Steve Thomas - IT Consultant

The 2022 startup market might feel like a slowly unfolding train wreck, but there’s good news to be found — provided you are willing to take a longer-term perspective.

Sure, startup layoffs are spiking, venture capital is slowing, and the stock market is a hot mess. Underneath each drumbeat of negativity, however, there’s more positivity than you might expect. And, extracting one more nugget from the recent Battery Venture quarterly cloud update, the doomsayers are ignoring history.

So this fine weekend, let’s find the sunshine amid the clouds. Get it? Clouds. OK, no more SaaS dad jokes. To work:

Founders, here’s the good software news

The good news is a variation of the bad news and is often positive thanks to historical comparisons. Sure, this is good news of a sort, but it’s welcome all the same:

  • The Bad News: Startup layoffs are spiking.
  • The Good News: Far less than in early 2020.

As Homebrew’s Hunter Walk noted recently on his personal blog, startup layoffs hit a local maximum last month, reaching 16,000 and change, per the Layoffs.FYI tracker. Given that the same data service recorded effectively zero startup layoffs during the Q3-Q4 venture boom, the figure is bad. But! It’s also far less bad than the damage startups endured in early 2020.

For example, startup layoffs reached nearly 10,000 in March 2020. And then for months, they stayed hot, with more than 25,000 recorded in both April and May of the same year. Just 70 individual startup layoff events were noted by Layoffs.FYI in May 2022, far fewer than the more than 100 per month recorded from March through May 2020.

Things are worse than they were in late 2021 from a startup staffing cut perspective, but we’re hardly setting records here, even looking just at recent data.

  • The Bad News: Venture capital is slowing.
  • The Good News: From historically record levels.

Super, the Indonesian social commerce startup focused on small towns and rural areas, announced today it has raised an oversubscribed $70 million Series C. The round was led by NEA with participation from Insignia Ventures Partners, SoftBank Ventures Asia, DST Global Partners, Amasia, B Capital, TNB Aura, Bain Capital chairman Stephen Pagliuca, Goldhouse, and Xendit CEO Moses Lo.

This brings Super’s total raised so far to $106 million since it was founded in 2018. TechCrunch last covered the startup at the time of its $28 million Series B in April 2021.

Steven Wongsoredjo, the co-founder and CEO of Super, says that Indonesia’s Tier 2, Tier 3 and rural area’s gross domestic product is three to five times lower than Jakarta, yet the cost of consumer goods there is higher by 20% to 200% thanks to supply chain issues. Not only that, but more than 30% of Indonesia’s GDP comes from East Java, Kalimantan and East Indonesia, making those places a valuable source of potential revenue for fast-moving consumer goods. By streamlining the supply chain and giving FMCG brands an easier way to reach consumers in rural areas, Super is also able to lower the costs of goods.

The startup plans to use its funding to expand into Kalimantan, Bali, West Nusa Tenggara, East Nusa Tenggara, Maluka and Papua over the next few years.

Super currently works with third-party logistics providers to create a hyperlocal logistics platform that it says can deliver consumer goods to thousands of agents within 24 hours of an order. The company’s agents, or resellers, can either be individuals or local shops called warungs.

Super says it currently has thousands of community agents, and aggregates and distributes millions of U.S. dollars worth of goods to communities each month. It now operates in 30 cities in East Java and South Sulawesi, primarily targeting areas that have a GDP per capital of $5,000 USD or lower.

Part of the funding will also be used to apply machine learning to the SKU’s in Super’s warehouse, to help the startup understand what sells best and where, so it can better determine the kind of inventory it holds. It is launching two private-label brands, including in cosmetics, and will create an app feature for agents that will let them track end-consumer transactions.

 

Super, the Indonesian social commerce startup focused on small towns and rural areas, announced today it has raised an oversubscribed $70 million Series C. The round was led by NEA with participation from Insignia Ventures Partners, SoftBank Ventures Asia, DST Global Partners, Amasia, B Capital, TNB Aura, Bain Capital chairman Stephen Pagliuca, Goldhouse, and Xendit CEO Moses Lo.

This brings Super’s total raised so far to $106 million since it was founded in 2018. TechCrunch last covered the startup at the time of its $28 million Series B in April 2021.

Steven Wongsoredjo, the co-founder and CEO of Super, says that Indonesia’s Tier 2, Tier 3 and rural area’s gross domestic product is three to five times lower than Jakarta, yet the cost of consumer goods there is higher by 20% to 200% thanks to supply chain issues. Not only that, but more than 30% of Indonesia’s GDP comes from East Java, Kalimantan and East Indonesia, making those places a valuable source of potential revenue for fast-moving consumer goods. By streamlining the supply chain and giving FMCG brands an easier way to reach consumers in rural areas, Super is also able to lower the costs of goods.

The startup plans to use its funding to expand into Kalimantan, Bali, West Nusa Tenggara, East Nusa Tenggara, Maluka and Papua over the next few years.

Super currently works with third-party logistics providers to create a hyperlocal logistics platform that it says can deliver consumer goods to thousands of agents within 24 hours of an order. The company’s agents, or resellers, can either be individuals or local shops called warungs.

