferences in early stage transactions during the quarter”

The Wilson Sonsini Report 

http://www.wsgr.com/publications/PDFSearch/entreport/Q12013/private-company-financing-trends.htm

also reports only on the deals they were directly involved in.

“The number of deals and the total funds raised in equity venture financings in which Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati represented one of the principals declined significantly from Q4 2012 to Q1 2013. This decrease was consistent with the declines reported by industry-wide surveys such as PricewaterhouseCoopers’ MoneyTree Report.”

The also reported a large increase in the number of Post Series A bridge loans—Series A Crunch in action?

ADP Report was published this morning

Take a look at the ADP employment report published this morning.  In May there was a good increase in professional business services.  This is a good sign for accountants! 

You can find the report here:

www.adpemploymentreport.com

Happy hunting!

Bryon McDougall
Partner
bmcdougall@soaprojects.com

Midsized Businesses - Hiring and Talent Development

According to the recent ADP report, 43% of midsized businesses (50 to 1,000 employees) intend to grow headcount in the next 12 months and approximately half of them feel that they do not have the tools to develop and retain their people.

http://www.adp.com/tools-and-resources/adp-research-institute/insights/insight-item-detail.aspx?id={651E393E-93E4-4FBB-BC3E-3E8A800E2DF7}

If you are a hiring manager in a growth situation it is key to find people that are motivated and capable of taking the next step.  Over hiring someone could be one solution but developing questions to understand candidate’s motivations and capabilities are key to the interview process.

We can help find the right people and help hiring managers with screening and interview preparation.  Contact me for more information.

Bryon McDougall
bmcdougall@soaprojects.com

 
 

January Job Postings for CPA's and Accountants

Are you concerned that there is not much out there right now?  Don't worry you are looking at the slowest time of the year.  It is quarter or year end close time and most people are coming back from holiday time off,  the first thing everyone needs to do is get some work done before they start looking to bring on a new employee.  Once up for air the postings will start appearing.

What you should consider doing to find a role now:

Job Postings from November and December - These could still be available, hiring managers have been out of the office and not able to conduct interviews.  If you see something posted from 30 to 60 days ago and have not applied you may try now.  It will not hurt you and if still available you may stand out more now than if you did when the position was first posted.

Temporary or consulting roles - People need help because it is a busy time.  It is a great idea to take on a project for the next 2 to 6 weeks.  Job postings will appear in grater numbers mid to late January and continue to increase through the entire first quarter.  Interview processes last 2 to 6 weeks (maybe longer) so if you commit to a project for one to two months you can still applying for a full time jobs next week and the timing for one to end and the other to start should work out.

Reconnect with your network and let them know you are open to change.  This includes recruiting relationships, former bosses and peers.

I hope this helps, contact me if you want to talk about the market.

Bryon McDougall
925-227-0700 x203
bmcdougall@soaprojects.com


 

Quarterly Venture Capital Update

Below is trendous insight to Venture Funding and how it may effect the market by Tom Scannell.   Tom is seasonedd CFO that provides consulting services to startups to small cap public companies.  I am happy to put you in touch with him if  you are in the market for a CFO.

As usual I feature the speaker’s comments and data from the “Shaking the Money Tree”. In addition to the STMT session I have included material from the Morrison Foerster “IPO University”, the “Fall Liquidity Summit” sponsored by Pillsbury & J.P. Morgan (best quote was “go long on guns and canned goods”). I also reference some interesting articles about Angel Investing vs. Venture Capital, the coming Series A Crunch in Social Media, What has Changed by Fred Wilson on investing in the consumer internet space. Finally there are my usual links to data from WSG&R, Cooley, Fenwick and West and USF/Cannice VC Confidence Survey.

Comments from Shaking the Money Tree Session

“Shaking the Money Tree” is sponsored by PriceWaterhouseCoopers and the National Venture Capital Association. It was hosted this time at Fenwick and West.

Some of the topics discussed were

·        Angel Investing -Is there a bubble?

·        Is the greed of VCs holding back the IPO Market?

·        The “JOBS Act”- Any long term impact on financing of start-ups?

·        What are the trends in “corporate” venture capital?

·        Is FDA bashing overdone in Life Sciences?

·        Was the CEO of NVCA correct in calling it a “Darwinian environment”?

·        Watch out for falling med devices!

The panelists at “Shaking the Money Tree” were

Sam Angus, Fenwick and West

Stephen Bernardez, Onset Venture

Keval Desai, Interwest

Renata Quintini, Felicis Ventures

Sumeet Jain, CMEA Capital

Moderator: Steve Bengston, PriceWaterhouseCoopers LLP

Please note that these summaries are mine and none should be attributed to any individual speaker or their firms.

  

Angel Investing- Is there a bubble?

·        There was discussion about the John Frankel’s article in Tech Crunch regarding the returns of Angel Funds vs. Venture Funds (http://techcrunch.com/2012/11/17/how-institutional-limited-partners-can-avoid-limited-returns/).  Frankel reviews the literature and concludes that venture capital returns are crappy primarily because the VC industry simply got too big for the number of “investment worthy” portfolio companies. In other words there was “bubble” in the asset class. (Excluding all the firms represented on the STMT panel—of course!)  Frankel’s conclusion matches the analysis of the Kaufman foundation and others.

