Sekėjai

Ieškoti šiame dienoraštyje

2023 m. birželio 11 d., sekmadienis

Startups Struggle To Stay in Business As Funds Dry Up.

"The pace of startup shutdowns, fire sales and sharp business-strategy changes is picking up.

Fresh capital from venture investors and bank loans is scarce and expensive. Going public is near impossible. Some business models that worked when cash was cheap are unsustainable now. That means venture-backed startups are running out of money and facing hard choices.

"The Mass Extinction Event for startups is under way," said Tom Loverro, general partner at venture firm IVP, in a recent tweet. Loverro said in an interview that none of his portfolio companies has shut down recently, but it is early days in what could be a wave of startup failures. "It's like the entire industry went out drinking and is now suffering the consequences," he said about the venture boom of 2021 that he believes is heading for a bust.

Some venture investors see the impact already."It is hitting now," said Elizabeth Yin, co-founder and general partner of pre-seed investment firm Hustle Fund. Of her firm's first fund, only about 60 of the original 101 portfolio companies are around. There were roughly 90 active startups a year ago.

"I had modeled out before that at least half of them would die in the first three years and that didn't happen," she said, adding she believes the frothy market boosted survival rates before the current downturn.

Yin said that she isn't concerned that the wave of closures will have a serious negative effect on her fund's returns. That is because the companies that recently folded were never marked to a high value in the portfolio, she said.

Larger shutdowns could put further pressure on venture returns that have been falling overall. The yearly internal rate of return for venture firms was negative 7% in the third quarter of 2022, the lowest value since 2009, according to PitchBook Data.

In recent months, several companies that raised significant venture funding have folded, including biotechnology company Goldfinch Bio, wine business Underground Cellar and fintech company Plastiq.

California startup Zume, which was developing a robotic pizza maker and was once valued at $2.25 billion, recently entered a wind-down process handled by Sherwood Partners, a restructuring firm, according to Sherwood's co-founder and co-president Martin Pichinson. Zume representatives couldn't be reached.

Sherwood's business increased by 50% through April 30 this year compared with the same period last year, Pichinson said. "And the storm hasn't even started," he added.

The venture-capital boom in 2021, as well as pandemic-era government funding to small businesses, likely kept businesses alive for longer than they would have otherwise, some observers believe. Now that those funding sources have dried up, the failures are coming in."Most of the companies we are handling now frankly deserved to have gone out of business a year or two ago," said Barry Kallander, president of KallanderGroup, which provides corporate restructuring and dissolution services.

Venture-backed businesses in the U.S. raised $346 billion in venture capital in 2021, according to the PitchBook-NVCA Venture Monitor report. Many are still surviving on that for now,investors and founders say. Some hope that they will be able to get through to a time when the market rebounds.

Startups in the U.S. raised $37 billion in the first quarter of this year, down 55% from the first three months of last year. The longer the venture market stays depressed, the closer many startups get to the moment of truth.

Real-estate startup Watson Living closed shop and was taken over by a wind-down specialist on Dec. 31, said Andrew Firestone, co-founder and former chief operating officer of the company.

In 2021, Watson Living found traction with a few customers and raised $2.5 million in seed financing at a valuation of about $15 million. Yet its product that offered financial rewards to good tenants was too complex and didn't add enough value to sell quickly to apartment operators, Firestone said.

"The market shifted and that time window where we had time to figure it out shrank significantly," he said. Watson Living returned less than 10% of the capital to investors, he said. Firestone has started a new business in another industry.

Historically, data on the number of startups that ceased operations is hard to track, researchers say. Successes, though, are rare.

About 45% of some 1,100 companies that raised a seed financing round in 2017 never raised follow-on funding, according to Carta, a provider of software to venture-backed companies that analyzes its clients' aggregate data.

Getting to a successful outcome is even more rare. Roughly 16% of companies have had a successful acquisition or went public within seven years of raising their first venture capital funding, according to data on close to five thousand U.S. companies that raised first funding between 1995 and 2013. 