Super says it currently has thousands of community agents, and aggregates and distributes millions of U.S. dollars worth of goods to communities each month. It now operates in 30 cities in East Java and South Sulawesi, primarily targeting areas that have a GDP per capital of $5,000 USD or lower.

Part of the funding will also be used to apply machine learning to the SKU’s in Super’s warehouse, to help the startup understand what sells best and where, so it can better determine the kind of inventory it holds. It is launching two private-label brands, including in cosmetics, and will create an app feature for agents that will let them track end-consumer transactions.

 

Fintech startups are taking the downturn harder than most other sectors, data indicates. So much so that even the largest and best-known private fintech companies are suffering from embarrassing revaluations.

Data collected by Andreessen Horowitz, a well-known venture capital firm with a history of investing in financial technology — most recently, crypto — shows that public fintech companies are suffering from greater valuation declines than other technology categories. At the same time, new information from Fidelity’s various funds indicates that the investing giant has changed its mind about the worth of some of startup land’s highest-flying companies, including Stripe.


The Exchange explores startups, markets and money.

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


There is a well-worn chestnut in Silicon Valley that no matter the market conditions, the best startups will always be able to raise. The argument implies that during looser market conditions, as we saw in parts of 2020 and 2021, startups with less core strength will be able to raise capital only to later struggle when the market turns. In contrast, the best startups, no matter the macro situation, will plug along.

In one sense, the saying is a tautology; of course the best companies will have the highest chance of success — they are, after all, the best companies. In another sense, it’s a narrow comment. Yes, the best startups will always be able to raise. But at what price?

Left unsaid is the fact that even the private-market upstarts that have collected the most plaudits, valuation, capital and revenue during a boom may endure a repricing when the market shifts. That’s what’s going on with Stripe, though we shouldn’t be too shocked given the cyclone of data points supporting Fidelity’s latest. Let’s explore.

What’s Stripe worth?

Let’s start with a broad look at the value of technology companies. The Bessemer Cloud Index has lost more than half its value since late-2021 highs, with the basket of modern software companies falling from a peak of $65.51 to just over $30 today. If we slice the market more finely, we can see even greater valuation compression in fintech.

Enter Future, a16z’s in-house publication that it built during a fit of anti-media sentiment among the technology class. Per this piece on the investing group’s blog, public fintech companies’ valuations peaked at around a 25x forward revenue multiple in October 2021. Since then, the same fintech cohort of stocks has fallen to around 4x their forward revenue (we’re reading from a chart, so the data cited here is more directional than exact).

Other categories of public tech company saw sharp declines, like enterprise companies’ peak forward multiples falling from perhaps 16x or 17x to around 7x. But no category took more stick since the 2021 bubble burst than fintech. (This is one reason why we are not seeing fintech IPOs this year, among other contributing factors.)

From that perspective, seeing Fidelity revalue its stake in Stripe is not a surprise.

To get a feel for how Fidelity has valued and revalued its Stripe stake over time, we’ll pull from Business Insider and Bloomberg reporting, as well as filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission:

French startup Upway has raised a $25 million Series A round led by Exor Seeds and Sequoia Capital. The company sells second-hand electric bikes that have been refurbished and are ready to roll.

In many ways, Upway reminds me of online marketplaces for cars. The startup provides a seamless experience for buyers who want to buy an electric bike but don’t want to pay the full price of a new electric bike.

Behind the scenes, Upway buys electric bikes from both consumers and companies. The team brings those bikes to its warehouse, checks them, repairs them in some cases and lists them on their website. Of course, Upway tries to generate a small margin on every sale.

In addition to Exor Seeds and Sequoia Capital, Origins is also participating in today’s round. Origins is the VC firm backed by many professional soccer players, such as Blaise Matuidi, Olivier Giroud, N’golog Kanté, as well as Antoine Dupont (a rugbyman).

Existing investor Global Founders Capital is investing once again in the startup. Henri Moissinac, the co-founder and CEO of micromobility startup Dott, is joining the round as well.

Right now, the startup operates in its home country France and Belgium. Bikes are shipped directly to customers from the same warehouse in Gennevilliers near Paris. But the company is already thinking about its next moves.

Upway will soon launch its marketplace in Germany, the Netherlands and the U.S. By the end of 2022, the company will have three different warehouses.

Sales of electric bikes have been growing rapidly in Europe. Manufacturers are benefiting from this boom, including some startups that have raised massive rounds, such as Cowboy and VanMoof . But they remain expensive goods and they also suffer from supply chain constraints.

Bikes (electric or not) will play an important role in the future of urban mobility in major European cities. That’s why it’s important to provide new ways to access bikes. Electric bikes more specifically can even replace many car rides outside of major hubs.

Some cities have invested heavily in subsidized bike-sharing services, such as Vélib’ in Paris. Some companies, like Dott, are buying thousands of electric bikes for their free-floating bike rental services.

Companies like Swapfiets and Dance are also important when it comes to democratizing electric bikes. These startups let you rent a bike for a flat monthly subscription fee. When you cancel your subscription, you hand out the bike.

