Steve Thomas - IT Consultant

SME-focused business travel booking platform, TravelPerk, has topped up the $160 million in equity and debt it raised last in a Series D last April with an additional $115M — closing out the round at $275M.

TravelPerk said its business is now being valued at $1.3BN — meaning it’s achieved coveted ‘unicorn’ status.

In total, it has raised $409M since being founded back in 2015.

The company declined to disclose a valuation when it took in the earlier slice of equity and debt last year so the Barcelona-based startup is sounding more confident going into 2022 vs Spring 2021.

That said, it’s not clear how much of the $115M tranche is equity vs debt — a spokeswoman for the startup declined to provide a break down or a clear answer when we asked, saying only: “This round is a mix of equity and debt funding.”

The final tranche of the D round was led by US VC firm General Catalyst, a new investor in the business, along with existing backer Kinnevik.

Another investor in this slice of the Series D, Gillian Tans, ex-chairwoman and CEO of Booking.com — who is investing in a  personal capacity — is joining the board of directors alongside Joel Cutler, an early investor in Stripe, Airbnb, and Kayak.

Commenting in a statement, Tans said: “I have been working in the travel industry for many years, and TravelPerk is the one company that never ceases to surprise me. It has solidified its leadership position over the last two years in challenging times for the travel industry, emerging stronger than ever. They are innovative and have been able to anticipate and address their customers’ changing needs through major acquisitions, new market entries, and product designs. I’m honored to be joining as an investor and the Board of Directors at TravelPerk and to help the company reach a global leadership position.”

General Catalyst MD Joel Cutler added in another supporting statement: “Hybrid and remote working is undoubtedly here to stay but a Zoom call will never be able to replicate the benefits of in-person, face-to-face interaction. We have no doubt that business travel will continue to grow and thrive in the years ahead, with TravelPerk as the clear leader in the space, and we’re thrilled to be participating in this funding round.”

It’s certainly been a tough couple of years for the travel sector generally — and for work trips in particular — given the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic which has led to scores of conference cancelations and accelerated tools and tech around virtual meetings, which offer a low friction, low cost alternative to business travel for physical meetings.

In person industry events did start to pick up again last year — with major tech conferences such as the GSMA’s Mobile World Congress, Web Summit and CES (earlier this year) taking place in some capacity — but it’s typically been with vastly reduced attendance vs pre-pandemic years.

Streaming continues to be a popular choice for workers and employers to avoid the risk and hassle associated with pandemic era business travel.

Despite obvious demand-side challenges for business travel, TravelPerk has continued to present a bullish front throughout this period — operating a no layoffs policy and splashing out on a number of acquisitions aimed at tooling up for COVID-19-triggered changes to how people are travelling for work.

It has also managed to tap investors to continue backing its platform as it reconfigures its feature mix to support changing business travel needs.

TravelPerk said the Series D will be used to double down on product development — with a focus on building tools for an era of hybrid working. Albeit, it’s focus is on trying to expand the portion of physically co-located working that’s going on.

A recent feature, added to TravelPerk’s platform in November, is an events organizing tool aimed at nudging customers to plan and book in-person get togethers, such as for an offsite, a party or a meeting of new starters. “TravelPerk Events enables remote and hybrid teams to connect in real life,” runs its marketing spiel for the tool.

“As time goes by, it is clear that there won’t be a replacement for the human touch. We are seeing data on our platform and we are feeling it ourselves,” argues CEO Avi Meir in a statement. “While some technologies are focused on virtual interactions, TravelPerk is building the technology that will help us get together in real life.”

The startup is also ploughing money into developing what it bills as “sustainable” travel solutions.

Last fall TravelPerk acquired a UK-based corporate responsibility consultancy, called Susterra, to beef up its ability to offer tools for customers to calculate a travel-related carbon footprint.

It was already offering carbon offsetting to try to grease bookings in spite of the existential challenge posed by climate change — which will require massive, swift global reductions in carbon emissions if humanity is to avoid environmental catastrophe, thereby presenting an obvious challenge to travel industry growth.

Nonetheless, TravelPerk is doing the opposite of talking down its growth prospects.

It said expanding in the US is another focus for the Series D — a market that became its largest a year ago when it acquired US-based rival NexTravel.

It also plans to use the funding to double down on growth in its other large market: Europe.

Since 2019 (so pre-pandemic), TravelPerk said its business has grown 4x in terms of annualised revenue. It also said it has doubled its customer acquisition rate — albeit a considerable chunk of recent onboarding is likely to have come from acquisitions over this period.

As well as buying US-based NexTravel at the start of last year, it also picked up the UK’s Click Travel last summer, at the time the largest business travel platform in the country.

French startup Back Market has raised another mega round of funding. In May, the company raised a $335 million Series D round. Today, the company is announcing a $510 million Series E round, which values the company at $5.7 billion.

If you’re not familiar with Back Market, the company operates a marketplace of refurbished electronics devices — mostly smartphones. In other words, if you think smartphones are expensive, you can get a phone that is still in good condition without paying full price.

There are many reasons why consumers might buy a phone on Back Market instead of buying a new phone from a carrier or smartphone manufacturer. In addition to saving money, many customers think new phones only feature incremental updates compared to previous generation models.

Many customers also want to avoid generating additional waste and choose a used device for that reason. Many old smartphones simply end up in a drawer after all. A new battery and sometimes a new display might be enough to turn an old device into an attractive refurbished phone.