That research was conducted by Honggi Lee, of the University of New Hampshire, Tel Aviv University's Lia Sheer and Matt Marx of Cornell University.

Failure rates may increase during downturns, Lee said. "If startups don't have money then they cannot operate," he said.

Samantha Ettus, founder and chief executive at fintech Park Place Payments, which had raised $4 million in venture funding, had to act fast when the largest investor of a planned financing failed to send the check last September. Ettus cut expenses, raised $440,000 in bridge funding from existing investors, and hired an investment bank to sell Park Place.

"When I first started the company, we said we will build this [into a] billion-dollar company. I had never intended to sell so early," Ettus said. Publicly traded Logiq acquired Park Place in April in an all-stock deal valued at more than $6 million, allowing Ettus to continue building her business with the resources of a larger company." [1]

1. EXCHANGE --- Startups Struggle To Stay in Business As Funds Dry Up. Chernova, Yuliya. 
Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y. [New York, N.Y]. 10 June 2023: B.1.

2023 m. birželio 10 d., šeštadienis

Laistykite, kaip profesionalas

„Jörgas Pfenningschmidtas padeda, kai lysvėje nesiseka.

Ponas Pfenningschmidtas? …. Sveiki? Taip taip. Sveiki. Šiandien turiu klausimą su daug aktualumo. Oi... Taip, šiaurėje ir rytuose sausa. Saksonijoje-Anhalte oras dar sausesnis, nei bet kada. Jūs turite laistyti. Taip, jūs turite. Tačiau dauguma žmonių tai daro neteisingai. Tikrai? 90 procentų, sakyčiau. Bet tai drąsus pareiškimas. Ar yra tam įrodymų? Tai apytikslis, asmeninis įvertinimas. Iš tikrųjų nuolat matau, kad žmonės tai daro neteisingai. 

Ką reiškia laisto negerai? Jie pila 15 minučių, kol viskas atrodo gražiai ir šlapia, tada jie sustoja. Ir jie tai daro kiekvieną dieną. Ir ar tai negerai? Taip, tai negerai, nes vanduo tokiu būdu nepatenka pakankamai giliai. Viskas šlapia, bet tik viršuje. Atitinkamai, augalai leidžia šaknis tik viršuje. Bet jei viršuje šlapia, su šaknimis ne viskas gerai. Ne. Žemė pirmiausia išdžiūsta viršuje. Ir toliau nebėra šaknų.

 Gerai, dabar prašau, kaip tai padaryti tinkamai. Turite kruopščiai laistyti. Ir ne taip dažnai. Ką reiškia vandeniui duoti prasiskverbti? Vanduo turi prasiskverbti pro šaknis ir patekti į gilesnius dirvožemio sluoksnius. Tada šaknys seka vandenį. Todėl jūs turite jį laistyti dvi valandas. Kiekvieną dieną?! Ne. Gal kas dvi savaites. Arba kai tampa ypač sausa ir matosi, kad tai būtina. 

Tačiau per sausrą augalai visada atrodo kažkaip skurdžiai. Žinoma, bet jei lapai per dieną suglemba, iš pradžių tai nieko nereiškia. Reikia pažiūrėti ryte. Jei lapai tada kabo, turėtumėte juos laistyti. Gerai, taigi laistysiu – bet kaip žinoti, kad laisčiau pakankamai skvarbiai? Pažiūrėk ten. Su kastuvu po augalu? Ne! Šalia. Jei po kelių colių atsiranda sausa žemė, to nepakako. Neskvarbiai? Taip."


Water like a pro

“Jörg Pfenningschmidt helps when things are not going well in the bed.

Mr. Pfenningschmidt? …. Hello? Yes / Yes. Hello. I have a question today that is due to topicality. ohh Yes, it is dry in the north and in the east. In Saxony-Anhalt even drier than ever. You have to water. Yes, you have to. But most people do it wrong. Real? 90 percent, I would say. But that is a bold statement. Is there evidence for this? This is a rough, personal estimate. I actually see all the time that people do it wrong. 