·        But the main point of the Frankel article is that Angel Investors do better than VCs because there are fewer of them, they are smaller, do more due diligence and stay closer to the companies they invest in (Wow! What a concept!)

·        The problem is that angel investors seem to be repeating the sins of venture capital. They are institutionalizing (see Frankel’s own “angel” firm ff Venture Capital) and there is now too much angel money pursuing too few quality companies-- especially in the social media and consumer web. Is there a “crunch” coming for these firms as they look for their first round of VC funding? See the recent post by Sarah Lacy on the Series A funding for social media companies.  (http://pandodaily.com/2012/11/28/the-series-a-crunch-is-hitting-now-have-we-even-noticed/)  and Fred Wilson’s insightful article on the falling investment in consumer web companies (http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2012/11/what-has-changed.html)

Is the greed of VC’s holding back the IPO Market?

·        There was a discussion that the venture community itself was a cause of the recent lack of IPOs. One of the panelist said because VC firms have gotten so big and need to make such huge investments they have gotten “too greedy” with the best companies. They keeping good companies private too long in order to “capture” more of the return. This leaves only “second class” companies in the IPO market.

·        There was the usual bemoaning of the passing of the good old days of the “Four Horsemen” investment banks and the small cap IPO. There was even a call from the audience to scrap the decimal system for stock pricing and bringing back the old “eighths” system!

·        There is more IPO news below in the notes on the MoFo “IPO University” and the Pillsbury “Liquidity Summit”

The JOBS Act-Any long-term impact on the funding of start-ups?

·        The general conclusion of this panel was that the JOBS act will not have a big impact on financing for start-ups

·        With that said, many panelists said that portfolio companies were taking advantage of both the opportunity to do “pre-IPO” roadshows and “stealth” SEC filings. They said that these two features could be having a positive impact on deal pricing.

·        It was predicted that only a very small number of companies will be involved with rule that raised the allowable number of private company investors.

·        There were further predictions of the death of the “second market” firms.

·        Not many companies have taken advantage of the relaxation of the pre and post IPO accounting reporting requirements for “emerging growth” companies. They seem to be afraid of Wall Street buy side reaction.  

What are the trends in “corporate” venture funding?

·        It was noted that the membership was rapidly growing in the corporate investor NVCA subgroup and the group is meeting more frequently.

·        Several of the panelists said that “corporate” or strategic investors are more willing to participate in earlier stage syndications and follow through on their syndication commitments

·        Fenwick and West’s Venture Capital report (see below) also had several interesting comments about trends in corporate venture capital investing

Is FDA bashing overdone in Life Science?

One of the panelists who is still actively investing in life sciences said that “FDA bashing” has been overdone as the source of the funding problems for life sciences companies. He said the FDA approval cycle, while unpleasant, is a manageable process. He noted that it “softens” and “hardens” over time. Investors just have to manage it.

Headline data from the Shaking the Money Tree Report
 Venture Capital fundraising- down QoQ and lowest since Q211; again dominated by few large funds. A “Darwinian environment”?

According to NVCA and PWC Money tree report, VCs raised  $5.0B in Q312. This is significantly down from a revised $6.0B in Q2112. Five firms accounted for 55% of total fundraising compared to Q2’s 80% figure. There were a total of 53 funds raised in Q312 and there were “new” funds. These numbers represent a 17% QoQ decrease in dollar commitments but a 23% increase in the number of funds raised. Mark Heesen, president of the NVCA, looking for some positive news said, “For the last several years we have watched carefully the consolidation of dollars into the hands of fewer firms. While more than half of the dollars raised this quarter were placed in five funds, it was less concentrated than previous quarter and allows for the distribution of capital across a more diverse base of funds”.  But he was also quoted as saying “We’re unquestionably in a Darwinian environment right now”.

Venture Capital Exits –# of M&A deals down while # of IPO deals were essentially flat. IPO average deal $ fell for third straight quarter while M&A $ were up slightly.

The # of IPOs fell by one this quarter (11 to 10) but if you remove the “ great white whale” of the Facebook IPO from Q212 they were flat. Once again excluding Facebook, the average IPO offering size was down slightly to $109M from $115M last quarter.

The number of M&A deals fell to 96 in Q312 from a revised 116 in Q212. The average deal size rose to $253M from $201M last quarter.  

VC Investments-Nationwide

• Overall – In Q312 there was $6.5B invested in 890 deals nationwide down from Q2’s revised $7.3B and 935 deals.

·       By Industry –Watch out for falling med devices!

In Q312 “Software” continued in its #1 slot at $2.1B, 304 deals and 32% of the total investment. These $ were down 12% from Q212 while the number of deals were up slightly at 1%. Biotech was #2 this quarter at $1.2B and 19% of the total. Med devices continue their sharp decline, falling 37% in dollars and 27% in investments in Q312. Med devices had its lowest level of investing since 2004.