Back Market doesn’t refurbish devices directly. Instead, third-party companies act as the sourcing partners for Back Market. By listing their inventory on Back Market’s marketplace, they can find customers more easily.

On the other end of the transaction, customers buy devices through Back Market as there’s a 30-day money back guarantee. Overall, 6 million customers have purchased a device on Back Market.

Sprints Capital is leading today’s funding round with existing investors also participating, such as Eurazeo, Aglaé Ventures, General Atlantic and Generation Investment Management. The French tech ecosystem has been on a roll as PayFit, Qonto and Ankorstore also announced that they had raised hundreds of millions of euros each over the last few days.

“Our goal is to make refurbished electronics the first choice for tech purchases. We expect to see a similar development in the electronics market as we have witnessed in the pre-owned car market in America, where consumer confidence in buying second-hand vehicles has resulted in sales that have increased twofold compared to new car sales,” co-founder and CEO Thibaud Hug de Larauze said in a statement. “The support and confidence of these funds, together with our growing customer base, marks an important step in Back Market’s journey, and more importantly, for the circular economy as a whole.”

One metric that is particularly important for Back Market is the average failure rate. Right now, the company estimates that it has a failure rate of about 4%, which means that one in every 25 phones doesn’t work as expected in one way or another. That’s why customer service is key when it comes to customer satisfaction. The company also estimates that new devices have a 3% failure rate.

The startup expects to double in size with a specific focus on the U.S. market — it currently has 650 employees. Back Market operates in 16 countries, including many European markets, the U.S. and Japan.

Twig, a London-based fintech targeting Gen Z and younger Millennial consumers with an e-money account that gives them instant cash-outs on fashion and electronics they want to sell, has closed a $35 million Series A round of funding.

The investment is led by UK-based fintech specialist, Fasanara Capital, with additional backing from a number of undisclosed strategic investors which Twig says include current and former executives from LVMH, Valentino and Goldman Sachs, among others.

The startup was only founded in mid 2020 — launching its service in the UK last July — but it touts rapid domestic growth (100,000+ monthly downloads of its apps; reaching sixth position in the iOS App Store’s top finance apps); and is already gearing up for international expansion.

The Series A is pegged for launching in the US (slated for Q1 this year) and the EU (Q2; where it’s eyeing Italy, France and Germany for starters), as well as expanding the product’s capabilities and feature-set with a focus on the buzz around Web3 and digital collectables.

For now, Twig accounts are only available in the UK. Founder and CEO Geri Cupi tells TechCrunch it has around 250,000 users at this stage.

He adds that the typical user is a 22-year-old, recently graduated professional female — perhaps with a bunch of stuff in her wardrobe that she’s outgrown and would be happy to resell.

Growth via user referrals looks likely to have helped fuel its early rise, given Twig charges users a £1 transfer fee for users to send money to a third party account but there’s no fee if you transfer from one Twig account to another.

It’s also worth noting that despite having a marketing slogan which paints itself as “your bank of things”, Twig is not actually a bank; rather a Twig account is an “e-money account” — so there are key regulatory differences (such as Twig accounts not being covered by the UK’s deposit guarantee scheme).

Not being a full fat bank means the startup can scale faster into new markets, with lighter regulatory requirements on the service than if it needed to obtain a banking licence. For now it’s not in a hurry to turn into an actual bank, per Cupi.

In earlier decades, long before the Internet- and open banking-fuelled fintech boom, legacy banks would pitch to get a new crop of school leavers signed up by offering freebies — like bags, stationery, music or other offers. Now fintech startups compete to offer the most appealing feature mix to net a target youth demographic.

But it’s fair to say that getting money into accounts remains a key aim.

That said, Twig is applying for B Corp certification which emphasizes social purpose and environmental performance, as well as transparency and accountability — Cupi says it’s in the final stage of the application; it has pending status currently and he anticipates getting full status in Q1 — while its PR pushes claims of sustainability and circularity, given that it’s plugging users into selling (rather than binning) their branded goods.

Its website also talks up its use of carbon offsetting and other initiatives to shrink environmental impact.

Thing is, in order for humanity to avert climate catastrophe, major reductions in global CO2 emissions are required — so, essentially, less consumption overall. Which does call into question the credibility of claims of ‘sustainability’ being made to stretch around a concept of resale that risks fuelling increased consumption via instant valuations and cash outs, as Twig offers.

Selling a currently owned thing to free up cash might encourage the consumer to splash out and buy more new things than they otherwise would if they had held onto the original item for longer. Or, to put it another way, circularity needs to work hand in hand with longevity if it’s to shrink consumption and actually reduce CO2 emissions. And it’s not clear that reducing friction involved in reselling will lead to consumers buying less overall. On the contrary; it may do the opposite.

So that’s one potential wrinkle in Twig’s sustainability pitch.

However when we put this conundrum to Cupi he neatly irons it out — deploying a (somewhat circular) argument which states that Twig’s goal of increasing “liquidity” of secondhand things can work for sustainability and support reduced consumption by making more secondhand stuff available to buy — thereby reducing demand for new stuff to be made as more items (re)circulate through this (more vibrant) secondary economy.