What does wrong mean? 

They pour it on for like 15 minutes until everything looks nice and wet, and then they stop. And they do that every day. And is that wrong? Yes, that's wrong because the water doesn't get deep enough that way. It's all wet, but only upstairs. Accordingly, the plants only make roots at the top. But if it's wet at the top, the roots are okay

No. The soil dries at the top first. And further down there are no more roots. 

Okay, now please how to do it properly. You have to pour thoroughly. piercing. And not that often. What does penetrating mean? The water has to get past the roots and into deeper soil layers. The roots then follow the water. 

But you have to water it for two hours. Every day?! nope Maybe every two weeks. 

Or when it gets particularly dry and you can see that it is necessary. In the drought, however, plants always look somehow needy. Sure, but if the leaves are limp during the day, that doesn't mean much at first. 

You have to look in the morning. If the leaves hang there, you should water them. 

Okay, so I'm watering - but how do I know I've watered piercingly? You look there. With a spade. under the plant? No! Besides. If dry soil comes after a few inches, that wasn't enough. Not piercing? Yes."


 

Braškės: saldžios, gaivinančios, toksiškos?

„Aplinkosaugos organizacija įspėja nevalgyti braškių: jos užterštos pesticidais. Kompetentinga institucija nesutinka.

Saldžios, gaivioss, nuodingos? Su šūkiais, tokiais, kaip „Geriau be nuodų“ ir „Nuodinga pagunda krepšelyje“, Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz (BUND) neseniai perspėjo nevalgyti įprastų braškių. Jos turi „didelę pesticidų apkrovą“. Aplinkosaugos organizacija nurodė tyrimą dėl išmatuotų pesticidų likučių braškėse.

Federalinis rizikos vertinimo institutas (BfR) dabar aiškiai pasakė, kad tai nekelia susirūpinimo. Remiantis dabartinėmis žiniomis, šias braškes galite valgyti nedvejodami. „Nė viename mėginyje nebuvo viršytas ar net apytiksliai pasiektas teisiškai nustatytas didžiausias likučių kiekis“, – sakoma pranešime. Griežtos autorizacijos procedūros būtų taikomos visiems augalų apsaugos produktams. Todėl pavojų sveikatai galima atmesti „pakankamai užtikrintai“.

Daugialypės naštos kritika

Pirmadienį BUND pranešė apie pesticidų likučius keliuose braškių mėginiuose. Organizacija rėmėsi įvairių prekybininkų vaisių laboratoriniais tyrimais.

15 iš 19 ištirtų braškių mėginių rasta iš viso aštuonių grybelinių ligų sukėlėjų naikinimo priemonių (fungicidų) likučių.

  Analizėje nebuvo jokios informacijos apie pastebėtas ribines vertes. BUND yra labai susirūpinęs dėl kelių poveikio, t. y. kelių agentų aptikimo viename mėginyje.

Yra požymių, kad skirtingos veikliosios medžiagos kartu padidina jų toksinį poveikį. Kritika ta, kad rizikos vertinime į šią temą neatsižvelgiama pakankamai. 

BfR aiškiai pasakė: net jei braškėse vienu metu galima aptikti kelių veikliųjų medžiagų, tai nekelia pavojaus sveikatai. Nes likučių yra minimaliai. Visos įrodytos veikliosios medžiagos buvo toksikologiškai įvertintos ir pripažintos saugiomis.

Pramonė nusiminusi

BUND akcija sulaukė Vokietijos braškių augintojų pasipiktinimo. „Šią savaitę, kai Vokietijoje braškių pardavimas yra didžiausias, toks pranešimas gautas neatsitiktinai“, – interviu sako Fredas Eickhorstas, Šparagų ir uogų augintojų asociacijos generalinis direktorius. Veiksmą jis apibūdina, kaip „polemiką“. Jo požiūriu, bandymų rezultatai puikūs – ir himnas vokiškam auginimui.