Coming back to Upway, people who want to use an electric bike to go to work or ride to school may consider getting their own bike. In addition to new bikes, it’s important to provide different offerings.

Upway makes electric bikes more affordable. All bikes come with a one-year warranty and there’s no stock issue as the company only lists electric bikes that it can sell right way. Some customers can also take advantage of Alma to buy now and pay later, in multiple installments without any interest.

The startup also provides accessories, such as helmets, lights, bike locks and child seats. Eventually, you could also imagine adding some insurance product to your basket before checking out.

Overall, Upway sells 400 different models from brands like Moustache, O2feel, Keola, Veloci, Arcade, Cowboy and VanMoof. There are currently 20 million electric bikes on the European and American roads. Those millions of bikes could all end up on a second-hand marketplace like Upway. And I’m not surprised that the startup managed to raise another $25 million.

A bike repair person checking the seat of a bike

Image Credits: Upway

Just how hard will it be for some high-flying unicorns to go public? The question gets more serious and worrisome by the week.

To understand how much the late-stage market has changed in the last few months, we’re once again pulling public market data that we will contrast against mega-unicorn Databricks’ known results. Recall that we executed this experiment in February, when the data analytics company announced that it closed 2021 with $800 million in ARR, and in April, when we took a look at the company under the harsher lights of a declining market for software revenues.

That downward trend continued, meaning that it’s time to take another pass at the exercise.


The Exchange explores startups, markets and money.

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


I promise that we’re not picking on Databricks for any reason other than that it committed the well-known sin of being more transparent than is traditional during its growth phase. By that I mean it shared a host of data points during its life as a private company. For that we are thankful. Sadly, because many of its peers preferred to hide their — let’s be clear: lesser — results, we are left using Databricks as our benchmark for how much things have changed in SaaS land.

It’s never great to punish the honest for their candor, but we also can’t avoid working to understand the current market — it’s our job. So, more with Databricks data today, even if we are reaching the point of cruelty.

So let’s chat results and valuations and see just how much work Databricks might have ahead of it to go public. Keep in mind that extension rounds at prior terms are coming back into vogue (Gusto is one example of this trend among the multi-unicorns), so we could see the company collect quiet capital without a public repricing before it does list. Our eyes, of course, are peeled.

Now, let’s have some fun.

A historical tour of Databricks’ valuation multiples

Pulling from our February and April coverage, a historical rundown of Databricks’ valuation and fundraising:

  • Q3 2019: $200 million run rate, $6.2 billion valuation — 31x run-rate multiple
  • End of 2020: $425 million ARR, $28 billion valuation — 66x ARR multiple
  • August 2021: $600 million ARR, $38 billion valuation — 63x ARR multiple
  • End of 2021: $800 million+ ARR, $38 billion valuation — 47.5x ARR multiple

Knowing what we did in April about the historical growth of Databricks’ revenue, we estimated that the company was at around $1 billion in ARR at that date, so we’ll go ahead and calculate the following ratios using both $1 billion and $1.1 billion ARR numbers for the company. You can decide which you think is a fairer estimate.

Now, at $1.0 billion in ARR, Databricks is worth 38x its annual recurring revenue. At $1.1 billion, 34.5x. That’s not a huge difference, mind, so no matter how you handicap the company’s recent growth, Databricks is worth around mid-to-high 30x its current top line. The question is how far from market reality that number is today.

HitPay has almost everything SMEs need to run their businesses.

In addition to being an online payment gateway, it also offers tools like point-of-sale software with card readers, plugins, payment links and no-code online stores.

The Y Combinator alum announced today that it has raised $15.75 million in Series A funding led by Tiger Global, with participation from returning investors Global Founders Capital and HOF Capital. It is currently used by over 10,000 merchants in Singapore and Malaysia, with plans to expand into more Southeast Asian markets, including Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines.

Co-founder and CEO Aditya Haripurkar told TechCrunch HitPay started in 2016 as an e-wallet, but then pivoted toward being a SME-facing platform in 2018 as a virtual POS product. As its team began to understand the needs of SMEs more, it started to develop the other tools on the platform.

HitPay’s Series A funding will be used for building a payments infrastructure from the ground up, with the intention of saving SMEs money and helping them expand their business. This will include business tools and payments infrastructure that includes all commonly used payment rails in each market, including bank transfers, cards, e-wallets and BNPL services.

“SMEs have very specific requirements, so we wanted to build a one-stop no code platform,” said Haripurkar. “That entails all our plugins, point of sale software, business software, online stores and recurring payments. We’ll be focusing on building these free SaaS tools in addition to building up payment rails, which are focused currently on Singaporean and Malaysian merchants. But in each country we launch in, that will look very different, so we will look at local payment methods in every country. That’s the biggest challenge for our team and where most of our investment and time is going as well.”

The first step HitPay will take as it expands into new countries is to get regulated in each market it operates in, to allow it to build payment infrastructure for SMEs from the ground up. Then it will integrate the most popular payment methods. For example, in Singapore, HitPay currently works with about 10 to 15 payment methods.

