Cendana has raised a $30 million ‘fund of funds’ for VCs managing $15 million or less

Cendana Capital, a San Francisco-based fund of funds manager, has amassed stakes in more than 100 venture firms since launching in 2010. For the most part, it did this by focusing on managers who are raising funds of $100 million or less in capital, even foregoing stakes in beloved outfits like Forerunner Ventures and Uncork Capital as their assets under management ballooned well beyond that amount.

Yet as the market changed, however, Cendana founder Michael Kim began to play with that formula. Last spring, for example, when he closed on $278 million in new capital commitments, he said planned to invest in the seed-stage managers he has always backed, but that he planned to funnel a small amount of capital to pre-seed managers raising $50 million or less, as well as to invest in a sprinkling of international managers.

Now Kim is back with a brand-new fund that sees him covering even more ground. Called Cendana’s Nano fund, it has raised $30 million in capital from existing Cendana backers to invest in up to 12 investment managers who are piecing together funds of $15 million or less capital. There are simply too many smart people right now making smaller bets for Cendana not to make the move, he suggests. We talked with Kim about the fund — and the changing landscape more broadly — in a chat has been edited lightly for length.

TC: What’s the thesis behind this Nano fund?

MK: The seed market has evolved a lot over the last 18 months to 24 months. You have this whole world of Twitter VC, meaning people who have a lot of strong opinions and an operator-investor perspective, but who may not have substantial funds behind them. You have solo capitalists like Lachy Groom and Josh Buckley, who’ve gone out and raised hundreds of millions of dollars. You also have the AngelList rolling funds. I think there are probably more than 100 rolling funds out there, and probably 95% of them are [headed by] people who are working at the big tech or private tech companies, and it’s more of a vehicle of convenience for their friends to invest alongside them.

TC: And you think they need more capital than is floating out there already?

MK: I think we are the only institutional LP that is focused at this stage, because as you know, many of the funds of funds and university endowments and family offices have to write big checks, so they’re not going to be investing a little bit into a tiny $10 million fund.

TC: What are you looking for exactly?

MK: The goal is to find the next Lowercase Capital. Not everyone knows this, but Chris Sacca’s first fund was $8 million and it returned 250x. Manu Kumar of K9 Ventures — his first fund was $6.25 million and returned 53x. So you can generate substantial alpha with these smaller funds.

Historically, we would meet with fund managers, and when they said, ‘We’re going to raise a $10 million to $15 million fund,’ we were like,’Okay, sounds interesting. Let’s talk when you’re raising your second fund.’ But we realized that we’re missing out an entire segment of the market. So Nano was created to capture that.

TC: Why draw a line in the sand at $15 million?

MK: First, if you’re going to be running a $100 million seed fund, you have to be writing $1.5 million to $2 million checks, and that’s a super competitive space right now, because not only are there other seed funds but also a lot of firms — Founders Fund, Sequoia Capital, Lightspeed, General Catalyst — that are very active at the seed stage. We’re coming across a lot of these managers who want to stay small, because by writing $300,000 to $400,000, they’re not competing against Sequoia or Forerunner Ventures; they’re just sliding into the round.

TC: Do you worry they will just get washed out of that investment later through subsequent checks from bigger players?

MK: Right now, we now have more than 100 portfolio funds within Cendana, and we did some data analysis. We looked at the fund size, and then the average ownership of each fund. And it turns out there’s a baseline of about 15% of a fund, meaning if you’re a $100 million fund, the average ownership stake [you have in your startups] is around 15%. If you’re a $50 million fund, the average ownership is about 7.5%.

We then looked at performance across our fund managers, and it turns out that of funds with $50 million in capital — our better-performing funds — have more ownership than 7.5%. They have more like 10% to 12%. Now, when you look at these tiny funds, if you’re a $15 million fund, 15% of that [should equate to] 2.2% ownership, but we are seeing that these tiny funds are actually getting more like 4% to 5% ownership. They’re punching above their weight because of who is involved.

TC: Who have you backed so far?

MK: The first one is Form Capital, a fund from Bobby Goodlatte and Josh Williams. Both were early at Facebook; Bobby led the team that designed Facebook Photos and was later an [entrepreneur-in-residence] at Greylock. Josh cofounded Gowalla (acquired by Facebook).

TC: How big a fund are they raising and how much are you giving them?

MK: They raised a $15 million fund, and our strategy is to [account for] 20% of [each of these funds], so we wrote them a $3 million check.

The second fund manager is Jeff Morris Jr.; he runs a fund called Chapter One. He was a senior product guy at Tinder and and an active angel, and he raised a $10 million fund last year into which we wrote a $2 million check.

TC: And the third?

MK: The third manager hasn’t closed the fund, so I can’t disclose his name, but he was a very early employee at Uber and ran their data teams.

The last is an interesting example because this person could probably go out and raise $100 million, but to my point about not wanting to compete against everyone in the world in writing a big check, he’s content to write [sub $500,000] checks into interesting data analytics and AI and machine learning companies, and everybody wants him involved because of his experience and his network of data scientists worldwide.

TC: When Chris Sacca dove in, it was his full-time job, I think. Do you care if these managers are focused solely on investing?

MK: No. With Nano we’re investing in people who may actually have a day job, which would not be a fit for our main fund, but with our Nano fund, our aperture is wider. We welcome anyone out there looking to manage $15 million or less to reach out.

TC: Well, to be clear, you have some criteria. What is it?