“Essentially our core business is we enable consumers to get paid for their old items and in the process we give a new life to their items — and this increases supply in the secondary market at least,” he says. “The demand in the secondary market has been growing and growing. The reason we can afford just to be on the supply side of the market is there is such a bigger need for extra supply right now in the market. And when consumers get hat extra cash it doesn’t mean they’re going to use it to buy more things.

“This is from what we’ve seen from our users. Typically from the funds that are being transferred to Twig we see that roughly 42% of them get used for new experiences — that might be travelling, it might be… experience-led — so it doesn’t mean that if you increase liquidity you necessarily increase consumerization of things that have a negative impact on the environment. And that’s what we’ve been seeing so far.”

Cupi condenses Twig’s business to a very simple pitch: “We tokenize assets.”

“The way Twig works is you can upload — let’s say a Gucci Marmont handbag — on the platform. And what Twig does is it tokenizes that asset and offers you a price for it,” he explains.

“Our goal is to make this available externally as well. In that scenario blockchain becomes useful… We want to increase the liquidity of this asset and make it very easy for consumers to trade the physical goods for virtual goods and use the virtual goods to buy physical goods or experiences.

“So we just want to make it much easier for them to trade, essentially.”

Cupi has a background in blockchain and the circular economy — which has included, back in 2018, selling a denim upcycling business to Levi’s Albania.

Physical items that resell well include fashion from brands like Nike, Gucci, Chanel, Hermes and other luxury makers, according to a Twig white paper — which talks about “redefining the future of ownership” and “empowering Gen Z to live a circular lifestyle”.

Apple electronics also hold their value well on the secondhand market, per Cupi — who notes that after Twig added electronics to the secondhand items it’ll buy, expanding out from buying fashion cast offs, its demographic shifted from over 90% female to around 70:30 female to male.

Twig takes care of the resale of pre-owned items for its users — providing them with an instant valuation and (potentially) instant cash to spend on whatever they like if it’s happy to buy the stuff they’re selling. (It has a pretty specific list of what it will and won’t buy.)

Shipping the goods to Twig is free for the user — so by using its service they essentially skip the hassle and risk associated with manually selling their stuff on a second hand marketplace like Vinted or Depop. (Albeit, they may get less than if they sold the items themselves.)

If an item fails a quality check once it arrives at Twig’s warehouse the user is charged a fee to return it to them (and presumably any instant payment they got for it is also reversed). While if Twig ends up being unable to sell an item it says it donates the goods to charity rather than binning them to avoid sending stuff to landfill because that’s bad for the environment.

Cupi says it’s in a growth-focused phase at present so is not seeking to make chunky margin on resales.

The value it’ll offer for an item varies, depending on various dynamic factors — its white paper notes that it uses a “market-based pricing algorithm” to analyze 100M+ products on the secondary market to provide “representative resale values for brands, item categories and market segments”.

Core to its premise is that factoring in resale value changes the concept of total cost of ownership for the consumer — which may have the power to shift buying patterns (it could, for example, encourage consumers to opt for high end fashion to get value longevity over environmentally ruinous and low resale value fast fashion, say).

Combining bank-like functionality — Twig accounts come with a Twig Visa debit card and include capabilities like the ability to make domestic and international money transfers — with a baked in secondhand goods resale service is a pitch tailor-made for the target Gen Z and younger Millennial demographic which has shown a keen and growing interest in both the thrift and sustainability of secondhand marketplaces.

Twig’s target demographic also explains its marketing being heavy on talk of environmental friendliness via circularity. (“Twig makes it easier and empowers you to adopt a more sustainable lifestyle,” is one claim on its retro-graphic-heavy website.)

Gen Z especially has been dubbed the sustainability generation — with these young consumers prioritizing “usage of goods over ownership”, as Twig’s white paper puts it.

So reimagining the function of a bank as an arbiter and exchange of resale value — enabling consumers to turn all sorts of stuff into, essentially, quasi-currency to pay for other things they want to have or do (a sort of high tech reinvention of barter if you like) — rather than as a literal store of financial value starts to look pretty interesting.

There’s another sustainability wrinkle to tackle, though — given how thoroughly blockchain is baked into what Twig’s doing.

While its tech has been built on blockchain from the start you’d be hard pressed to notice from the user-facing descriptions on its website. But its plan for the Series A risks throwing its Gen Z-friendly eco-sounding marketing right out of whack — as its PR seeks to tap into the raging Web3 hype, with the launch of what it describes as “a first-of-its-kind Web 3.0 green payment infrastructure”.

This forthcoming functionality will enable users to “tokenize” real world assets and “make them tradeable in seconds”, its release goes on, adding that: Twig will enable digital and physical items to be monetized and traded in new ways. Such an approach will allow users to trade-in goods at the checkout page and buy crypto currencies as well as NFTs by trading-in their clothes or electronics.”

Quite how encouraging the trading of crypto and NFTs can be spun as “green” is an interesting question to ponder.

After all the energy costs of crypto can look like an extinction level event, in and of themselves.

For example, a study last year by Cambridge University suggested that just one cryptocurrency — Bitcoin — consumed more energy annually than the entire country of Argentina.

Another piece of research, from March last year, suggested Bitcoin consumed as much energy as Norway — with predictions that its carbon footprint would soon be akin to the emissions generated by the entire metropolitan area of London.

In short, the infamous inefficiency of blockchain-based cryptocurrencies — certainly those that require proof of work to validate transactions — looks anything but sustainable.