HitPay’s no-code platform allows SMEs to unify their online and offline payment stacks. It is typically used by medium-sized businesses, with annual revenue between $500,000 to $2 million. Most are in the retail segment, but Haripurkar expect that to evolve as well.

News broke yesterday that Substack, the popular newsletter publishing tool, called off fundraising plans for a Series C after a raise at its price target failed to materialize. The company’s revenue base, when compared with its hoped-for valuation, was too small to support the numbers that the startup had in mind.

This is not a unique story. Many startups that raised at high prices last year will run into snags as they try to attract capital at new, higher valuations. The why in this case has been the topic of conversation in technology circles for months now. In short, market conditions that led to a venture capital bonanza last year have slowed or reversed, leaving many startups sitting on private-market valuations that no longer translate to present-day investor appetite.


TechCrunch+ is having a Memorial Day sale. You can save 50% on annual subscriptions for a limited time.


Substack is striking a combative tone with media coverage of its fundraising exploits, telling The New York Times — which broke the news of the company’s Series C attempt — that its comment on the story was its jobs page. Certainly, Substack still has capital and is hiring, but that it wanted to raise more funds is also illustrative.

The Substack Series C saga is a good moment to refresh ourselves on just how much the market has changed. And what’s more, we can go back in time and vet our prior coverage of the company’s finances, grading what we mathed out when it last raised. Everyone is going to look a little silly, so let’s get into it!

Valuation mechanics

Recall that Substack last raised a $65 million Series B at what PitchBook described as a $675 million post-money valuation. Here’s the latest from the Times on what the company wanted to raise in a Series C:

Substack held discussions with potential investors in recent months about raising $75 million to $100 million to fund the growth of its business, said the people, who would speak only anonymously because the talks were private. Some of the fund-raising discussions valued the company at between $750 million and $1 billion, they said.

Notably, if Substack had raised $75 million at a $750 million post-money valuation, it would have been effectively a flat round from its Series B. That that valuation appears out of reach today implies that the only way that Substack would be able to raise a new round of equity funding would be with a valuation cut. Down rounds are not popular, so it isn’t a surprise that the company put its fundraising plans on hold at least for now.

Why did Substack struggle to attract high eight to low nine figures of capital at a nine- to 10-figure valuation? Because it had a seven-figure top line last year, the Times reports, writing that “Substack has told investors it had revenue of about $9 million in 2021.”

That nugget lets us do some interesting math:

In every startup cycle, there are attempts to get consumers goods faster than ever before, the hope being that technology has improved to the point that such deliveries are financially possible. Infamous dot-com-era flameouts are now ancient history, but they do indicate just how long founders and their backing investors have been working on the concept.

The dream of super-quick consumer deliveries never went away. Amid Uber’s ascent, a number of startups tried to build companies focused around fast food deliveries, leveraging pre-cooked food and a supply of drivers in urban areas to deliver the eats. Sadly, SpoonRocket and Sprig failed to survive.


The Exchange explores startups, markets and money. Read it every morning on Extra Crunch or get The Exchange newsletter every Saturday.


Instacart was a big deal, with a goal of one-hour grocery delivery, a model that it has expanded to include next-day delivery and the like. Some major platforms are tinkering with sub-hour deliveries, absorbing costs to work on the idea of even speedier consumer service.

Startups have also been hammering away on the idea in the last few years, leaning on so-called dark stores — mini warehouses, more or less — to provide a local supply of goods that can be whisked to consumers’ doors in record time. GoPuff has raised a tectonic amount of capital, for example, as have a host of other startups around the world. The model, called quick commerce — q-commerce for short — attracted billions of dollars in funding in recent years.

And as in previous cycles, it’s falling apart. This is not to say that every company in the q-commerce market today will fail; GoPuff has major backers, and despite some issues, it may pull off its model. But we’re seeing, once again, startups that raised huge sums of money to build super-rapid consumer delivery models lay off staff, attempt to merge, and otherwise stay alive after they consumed mountains of cash.

Who could have seen this coming?

Fast is expensive, slow is cheap

It is not hard to see why q-commerce caught the attention of both founders and investors. Uber Eats helped keep its parent company’s gross merchandise volume afloat during COVID, when demand for ride-hailing services tanked. And DoorDash grew like a proverbial weed over the last few years, leading to a mega-IPO and share price that crested at $257 in late 2021.

Consumers wanted deliveries, and they wanted them quickly, and companies that were in that game were doing well. So why not try the same model, but even faster? Wouldn’t consumers love that even more? So long as you had a model in mind that could make the math shake out at least on paper — thank you, dark stores! — it was off to the races.

Fintech startup and alternative credit asset manager Viola Credit, has closed its latest $700 million fund which provides asset-based lending capital to FinTech, PropTech, and InsurTech startups.

If this FinTech play reminds you of Silicon Valley Bank, then think again. The latter provides corporate lending, also known as venture lending. Instead, Viola provides lending capital to Fintech lenders. So, for example, for a company like Affirm which provides installment plans to consumers, Viola Credit provides the lending capital to provide these receivables. Another example is Market Finance, a tech-enabled SME lender in the UK, which needs lending capital to finance loans.