Tačiau BUND juos pateikė iškreiptai. Kiti tyrimai, pavyzdžiui, Valstybinis sveikatos ir maisto saugos biuras (LGL) Bavarijoje, pateiktų panašius rezultatus. QS kokybės užtikrinimo sistema, kurioje dalyvauja daugiau, nei 90 procentų Vokietijos braškių augintojų, taip pat reguliariai atlieka likučių tyrimus. Eickhorstas sako, kad perteklius Vokietijoje yra tik 0,64 proc. Tarptautiniu lygmeniu tai yra išskirtinė vertė.

Norintiems apsieiti be cheminių-sintetinių priemonių BUND pataria braškes užsiauginti patiems arba įsigyti ekologiškų prekių. Bet tai kartais nėra lengva, vokiškų ekologiškų braškių beveik nėra. Ir ne be reikalo, sako Eickhorstas: „Braškės lauke itin jautrios puvimui. Auginimas ekonomiškai neapsimoka be veiksmingų pesticidų.“ Jau daugelį metų ekologiškai auginamų braškių buvo mažiau, o ne daugiau.

Daugelis ūkininkų iš esmės nori naudoti mažiau pesticidų. ES lygmeniu svarstomas teisės aktų paketas. Tačiau ūkininkai baiminasi didelių derliaus nuostolių, nes diskutuojama apie pesticidų sumažinimą per pusę."


Strawberries : Sweet, Refreshing, Toxic?

“An environmental organization warns against eating strawberries: they are contaminated with pesticides. The competent authority disagrees.

Sweet, refreshing, poisonous? With slogans like "Better without poison" and "Poisonous temptation in the basket", the Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz (BUND) recently warned against eating strawberries from conventional cultivation. These would have a “high pesticide load”. The environmental organization referred to a study on measured residues of pesticides in strawberries.

The Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) has now made it clear that this is not a cause for concern. According to the current state of knowledge, you can eat these strawberries without hesitation. "In no sample was the legally stipulated maximum residue level exceeded or even approximately reached," says a statement. Strict authorization procedures would apply to all crop protection products. Health risks can therefore be ruled out "with sufficient certainty".

Criticism of multiple burdens

On Monday, the BUND reported on detected residues of pesticides in several strawberry samples. The organization relied on laboratory tests of fruits from different traders.

In 15 of the 19 strawberry samples examined, residues of a total of eight agents against fungal diseases (fungicides) were found.

  The analysis did not contain any information on the observed limit values. The BUND is very concerned about multiple exposures, i.e. the detection of several agents in one sample.

There are indications that different active ingredients increase their toxic effect. The criticism is that the risk assessment does not take this topic sufficiently into account. The BfR gave the all-clear: Even if several active substances can be detected in the strawberry at the same time, this is not a health risk. Because the residues are minimal. All proven active ingredients have been toxicologically evaluated and found to be safe.

Industry is upset

The BUND action was met with resentment among German strawberry farmers. "This week, which is the week with the highest sales for strawberries in Germany, such a report does not come by chance," says Fred Eickhorst, Managing Director of the Association of Asparagus and Berry Growers, in an interview. He describes the action as "polemics". From his point of view, the results of the tests are excellent - and a hymn to German cultivation.

However, the BUND presented them in a distorted way. Other studies, such as the State Office for Health and Food Safety (LGL) in Bavaria, would provide similar results. The QS quality assurance system, in which more than 90 percent of German strawberry farmers participate, also carries out residue tests on a regular basis. The excess rate in Germany is only 0.64 percent, says Eickhorst. In an international comparison, this is an outstanding value.

The BUND advises those who want to do without chemical-synthetic agents to grow strawberries themselves or to buy organic goods. But that is sometimes not easy, there are hardly any German organic strawberries. And not without reason, says Eickhorst: "Strawberries in the field are extremely susceptible to rot. Cultivation is not economically viable without effective pesticides.” For years there have been fewer, not more, strawberries from organic cultivation.

Many farmers are basically willing to use fewer pesticides. A legislative package is being discussed at EU level. However, farmers fear significant yield losses, since a reduction in pesticides by half is under discussion.”