There’s even more wasteful energy usage being attached to blockchains too: Aka the rise of NFTs (non-fungible tokens) which involve — and further encourage — the use of energy-intensive transactions by layering the trading of digital collectables atop blockchains.

The current hype around NFTs (as fashion/status symbols) combined with the retail trading of these digital assets — and the suggestion that hyper quick money can be made by burning energy to shift collectable pixels — pours yet more fuel on this energy bonfire.

Last year an analysis by a digital artist suggested that an average NFT could have a carbon footprint equivalent to a month’s worth of electricity usage for a person living in the EU. So, again, it’s hard to conceive of a way to spin features that encourage users to get busy tokenizing and trading their stuff — and/or digital collectables — as, in any shape or form, “green”.

Once again, Cupi is not phased by this counter argument, though.

Firstly he says that the blockchain infrastructure Twig has been built on is more energy efficient than some other blockchains.

“Blockchain itself is not bad for the environment as a technology — there’s different applications of it,” he argues. “In our case the blockchain that we built on top of — it’s Hyperledger Sawtooth — the energy usage is very, very small compared to the other solutions out there.

“So we try to minimize the usage of energy intensive solutions.”

He also specifies that Twig is calculating its internal energy usage to try to quantify its environmental impact and — at a minimum — it’s doing carbon offsetting to counteract this.

He says it is also supporting projects that are seeking to sequester/remove CO2 from the atmosphere.

Although how viable/credible the specific projects are is a whole other matter.

While Twig may be seeking to minimize/offset its own energy usage/carbon footprint, the bigger potential environmental impact is likely to be from secondary (for want of a better word) usage — aka, any consumption, energy use and CO2 emissions that Twig’s users and suppliers generate as a result of what its platform enables them to do.

Calculating those linked but indirect impacts — sometimes called ‘Scope 3′ emissions, in sustainability reporting terms — is much harder than doing an internal audit of a business’ direct energy usage. Yet Scope 3 emissions also tend to comprise the biggest chunk of an organization’s carbon footprint. So you can’t just wish all those connected transactions, emissions and effects away.

Twig is clearly trying to tackle some of this — by doing carbon offsetting to cover the shipping of goods, for example. And its ambition to gain B Corp status looks laudable.

But it’s a lot harder to predict what sort of energy costs its platform may ultimately end up generating — based on the consumer demands and trends it might feed and/or drain.

By encouraging users to buy crypto and get into trading NFTs it’s clear there will be associated energy costs. And there is a risk that such intensive energy costs could end up erasing potential environmental gains (if Twig is able to turn increased liquidity of secondhand goods into a net reduction in manufacturing of new items via reduced demand from consumers to buy new).

But it’s also possible that such a radical reimagining of what can be used to make a payment — all sorts of items/things/stuff; in theory a consumer may not need to ever spend actual money in a world of tokenized value — could lead to substantial shifts in consumption that can actually move the needle on circularity. And move our societies away from the vicious circle of throwaway consumption that’s characterized so many decades of capitalism.

Put another way, if the things we have can be relied upon to more predictably sustain their value for resale — thanks to the help of blockchain-based tokenization (which can support authentication to combat fakes) and more stable valuations (based on knowing the full ownership history via a distributed ledger infrastructure) — consumers may be nudged to take better care of the stuff they have in order to preserve its longevity for better resale, meaning the world’s industries won’t need to make half so many things in the first place — lifting crippling systemic pressure on planetary resources.

It’s certainly a thought.

De-emphasizing money by making it much easier to make payments by exchanging all sorts of things might be exactly the kicker we need to rework how we think about value, ownership and wealth. And, indeed, planetary resources.

Here’s Cupi again: “Instead of using your own cash to buy NFTs you can use things that you have at home and don’t use anymore — for instance you might have an old iPhone that you don’t use anymore and you can trade that for an NFT or you can trade that for some cryptocurrency or you can use that to buy an experience — you can use that to buy a trip to New York or you can use that to pay for your next vocational course… So the whole purpose of Twig is to increase liquidity in the market and — essentially — to make it very easy for people to use assets that they don’t use anymore and give them a second life.

“That way our ethos is you can both do good to your wallet and to the Earth.”

The vision for Twig is therefore to turn itself into a payments platform — but one that translates physical goods into payments on behalf of its users/customers.

“At the moment Twig is just a b2c platform — but it’s going to become a b2b2c platform. So it will be connected as a payment gateway of different providers,” he says, noting that it has inked agreements with “a couple of big merchants” to be plugged into its infrastructure (he’s not disclosing which retailers as yet).

“What we’re trying to do — essentially — is to reinvent the definition of wealth,” Cupi adds, discussing how he sees the notion of money evolving. “So if everything that you own can be treated as money your perception of wealth also changes.

“The old definition of wealth is the value of your largest asset — the value of your house, the value of your car… But you don’t see as part of your wealth — typically — the value of your wardrobe, for instance. This is what we’re trying to change. And in that way if everything has instant liquidity you can treat your things as cash. It doesn’t make a difference whether it’s cash — or a Gucci Marmont handbag. If you want to buy something in pounds it’s then the same.”

So if Twig gets its way the future of payments might get a whole lot more visual and physical — maybe you’ll be buying a secondhand iPhone by dragging and dropping an NFT you minted into the ecommerce payment window.