As Ido Vigdor, General Partner at Viola Credit, says: “There is a disruption happening in financial services. These are tech companies backed by VCs but they also need financial partners due to their capital-intensive businesses in order to do this. We are at the intersection by providing lending capital solutions to these new tech-based financial solutions.”

The FinTech sector boomed in 2021, with global FinTech funding reaching a record $132B.

The massive digital transformation going on right now has given rise to non-bank and alternative lending companies. In 2021, FinTech Lenders originated over $120 billion in loans.

Viola Credit, will partner with FinTech platforms across the US, Western Europe, UK, Australia, and New Zealand.

Competitors to Viola include Victory Park Capital, Atalaya Capital, or Pollen Street Capital in the UK.

Be greedy when others are fearful, and fearful when others are greedy. Consensus is expensive. There are cliches aplenty when it comes to making money, and many investing koans deal with doing the opposite of what the masses are up to at any given point.


The Exchange explores startups, markets and money. Read it every morning on Extra Crunch or get The Exchange newsletter every Saturday.


The logic works to a degree in startup land. The Web 2.0 chestnut that great companies are founded in hard times has been adapted by the web3 crew, for example. When crypto prices are going up, money piles into the sector. When crypto prices crash, folks in the web3 world love to call the regular and painful downturns “building periods.”

What matters more than sloganeering? Capital flows. And despite all the well-worn wisdom that investing when markets are cracking and the public is running scared, we are seeing venture capital totals slow around the world — in crypto, in particular.

Heading into today, it seemed likely that the falling pace of venture investment that we’ve observed in recent months would persist as crypto hibernated between price events. And then Andreessen Horowitz announced this morning that it has raised a $4.5 billion crypto-focused fund. As our own Lucas Matney put it, that’s a “whopper” of a fund size.

Putting said capital where own mouth resides

A beef that one could have with venture capital is that it’s not always very adventurous. For example, during the SaaS era of the last decade or so, venture investing was increasingly metricized and, to a degree, figured out. Sure, some investors were still putting money into moonshots — literally, at times — but it seemed that the easy, well-trod path to recurring software revenue nirvana was absorbing so much market oxygen that most VCs looked more like mini crossover funds than venture outfits.

And we’re seeing even those bets pull back as the stock market takes body blows and market sentiment about growth versus profitability swings away from the former and toward the latter.

What a16z is doing is something akin to quadrupling down on the web3 market with its largest fund to date, precisely as its competitors tighten up their purse strings. This is what it actually means to be greedy when others are fearful, and a16z knows it. From Matney’s look at the new fund:

Crypto Fund IV continues to be helmed by longtime GP Chris Dixon, who has seemed to up his public persona in recent months, particularly on Twitter, where he breathlessly defends the web3 space from its detractors, getting into occasional spats with figures like Block’s Jack Dorsey and Box’s Aaron Levie. The continued skepticism among plenty of investors and entrepreneurs has grown louder in recent weeks following the particularly ugly collapse of the Terra ecosystem and its stablecoin UST, which imploded seemingly overnight, evaporating tens of billions in value while renewing calls among federal lawmakers to fast-track legislation aimed at reining in the industry.

When asked whether the market’s cooling will scare traditional firms away from continuing their crypto bets, a16z’s Arianna Simpson told TechCrunch that “it’s likely other firms will pull back,” but that “the size of our new fund speaks to the level of excitement and belief we have in this category.”

Hell yeah.

It’s been a tough few years for Berlin-based femtech hardware startup Inne which came out of stealth R&D in the fall of 2019, shortly before COVID-19 hit Europe. By January 2020, founder and CEO Eirini Rapti tells us she was busy making final inspections ahead of the launch of its debut product — a connected device it calls a “minilab” for at-home, saliva-based hormone testing to support fertility and cycle tracking — but then, in just a few weeks, the region was plunged into lockdown and everything changed.

Hardware startups are rarely smooth sailing at the best of times. But the coronavirus pandemic created a cascade of new challenges for Rapti and her team around supply chain and logistics — upsetting their careful calculations on unit economics. The pandemic also called a halt to a major piece of research work the startup had lined up with a US university to study its hormone-tracking method for a key contraceptive use-case — a product it had intended to prioritize but could not bring to market ahead of the study which is required to gain regulatory approval.

In a matter of weeks, Inne was forced to freeze its big launch as it tried to figure out how best to move forward — and, indeed, whether it should launch the product at all in such a challengingly reconfigured environment.

“Due to COVID-19 we’ve had to really shift around our plans,” says Rapti, talking to TechCrunch via video chat. “We had loads of unpredicted supply chain issues… There were so many fuck-ups that came up with COVID-19! It’s unbelievable what happened.

“I remember our last interview [in October 2019], I was super optimistic — I’m still very optimistic — sort of really looking forward to get all of our tech out to the world. We were setting up our production line when I spoke to you. We had John Hopkins [research university] agreeing to our contraceptive study. Like, the world was my oyster… And then I came back from a last inspection of the goods coming off the production line in January 2020 and we were hearing about what was happening in China but we were not really conscious of it and then we were so busy with pre-sales and whatever.