• By Stage of Development – Down in $ and  # in all stages

The combined amount invested in “Seed” and “Early Stage” rounds were down significantly this quarter to $1.9B compared to Q212’s $2.4. The number of deals and average deal size fell significantly in both categories. These two categories represented about 29% of the total invested and about 52% of deals. Expansion deals ($2.6B) were slightly down—3% in $ and 1% in number of deals. Later stage deals ($2.0B) dropped 4% in # and 10% in dollars. $2.0B went to 187 deals and represented 21% of total deals and the value 27%

• By Sequence – Later stages again dominate $ and first stage deals continue small

The “5th and beyond” sequence ($2.9B and 225 deals) continued to lead the rankings. “First sequence” fundings were $1.0B with 297 deals The dollars were down 13% from Q212 The average size of the first sequence deals continues small.

• Size – “Falling”

The median amount invested in Q312 was $2.5M down the $3.0M from Q112 and Q212. The mean size fell to $7.3M from a revised $7.8M in Q411. 

VC Investments-Silicon Valley

• Overall – “not too bad overall but down from Q3”

VC Investments here in Silicon Valley in Q112 were $2.6B down from an unusually high $3.2B in Q211. The number of deals also fell-- from 288 to 268. 

• Percentage of Total – “popping back up”

The percentage of nationwide VC $ going to Silicon Valley in Q312 popped up to 40% after Q312’s 36%

• Series – “Up a bit”

The dollars going to Series A in Silicon Valley rose to $523K this quarter in 93 deals. It’s nice to see a sequential rise in this number

Fall 2012 Liquidity Conference

This session was sponsored by Pillsbury, NYSE, Deloitte, RR Donnelly, Connor Group and J.P. Morgan

The first session covered the current IPO market and the fourth session covered Life as A Pubic Company. As you can imagine in a conference sponsored by the above firms there was plenty of talk in the first session about how “strong” the IPO market was.  “If you’ve got a good company, the IPO window is always open…blah, blah, blah”. Putting my cynicism aside, J.P. Morgan did present some encouraging data that showed that 70% of the tech IPOs YTD were above their IPO price as of the date of the seminar. (Didn’t make any comment about the face plant of Facebook) If we could keep that statistic going we would have gone a long way towards solving the IPO “problem”. The rest of the sessions covered the “standard topics” of IPO readiness and being a newly public company. More on that below in the comments about the MoFo “IPO University”

The second panel covered the world economic condition—Europe, China and the Fiscal Cliff in the U.S. This was a very depressing session, especially the comments by Jim Van Horne of Stanford. As one of the participants said “go long on guns and canned goods”.

The third panel was on the state of the M&A market. This was also a relatively downbeat session. Tech M&A is down both in value and the number of transactions with not much good news on the horizon.  Several speakers commented that it should be a more robust M&A market given cash on the balance sheets and need for new products. But they all said that the larger firms know it is a “buyers” market. As a result they are very slow, low balling valuations and refusing to share the upside (so what else is new?). Their advice to companies that were looking to M&A was also pretty standard--start networking earlier, look to fit known “holes” in acquirers portfolios, make sure there is competition for you and be prepared for due diligence (yes, do Sarbanes Oxley). There was also the standard advice regarding post acquisition integration.  They were strong consensus that buy-outs were bad for all parties involved.

IPO University

This session was sponsored by Morrison Foerster.

This was a good session covering the IPO process itself, the roles of the essential players (accountants, lawyers, investment bankers), the keys to success, the SEC process and finally the impact of the JOBS act on the IPO process. With the exception of the JOBS act it was startling to see how little the qualification, preparation and the process of IPO has changed over the years.

It will be interesting to see how the SEC implements the “research” portion of the JOBS act. The act allows broker dealers to publish research reports and participate in meetings about qualifying “emerging growth companies”. I think this may be the most important part of the JOBS act.

Some web references:

·       PWC and NVCA Shaking the Money Tree Report (https://www.pwcmoneytree.com)
 

·       University of San Francisco Venture Capital Confidence Index http://www.usfca.edu/faculty/business/Mark_Cannice/ /Dr. Cannice showed a slight increase in his Venture Capital Confidence Index after a sharp fall off in Q2. . Dr. Cannice’s said that the results “suggest a possible stabilization in confidence at level somewhat lower than its nearly nine year average”. His respondents were still very cautious.

·       The Wilson Sonsini Entrepreneurs Report is available at  (http://www.wsgr.com/publications/PDFSearch/entreport/Q32012/private-company-financing-trends.htm) They reported “Our quarterly survey of venture investment activity, like other surveys recently released, shows a meaningful decline in number of transactions and aggregate dollars invested across all sectors”. On the positive side they reported that the transactions they reviewed show a “relatively stable, company-favorable market in key deal metrics”

·       The Fenwick & West Venture Report: http://www.fenwick.com/publications/Pages/silicon-valley-venture-survey-third-quarter-2012.aspx A good report showing both NVCA and Thompson Reuters data.

·       The Cooley-Godward Venture Report: http://www.cooley.com/venture-financing-report-q3-2012

Tom

Tom Scannell & Associates, Inc.