Or posting off a pair of limited edition Nikes to score that sweet Spring city break you’ve been looking forward to.

Or, er, buying a chunk of prime real estate with some prize pieces of diamond-encrusted jewellery…

While younger consumers may already be comfortable with a world of fairly commoditized value tradable stuff, what about older consumers? Does Cupi reckon Boomers or Gen X can be convinced to start making payments by parting with things they’ve ploughed their cash into?

Are first edition signed books and prize vinyl pressings going to end up folded into the future payment mix?

“To be honest I don’t know the answer to that,” he says. “At the moment we’re seeing our product, Gen Z reacts very well to it. And also young Millennials — so twentysomethings… that’s what we’re seeing — and in the UK. It might be a different picture once we go to other markets as well.”

 

IBM announced this morning that it has acquired Australian startup Envizi to add to its package of ESG (environmental, sustainability and governance) offerings to help measure environmental impact up and down the supply chain.

The companies did not share the terms of the acquisition, but with Envizi Big Blue gets a platform for measuring, managing and optimizing a customer’s environmental sustainability efforts. In other words, it’s taking a data-centric approach to the problem just as it did when it was building Watson Health in 2016, a division that it is reportedly trying to sell at the moment.

Kareem Yusuf, general manager for IBM AI Applications, said that companies need data to drive insights, and that’s what his company is getting with Envizi.

“Envizi’s software provides companies with a single source of truth for analyzing and understanding emissions data across the full landscape of their business operations and dramatically accelerates IBM’s growing arsenal of AI technologies for helping businesses create more sustainable operations and supply chains,” Yusuf said in a statement.

Envizi CEO and co-founder David Solsky sees this as a way to scale the company by taking advantage of IBM’s global presence, a typical argument for a company being swallowed up by a much larger one. “Today doesn’t mark the end of an era, nor the beginning of a new one. Rather, it is a transition to a structure that is going to allow us to scale at an unprecedented rate and globally help our clients accelerate progress toward their sustainability commitments,” Solsky wrote in a company blog post announcing the deal.

IBM sees Envizi as AI-driven software to add to its existing package of products that includes the IBM Environmental Intelligence Suite, IBM Maximo asset management solutions and IBM Sterling supply chain solutions. The latter uses the IBM blockchain for sourcing and traceability along the supply chain, which could improve safety or traceability.

It’s worth noting that even as the company continues to pursue AI-fueled solutions, this time it did not attach the name Watson to its ESG efforts, as it did with the healthcare initiative six years ago. Perhaps IBM has decided the Watson brand has lost some of its shine over the years and has moved on from attaching the name to every AI-driven solution in the company.

The company notes that it is using these same software tools in-house to help drive its own sustainability efforts as it works to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2030.

French startup Doctolib is expected to close the acquisition of Tanker today based on regulatory filings. Doctolib is a French unicorn that develops a software-as-a-service product to help doctors and medical workers with admin tasks. In particular, Doctolib acts as a booking platform that connects doctors with patients. 300,000 health professionals pay for the service and 60 million people have used it in Europe.

Tanker helps healthcare tech companies secure user data. The startup has developed a protocol as well as client-side development kits that can be integrated in a web app, a mobile app or a desktop app.

After you add Tanker to your product, messages and files that are shared between patients and health professionals are end-to-end encryption. Tanker and its customers can’t decrypt files or messages as it doesn’t have access to the private encryption key. In other words, if you’re not the sender nor the recipient, you can’t decrypt the data.

With a focus on the healthcare industry, Tanker lists Doctolib, healthcare insurance startup Alan and telehealth startup Qare as its customers on the company’s website. In June 2020, Doctolib announced that it added end-to-end encryption thanks to a partnership with Tanker

A source sent me a regulatory filing from January 3rd, 2022 with details on the transaction between Doctolib and Tanker. A previous regulatory filing from December 22nd, 2021 also mentions the acquisition. You can view both of these documents on Pappers.

“Doctolib plans to acquire the shares of the company named Tanker,” a lawyer writes in a letter. “This transaction would be conducted based on the terms of the agreement protocol signed on December 9th, 2021, which involves transferring 100% of the shares of the capital of the company Tanker for the benefit of Doctolib.”

The most recent filing mentions January 11th, 2022 as the closing date for the transaction, which is today. We have reached out to Doctolib, but received a “no comment” on the matter.

Based on the legal documents, Doctolib is acquiring Tanker in a cash and stock transaction, which would value Tanker at $28 million to $34 million (€25 million to €30 million).

The valuation enigma

Yesterday, I wrote about Doctolib’s press conference on its most recent metrics and upcoming product releases. Interestingly, Doctolib co-founder and CEO Stanislas Niox-Chateau said they “have stopped communicating on funding rounds for the past several years. Every quarter, every year, investors invest once again or invest for the first time based on our long-term project.”

Back in 2019, the company said that it had reached a valuation of $1.13 billion (€1 billion). That’s the last time Doctolib talked about funding rounds.

But that’s not the most recent funding round. For instance, as Charlie Perreau spotted, General Atlantic invested $69 million (€61 million) in the company back in February 2020.

As for the company’s valuation, based on Tanker’s acquisition, each Doctolib share is worth €170.91. There are currently around 18 million Doctolib shares, which means that Doctolib could be valued at roughly €3 billion ($3.4 billion).