“And then of course a month later we didn’t know if we were going to get raw materials from China. We didn’t know if the factories that were working within Europe were going to even be able to have people in the factory. ”

The start of the planned contraception study also kept being postponed, as the US research institution which had agreed to conduct it, pre-pandemic, understandably prioritized work related to COVID-19 itself.

The upshot for Inne was a shock freeze on its best laid plans — plans Rapti had been working towards since 2017 when she founded the business and kicked off R&D to get the at-home hormone testing product to market.

“2020 for me started on this big high — we had our final products, we got our approval [to sell the device in Europe], we are launching pre-sales. I think we had 200 people buy the product and then we kind of had to stop because we didn’t know if we were even able to deliver these 200… This is how bad it was,” she adds.

As well as having shelled out to set up a production line it suddenly had to suspend, Inne had also doubled the size of its team to prepare for scaling. But suddenly the message from the investment world was ‘slow everything down’, recounts Rapti. “So I was like why didn’t you tell me two months ago?!… My whole strategy came crumbling down.”

The supply chain and logistics disruption — some of which has lingered even while pandemic lockdowns have eased — also forced Inne to concentrate most of its effort on the German market in Europe — “because we wanted to contain, as much as possible, the logistical nightmare”, as she puts it.

“Electronic chip shortages of course are affecting everyone… but it’s also as simple as backlog on logistics,” she explains, discussing how COVID-19 has dialled up difficulties for the fledgling hardware business. “Your shipments take longer or your air freight is much more expensive and all of a sudden your price per unit becomes really high — and for a small company like us, for a startup, if you cannot demonstrate your unit economics and your growth what can you demonstrate? And quite frankly I was sitting there for a few months — and I think it was the first time I froze in my career where I felt I have no idea what I will be able to show in the next six months!”

By summer 2020, Rapti was facing a big decision over how to move forward while the business was still mired in uncertainties around supply chain resilience and with no new date on when it would be able to launch contraception as it still hadn’t found a replacement partner to do the study.

Additionally, it was unclear when the startup would be able to raise more funding in such a challenging climate. Yet, given the expanded team Rapti had put in place ahead of the 2020 launch, she needed to consider burn rate — which meant deciding whether she had to let staff go to give the startup the best chance of surviving so much disruption.

The choice boiled down to two options, per Rapti: Either cut everything right back, keeping only a bare minimum of staff to extend the runway and find another, probably European-based institution to carry out the contraceptive study; or reduce cash burn a bit but go ahead and launch the minilab with only fertility and cycle tracking — meaning there could be no user messaging on natural contraception, limiting the product’s utility to (only) women trying to get pregnant or those looking for help with an irregular cycle.

In the event, Rapti went for the second choice — saying she was, above all, keen to keep the team she’d built up. She also saw an opportunity to use a partial launch to at least learn about the market, even though continuing supply chain constraints meant Inne had to limit the number of devices shipped to make sure they could provide the full service to the first buyers (its subscription-based progesterone testing service works with packs of single-use daily testing strips to gather the user’s saliva sample, with testing performed by inserting the moistened strip into the minilab for analysis).

“The first year we could circulate — I think — 500 devices, or very little, without having delays. And I think we closed last year with close to 2,000 customers,” Rapti adds.

Outside Germany, Inne also has some early users in Austria, Switzerland and the U.K. — but the launch has clearly been a very different and more painstaking process than Rapti had envisaged from her high in fall 2019.

Another cloud she may not have expected to see looming on the horizon now is the prospect of the US Supreme Court overturning constitutional protections for abortion in the US — which, followed a leaked opinion on Roe v Wade earlier this month, is already causing consternation over the risks that digital services like period tracking apps could pose to US women if their data can be used to track them or to try to build prosecutions around their reproductive health.

“I’m horrified by what is happening to the US,” says Rapti when asked whether she is concerned about this risk. “The reality is we are not right now in a position where, legislatively wise, someone could ask for this data to be used against women in court — as of today. So what I truly believe is it would be counterproductive to go backwards and, instead of giving women access to and understanding of their own data, to say actually we need to scrap all that because it could be used against them.

“I think this would be really a step backwards. But rather I think what our job is — as female health companies — is to defend the rights of our users and also make the data as anonymous as possible so it cannot be traced back to the actual user.”

Rapti argues there is a clear way to separate profile data that is used for marketing from health data generated by usage of the product — and says Inne’s approach for the latter is currently to use double encryption and split usage data and also where it’s processed (some of which she says happens on the user’s device) so that it’s not all sitting in a single repository which it could be easily ordered to hand over.

But she also says the startup would be prepared to create further protections for user data in response to any changes to the law that threaten women’s rights.