That valuation seems low given Doctolib’s customer base (300,000) and Doctolib’s starting price (€129 per month). Maybe Doctolib’s shares were a bit undervalued as a nice gesture for Tanker investors. Maybe Doctolib hasn’t raised in a while and is about to raise at a higher valuation. It remains an enigma for now.

It’s painful to watch SPAC deals collapse post-combination. You can viscerally feel dreams melting away to disappointment as founders, employees and investors still holding shares in the newly public entities watch their wealth dwindle.

The mess is not sector-specific. Media? Not a good SPAC target. Insurtech? Nope. 3D printing? Not looking good. E-scooters? Nerp. Hardware and software for apartment buildings? Not that either. Fintech? A mixed bag, but with some pretty poor results as well.


The Exchange explores startups, markets and money.

Read it every morning on TechCrunch+ or get The Exchange newsletter every Saturday.


SPACs did manage to get a number of startups and unicorns public more quickly than they might have managed on their own. But the results are proving to be pure trash so frequently once the hype has died down and real, post-debut life begins that I would hazard that we’ve collected enough data to call the SPAC boom a failure.

A failure in what terms? In that SPACs will not become the chariots that help transport enough unicorns across the private-public market divide and begin to cut down on the rising number of pricey former startups collecting by the exits of Startup Land. The results are just too icky for that to work out.

The unicorn pileup

One of the most quietly pressing issues in technology investing today is the fact that the number of unicorns continues to grow, year after year. This is to say that the pace at which venture capitalists and other private-market investors can take companies public is far slower than the rate at which they can generate paper wealth. North of 900 unicorns are waiting for an exit, with Crunchbase counting 944 and CB Insights landing on a slightly higher figure of 959.

The result is that several trillions of dollars of value are sitting on the sidelines of the capital markets, waiting to be called into the game. And SPACs had a shot at helping.

Peer-to-peer car-sharing company Turo filed to go public last night. TechCrunch’s first look at its S-1 filing is here, in case you missed it.

That Turo has filed to go public is not a surprise. After raising nearly $500 million while private, the company has an enormous capital base underneath it, meaning that there is also institutional pressure for the firm to pursue an IPO. Turo first raised external capital back in 2009, Crunchbase data indicates, so some investors have been waiting for the company’s S-1 filing for a long, long while.


The Exchange explores startups, markets and money.

Read it every morning on TechCrunch+ or get The Exchange newsletter every Saturday.


The good news is that Turo’s business had a turnaround year last year. After posting somewhat lackluster 2020 results, Turo saw its revenues and results rebound, at least through the third quarter. We’ll get Q4 data in a subsequent S-1 filing.

This morning, I want to compare and contrast the company’s 2020 and 2021 results as a way to show how some unicorns will come out of the pandemic with jets on. Frankly, the Turo income statement, once we beat back some non-cash costs muddying its bottom line, has me impressed.

Let’s talk about acceleration post-lockdown.

Turo’s financial rebound

From 2019 to 2020, Turo recorded slim revenue growth. The company’s top line grew from $141.7 million to $149.9 million, or around 6%. For a venture-backed company ramping toward an IPO, that’s an incredibly thin pace of growth.

Even worse, the company’s net losses stayed essentially flat during the period, decreasing just a smidge from $98.6 million worth of negative net income in 2019 to $97.1 million in 2020.

But then, 2021 came around. Observe the differential in results:

Image Credits: Turo S-1

As you can see when we contrast the first three quarters of 2020 with the same portion of 2021, the company’s revenue growth reignited, and it swung from stinging operating losses to operating profits. It appears that last year was a rebirth of sorts for Turo — it left slow growth behind for hyper-growth (207% between 2020 and 2021, for the periods listed) and losses for profits (on an operating basis).

Yes but, I can hear you saying, the company’s net loss actually got worse in the first three quarters of 2021 when compared with the preceding year. Why are we giving it plaudits for growth when it torched so much money? 

French startup Qonto has raised a $552 million Series D funding round (€486 million). Following this investment, the startup has reached a valuation of $5 billion (€4.4 billion). This is one of the largest rounds in the French tech ecosystem.

Qonto is a challenger bank focused on business bank accounts. The startup focuses primarily on small and medium companies as well as freelancers. It currently operates in France, Germany, Italy and Spain.

Tiger Global and TCV are leading today’s funding round. With 220,000 clients, Qonto still plans to grow at a rapide pace in the coming years. “Our goal is to reach one million SMEs by 2025,” co-founder and CEO Alexandre Prot told me. “And we know that Tiger and TCV have supported quite a few companies to reach that scale.”

Some new investors are also participating in the round, such as Alkeon, Eurazeo, KKR, Insight Partners, Exor Seeds, Guillaume Pousaz, Gaingels and Ashley Flucas. Existing investors Valar, Alven, DST Global and Tencent are putting more money on the table as well.

That’s quite a long list of investors and Qonto proves once again that private equity firms are actively looking for late-stage growth rounds in Europe.

Image Credits: Qonto

From everyday banking to an all-in-one finance solution

What’s interesting with Qonto is that it’s a truly European startup. In the U.S., spend management solutions, such as Brex and Ramp, have been massively successful. As The Information’s Kate Clark reported, they want to replace American Express and hand out corporate cards to millions of employees in the U.S.