“We need to be legally on top of things and make sure that whenever there is a law that is passed we change our product fast in order to guarantee this anonymity as much as possible,” she tells TechCrunch. “And I would rather we invest in that legal capacity on our side than to say we stay away from having women tracking their data because the government could use it. But I definitely see it as our job. We need to be on top of legislative lobbying, if I can put it that way, and make fast changes to our product in the way that data is structured so that we can protect [our users] as much as possible.”

Series A expansion

Today, Inne has better news: An extension to that $8.8M Series A round it closed back in 2019. It’s taking an addition $10M now so it can stock up on raw materials and retool its production line to unplug any remaining production bottlenecks. The expansion to the Series A is led by DSM Ventures, with Borski Fund and Calm Storm Ventures also participating, along with a number of angels, including Taavet Hinrikus (Wise), Dr Fiona Pathiraja and Rolf Schromgens (Trivago).

But not only that — Rapti says it’s planning to expand its product offering to include another hormone test — for cortisol (aka, the stress hormone; tracking cortisol can be useful for athletic performance, as well as for links to wider women’s health issues).

It is also set to its first steps outside Europe later this summer, via a US partnership with a women’s health brand called Phenology. The tie-up will be exclusively focused on perimenopause — so Inne will be getting a toe in the water in that major market while it waits on regulatory clearance for its digital contractive.

The US partner will offer Inne’s device to a subset of its users as a way to track changes in their hormones during the early stage of the menopause — supplementing the services it offers them, which includes personalized wellness programs and  supplements. (Notably, Phenology’s parent, a company called Hologram Sciences, shares an investor with Inne — DSM Ventures, aka the venture arm of Dutch vitamin giant DSM — so you can see the investment synergies at work there.)

“It was clear there was a synergy and a very clear geographical separation also — US and then Europe — and they’re not interested in contraception which I always wanted us to own fully globally,” notes Rapti. “And that’s kind of how, through seeing that Hologram Sciences would actually be a great partner for expanding our use-cases to the US, we decided on DSM Ventures being an investor in this round.”

She confirms Inne has finally been able to get a contraceptive study underway this year with a new partner in Europe, saying she expects the work to be completed around November — paving the way for Inne to be able to launch a contraceptive product in Q1 next year. That will put it into competition with the likes of Natural Cycles‘ basal-temperature based ‘digital contraceptive’ (which got regulatory clearance in Europe back in 2017); and period tracking app Clue’s more recent cycle-tracking system which gained FDA clearance for contraception in March 2021, to name two existing products.

So, demand willing, the pieces needed to scale Inne’s hormone-tracking femtech business do finally look to be slotting into place.

“I think it was the right thing to do,” adds Rapti, returning to her decision to go ahead and launch in the middle of the pandemic — to “see who buys the product” and “connect with the customers” — even if that choice meant delaying the launch of the contraceptive product.

Femtech hardware startup Inne's team pictured in a group photo

Image credits: Inne

“It took me a long time to find especially the science and data science team that losing them over a crisis like this would have been, in the longer term, the worse ordeal,” she adds. “Because you find scientists, you make them product people and product thinking and then to let them go… It’s our core competence so that’s the first thing that I thought.”

Certainly Inne will face more competition when it finally launches its rival contraception. But that’s not necessarily a bad thing in such a novel space where women must be convinced they can trust new entrants’ methods over more tried and tested products for avoiding pregnancy like the pill and condoms.

Going ahead and launching with just fertility and cycle tracking also, of course, allowed Inne to road-test its team as it switched into commercial operations, serving those early customers. So it had a chance to iron out operational and service wrinkles with a small customer base, ahead of what it hopes will be wider scaling — as it expands both its production capacity and the product’s feature set with the help of the extra Series A funding.

Hormone tracking for the quantified self

So who are Inne’s early adopters? “We attract women who are on the less regular side of the cycle, so either have had several miscarriages or have had hormonal issues or have had very fluctuating cycles. So our data is biased towards irregularity,” says Rapti, also noting that users tend to be computer savvy and active on social media, where it does much of its marketing.

Ages of users range from 18 to mid 50s — but with a “peak” between 28 to 38, per Rapti.

Tracking progesterone means Inne can tell users whether they have ovulated or not — which, in turn, could help them detect a month when they have not ovulated, which (for people seeking to get pregnant) could help them understand challenges they may be having. For others, hormone tracking may be helpful to navigate patterns in an irregular menstrual cycle.

Other femtech products can rely on different approaches to try to predict fertility — such as temperature measurements or algorithmic analysis of cycle tracking data — but, as Rapti puts it, “the beauty of progesterone is it can really tell you has it happened or not”, so it’s offering a binary confirmation.

She says the majority of Inne’s users at present are using it for fertility tracking to help them get pregnant, with a smaller proportion (30% last year; but so far this year it’s getting closer to 40%, per Rapti) using it for cycle tracking to manage irregular periods. But she emphasizes that usage is “fluid” and “a bit of a journey” as women’s needs also change.

“We have two modes in the app: You can choose it either to cycle track, basically, but with hormones or to get pregnant,” she explains, adding: “It is such a fluid journey for a women in our product because the data tells me that some women are starting to track their cycle and then they will change their goal in a couple of months so it looks like maybe they’re preparing or they just came off the pill etc.”

Rapti’s wider vision is for the product to be able to “offer something all the way from the first period to the last period” — which is why she’s so keen to get the contraception product launched (asked if she thinks it’ll be the bigger market she says she’s not sure — but, just in pure numbers terms, there are obviously more women of fertile age seeking to avoid pregnancy than wanting to get pregnant at any given moment); as well as to build out utility elsewhere, such as by expanding into cortisol tracking.

The forthcoming cortisol test will provide users with the ability to understand whether they are going through a prolonged period of stress that has chemically affected their body, per Rapti — which she says may in turn be impacting their fertility or sports performance.

Users will be able to specify whether they want to include cortisol tracking in their Inne subscription and, if so, they will be sent a mix of progesterone and cortisol testing strips. But while the former is typically a daily test (which should be taken within a ~three hour window in the morning), the cortisol test is different; it’s not intended to be taken daily but when it is performed it needs to be done multiple times per day (and then that process repeated at intervals).

“You build the profile daily, with cortisol,” explains Rapti. “You do five measurements in one day and you do them every month for example, or every two weeks. But it’s not about, you know, ‘I do a test today and I do a test tomorrow and I see how my stress is’. No, it’s really that you’re building a chemical profile of your day and then you look at that over a period of time to try and understand if you really are under sustained stress and it has chemically affected your body or not.”

The thinking behind adding a second hormone test is not to address a broader range of users but rather to give women more reasons to get the minilab into their lives, per Rapit, by encouraging them to “trust these hormonal insights”.

Inne founder and CEO Eirini Rapti

Inne founder and CEO, Eirini Rapti (Image credits: Inne)

A major update to the next release of Inne’s app will bring a raft of self-reporting options — around what it’s calling “symptoms and events” — which is intended to help users link their daily activity/feelings with hormonal changes they can track using the product.

“We are launching 41 symptoms and events that people have asked for but which will also help us give more specialist insights because we will correlate them with hormones in the coming months,” she says. “They fall in different categories — about exercise, nutrition, certain things such as headache or migraines which are related to hormones; skin conditions, hydration/dehydration. They go from exercise to lifestyle to food to skin. And different types of body pain.”

“The beauty of being able to do that with hormones is you really see [the chemical change] — the opportunity we have here is we know the chemical role of hormones, can we truly related them to self-reported symptoms? And to what extent can we do that,” she adds, confirming: “It’s a long term correlation project. We didn’t want to start with it because we wanted to make sure that hormonal data were always going to take the center stage so we needed a large data pool first to establish what we’re doing and then try to see if it can correlate.”

Here Inne’s products looks as if it could push into ‘quantified self’ territory — with potential utility overlap with a recent wave of biosensing startups and companies that are seeking to commercialize continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) hardware for a more general health/sports performance use-case (i.e. beyond the management of blood glucose for people with diabetes or prediabetes for which the CGM sensing tech was originally developed). And where there are similar question marks over the wider consumer utility of that sort of biosensing (i.e. whether the average consumer can usefully interpret all this real-time biological feedback).

But one built-in advantage Inne’s approach has vs CGM startups is it’s non-invasive. And a consumer may feel more inclined to try something experimental on the off-chance they could discover a helpful correlation if it only requires them to moisten a some test strips in their mouth a few times a month, rather than — in the case of CGM-based glucose tracking — having to live with a biowearable and its metal filament under the skin of their arm for weeks at a time.

Rapti says Inne’s plan is not to break out a totally separate service around cortisol tracking — although she stresses the test itself does involve a completely different user experience — rather the goal is to serve users who want to gain a deeper understanding of how hormones affect their bodies.

“Instead of selling new strips to a different woman what I’m trying to say is this is going to be your subscription and then you tell us what you’re interested in. And if you’re interested in both stress and cycle tracking or fertility then we will send you every month strips of both and we will instruct you what to do when. So we’re not looking to make upselling with new strips but more deeper hormonal understanding so the price will remain the same. And you’ll just get a combination of strips for that same monthly price,” she says.

“I had so many people in this raise who said oh that would be amazing for men, why don’t you sell it to men! Do you know what, I think it would be amazing for men but how about we wait a minute and just offer it to women!” she adds.

There is clearly lots more Inne could do and add. So an obvious challenge is how to create a clear marketing message around such a multifaceted product?

On that Rapti says they’ve got one big takeaway: Women want to get specific about the benefits — which means finding fora where they can discover the product but also get to ask their own questions.

“It is a very early market. I feel that women know that there’s so much they can learn about their bodies and quite frankly we are giving a new angle where we’re like — hey, look, we should be able to track our hormones because [women] have been excluded from research for all those years and if only we had been included we would have known so much more about medication, our bodies, everything around that. So let’s bridge that gap — that’s our mission. And at the same time they’re like this is great but what exactly can you do for me?” says Rapit.

“So the way we’ve been approaching it — what I can tell you works — is to be very precise on what benefit they can get. And that’s why Instagram and influencer marketing works because women get the chance to ask questions and to really understand if this will serve them or not.”