Qonto started out with business bank accounts because that’s the key financial component of European companies. Many companies use their bank accounts directly to move money around. They initiate transfers, share their bank account number (IBAN) to receive a payment and set up direct debits to pay bills.

And Qonto does that really well. You can sign up from a computer and get a local IBAN a few minutes later. After that, you can also order debit cards to pay with your card.

At first, Qonto relied heavily on a third-party banking partner — Treezor. The startup then applied to get its own license to become a payment institution. In 2020, Qonto moved all its clients to its in-house core banking system. The company now owns this critical part of the technical stack.

Qonto has expanded beyond the simple bank account. The startup’s CEO Alexandre Prot defines Qonto as three different products rolled into a single service. In addition to the everyday banking part, it also simplifies bookkeeping and accounting. It can become your spend management solution as well.

On the bookkeeping front, Qonto lets you export or sync with your existing accounting solution. This is a fragmented market as each country uses different accounting tools. For instance, you can export your data to Cegid if you’re a French company, you can synchronize with Datev if you’re a German company, etc. Qonto users can also import receipts directly in their Qonto account.

As for spend management, Qonto lets you hand out physical, virtual or one-time cards to employees. Admins can set up different spending limits, an approval workflow and all the usual stuff that you get from a spend management solution. It might not be as feature complete as a dedicated product, such as Spendesk, but it could be enough for small companies.

For everything else, Qonto partners with other fintech startups. For instance, customers can open a credit line with October and borrow €15,000 to €30,000. Customers can also open a savings account with Cashbee and its banking partner My Money Bank.

Image Credits: Qonto

A single bank account

There are 220,000 companies paying for Qonto every month. Pricing ranges from €9 per month for the most basic freelancer account to €249 per month for enterprise accounts. On top of that, some companies pay more to get more cards or when they go above certain limits.

What makes the business model even more lucrative is that a lot of customers just sign up on their own. When they create their company, they use Qonto for the initial capital deposit in order to register the company. Essentially, Qonto combines inbound marketing with the high margins of a SaaS product.

“Around a third of our customers created their companies with us. It’s their first account and the only one that they use,” Alexandre Prot said. “Two-thirds of our customers are companies that existed before they opened an account with us. Roughly half of them close their existing bank account, half of them use Qonto in parallel with one or several accounts.”

With today’s funding round, the company plans to grow its team from 500 employees to 2,000 people by 2025. Qonto will also invest heavily in its existing markets. “We will be able to invest more than €100 million on each of our markets,” Prot said. While there are still a lot of SMEs that are not using Qonto in France, Germany, Spain and Italy, Qonto also plans to enter new market in 2023.

Indonesia-based eFishery announced today that it has raised what it claims is the largest round of funding by an aquaculture tech startup in the world. The company, which provides feeding devices, software and financing for fish and shrimp farmers, got a $90 million Series C co-led by Temasek, SoftBank Vision Fund 2 and Sequoia Capital India, with participation from returning investors the Northstar Group, Go-Ventures, Aqua-Spark and Wavemaker Partners

The funds will be used to scale up eFishery’s platform and expand into the top 10 countries for aquaculture, including China and India.

eFishery’s products include software like eFarm, which lets shrimp farmers monitor their operations and eFisheryKu, which does the same for fish farmers. Its financing products include eFund, which connects fish farmers to financial institutions for products like a pay later service to buy suppliers. It says more than 7,000 farmers have used eFund so far, with total loans approved more than $28 million.

Other products include smart feeders that are now used by more than 30,000 farmers in Indonesia.

In a statement, Anna Lo, Investment Director at SoftBank Investment Advisers, said, “Indonesia is one of the world’s largest producers of fish and we believe its aquaculture industry can play a meaningful role in feeding the world’s growing population.”

Other Indonesian agtech startups that have recently raised significant rounds of funding include marketplaces TaniHub and Eden Farm, fishery “sea-to-table” company Aruna and social commerce startup Chilibeli.

The backbone of Indonesia’s economy are its estimated more than 60 million SMEs. But many lack access to working capital and, especially before the pandemic, managed their finances using manual processes like spreadsheets. With COVID-19 prompting many to digitize, startups that focus on SMEs have been raising large rounds of funding to scale up quickly. KoinWorks is the latest. The Indonesia-based financial platform for SMEs announced today it has raised $108 million in Series C funding led by MDI Ventures. The round included $43 million in equity and $65 million in debt capital for the working capital loans KoinWorks provides to its customers.

The round brings KoinWorks’ total raised to $180 million. Existing investors who returned for its latest round include Quona Capital, Triodos Investment Management, Saison Capital, ACV and East Ventures. The new funds will be used for hiring about 400 new employees and scaling KoinWorks’ latest suite of products, SME Neobank.

KoinWorks is headquartered in Jakarta, with holding in Singapore and tech offices in Yogyakarta, India and Vietnam. KoinWorks was originally created to help SMEs, which are often turned away by traditional financial institutions, get access to working capital. Since then, it has also developed a comprehensive platform of financial tools to help its customers, including e-commerce vendors and social commerce sellers, increase their sales.

TechCrunch first profiled KoinWorks in 2019 when it raised $12 million for its lending platform. Demand increased as more businesses went online during the COVID-19 pandemic and the startup says its user base tripled to 1.5 million customers, and a waitlist of 100,000 SMEs who are being onboarded onto its new financial software. Co-founder and executive chairman Willy Arifin told TechCrunch in an email that since 2019, monthly loan disbursements have also tripled to nearly $50 million and revenue had quadrupled.

KoinWorks focuses on SMEs that are underserved by traditional financial institutions and may not have a bank account or credit cards. On the platform, users can create an online bank account and card, borrow working capital, and access accounting, point-of-sale, early wage access and human resources management systems tailored for small businesses.

Arifin said that since KoinWorks’ monthly disbursement rate reached $50 million a month, its take rate has grown enough that the company became cash flow positive earlier this year, and its non-performing loan (NPL) percentage is lower than 2%. He says banks serving traditional SMEs have at least double KoinWorks’ NPL. “As many as 20% of businesses shifted their sales channels offline to online during the pandemic, and 89% of businesses now use online channels to sell their products and services,” he said.

Over the last three years, KoinWorks’ competitors have grown to include other neobanks and startups that started out as accounting software but are expanding to include working capital loans and other financial services. Two notable examples included rivals BukuWarung and BukuKas, both of which have raised significant rounds of funding.

“When we started out, we were among hundreds of traditional financial institutions. Fast forward to the present day, we are seeing those same banks now undergo digitalization,” Arifin said. “Despite that, Indonesia’s yearly funding gap is $80 billion USD, so those who remain unbanked or underbanked are still at a disadvantage. There’s still a lot of room for improvement”

He added that with tens of millions of entrepreneurs in Indonesia, “it’s not a winner-takes-all market.” The top five banks in the country have a combined market value of close to $160 billion USD. There will undoubtedly be fintech companies out there tackling the unbanked/underbanked space, however, KoinWorks has a best in class approach tailored to the needs of SMEs and entrepreneurs that we believe will have a significant impact on the future sector.

In a statement, MDI Ventures CEO Donald Wiharia said, “Investing in KoinWorks is investing in the financial literacy of underbanked and underserved communities. We are ecstatic to be in concert with a team that understands the importance of each step in the journey of entrepreneurship and SME growth.“

Startup accelerator Y Combinator announced this morning that it has updated its terms, providing participating companies with more total cash. The group will now invest $500,000 in batch startups.

The money comes in two different forms. The first is the well-known Y Combinator equity deal, worth $125,000 for 7% of accelerated startups. The group will now also offer $375,000 in the form of an uncapped SAFE note — a simple agreement for future equity — with a “most favored nation” clause.

Uncapped means that there is no defined maximum price at which the $375,000 SAFE will convert to shares, while the “most favored nation” language ensures that Y Combinator gets as good a deal as anyone else in a later conversion.

That Y Combinator is now offering more capital to startups is not surprising; indeed, that it took this long for the group to update its terms is the bigger surprise. Still, a half-million dollars is much more in keeping with where the pre-seed and seed-stage investing markets have headed in recent years, namely to larger dollar amounts at higher prices.

The updated terms do not mean that the accelerator itself will have any less preserved upside in portfolio companies. In fact, you could argue that Y Combinator’s updated terms are defensive in that it is offering more capital in addition, but not in place of, its traditional equity stake in companies that pass through its doors. So the accelerator may be better able to attract the best early-stage startups with larger checks, even as it puts its initial equity investment to work at a price point that has proven historically lucrative.

As an institution, Y Combinator has been updating itself as the startup market has evolved. From a focus on in-person work, YC went remote during the pandemic. The result of that switch was more participating startups from other countries and markets, by TechCrunch reckoning. The group has also moved to remote demo days, something that we’ve appreciated here at TechCrunch as we no longer have to drive down from San Francisco to a large room with too few chairs.

It will be interesting to see how rival accelerators react, if at all, to Y Combinator’s updated terms set.

The value of bitcoin fell under the $40,000 mark in early morning trading today.

The popular cryptocurrency sold off sharply this morning, while rival tokens like ether also lost value. Currently worth $39,831 per coin, bitcoin is off 4.3% and ether 5.1%, according to Coinbase data.

While it is always risky to cover price changes in the crypto world, the fall in the value of bitcoin has crossed the threshold from notable to material. Yahoo Finance indicates that bitcoin’s recent all-time high saw the cryptocurrency trade as high as $68,789.62 per coin. Today’s price puts bitcoin’s current drawdown at just over 42%.

That’s twice the swing required for bitcoin to have entered a technical bear market, and four times what it would need to meet the requirements of a correction.

But price declines in the value of certain cryptocurrencies are not slowing the decentralized world. Crypto-focused publication The Block noted this morning that NFT trading volumes at the popular OpenSea marketplace are strong to start the year. So, web3 activity appears strong by some measures, despite recent price declines; whether today’s selloff will have an impact on NFT trading activity, to stick with that particular example, is not yet clear.

For other crypto market participants, the selloff could harm near-term results. There is a historical, positive connection between rising crypto prices and trading volumes. Companies like Coinbase and others make their daily bread off trading fees, meaning that falling crypto prices are generally bearish for their financial performance. Of course, the past is not a perfect predictor of the future, but today’s selloff is not precisely bullish.

Cryptos are not the only volatile asset that is trading lower this morning: Tech stocks as a whole are off 1.81% (Nasdaq Composite), while software stocks are off an even more painful 2.62% (WisdomTree Cloud Computing Fund).