MK: No matter who we invest in, they have to have investment experience and an investment track record. What we really look for at the end of the day is a person who has some sort of advantage — whether it’s domain expertise or networks. So you could be an amazing computer scientist in Pittsburgh at Carnegie Mellon and if you’ve made some investments [we’d talk with you]. It could be someone coming out of Stripe or PayPal or Facebook or an entrepreneur in Atlanta.

TC: A $30 million fund of funds is going to get committed pretty fast in this market. Is the plan to raise maybe one every year?

MK: We have an incredible top of the funnel, and as you’re alluding, we’re going to be inundated. But we walk in there and try to meet with everybody.

We’re also in discussions with our existing fund managers to create a nano fund for [some of] them. So, you know, imagine one of our fund managers, running a $100 million fund. Why not create a $10 million nano vehicle with them where they could write $250,000 to $500,00 check? They don’t want to fill up their fund with these small checks, but you could see how, if they were to create this smaller vehicle, it could be very interesting for them for a returns perspective.

TC: So you’d write them a check for a third of this nano fund . . .

MK: And their LPs would fill in the rest. I’m sure they’d be excited to do it.

from TechCrunch https://ift.tt/3m9wCHi

Spain’s Glovo picks up $528M as Europe’s food delivery market continues to heat up

On the heels of Deliveroo raising more than $2 billion ahead of its debut on the London Stock Exchange this week, another hopeful in the food delivery sector has closed a super-sized round. Glovo, a startup out of Spain with 10 million users that delivers restaurant take-out, groceries and other items in partnership with brick-and-mortar businesses, has picked up a Series F of $528 million (€450 million).

Glovo aims to become the market leader in the 20 markets in Europe where it is live today, in part by expanding its “q-commerce” service — the delivery of items to urban consumers in 30 minutes or less — and it will be using the money to double down on that strategy, including hiring up to 200 more engineers to work in its headquarters in Barcelona, as well as hubs in Madrid and Warsaw, Poland.

This is a milestone funding round not just for the company, but its home country: it marks the largest-ever round raised by a Spanish startup.

“We started in Spain, where you have access to far less capital than other countries in Europe. We do more with less and that’s made us leaner,” said Sacha Michaud, the co-founder of the company, in an interview this week. “We’ve got our own strategy and it seems to be working.”

The funding is being led by Lugard Road Capital and Luxor Capital Group (the former is an affiliate of the latter), with Delivery Hero, Drake Enterprises and GP Bullhound also participating. All are previous backers of Glovo.

“We’re thrilled to have the continued backing of Luxor Capital Group and all of our existing investors. Over the last few months, we’ve moved very, very quickly but our vision remains unchanged,” said Oscar Pierre, Glovo’s other co-founder and CEO, in a statement. “This investment will allow us to double-down in our core markets, accelerate our leadership position in places where we are already very strong and continue to expand our excellent Q-Commerce division, as well as bring new innovations to our unique multi-category offering to extend more choice to our customers.”

Valuation is not being disclosed with this round, but when it raised its $166 million Series E in December 2019 — just ahead of the Covid-19 pandemic that truly changed the face of delivery services in many parts of the world — the company had a valuation of $1.18 billion, according to PitchBook data. Michaud would only confirm to me that it was “definitely an up-round,” which would put it at at least $1.7 billion, based on that estimate.

The funding comes on the heels of a very busy period of fundraising in the sector as investors the race to get in on the delivery of hot food, groceries and other necessities in Europe — a fast-growing business model in the most normal of times that blasted off in the last year as an essential service for consumers confined to their homes, often by government mandate, to stave off the spread of the coronavirus.

Just in the last few days, Gorillas in Berlin raised $290 million on a $1 billion+ valuation for its on-demand grocery business; Everli out of Italy (formerly called Supermercato24) raised $100 million (Luxor is one of its investors too); and reportedly Zapp in London has also closed $100 million in funding. Earlier in March, Rohlik out of the Czech Republic bagged $230 million.

Amid all those private raises, we also had Deliveroo’s IPO yesterday, which — as IPOs so often do — exposed some of the trickier aspects of the business. The company — which is backed by Amazon, a formidable player in food and essentials delivery — easily raised the most of money of the month — $2.1 billion in the private placement ahead of the listing — but then proceeded to slog out its debut on the LSE with shares progressively slumping throughout the day and ending up significantly lower than its offer price.

Areas of concern around Deliveroo serve as cautionary tales for all of them: not just how you price an IPO and what allocation you give to future shareholders, but also the unit economics of your business model, the price of competition, and where labor costs will fit into the bigger picture (and the bottom line).

“We’ve got our own road and we’re doing a pretty good job,” Michaud said in an interview when the subject of Deliveroo IPO came up. “We’re still David versus the Goliath out there.” Part of that for Glovo has also included some decisions made on rationalizing its own business: the company sold off its Latin American operations in a $272 million deal to its backer Delivery Hero last year to focus solely on Europe and adjacent geographies.

But even before the Series F being announced today, Glovo itself was one of the companies raising money for specific purposes, and those efforts point to how it plans to proceed in the weeks and months ahead on its own growth plan.

In January Glovo announced a strategic deal with Swiss real-estate firm Stoneweg, which pitched in €100 million ($117 million), to co-develop a number of “dark stores” in areas where Glovo already operates to improve its distribution networks and help speed up its delivery times.

It’s part of a fulfillment operation that complements the hot food that Glovo sells on behalf of its restaurant partners: the dark stores are stocked with items Glovo sells on behalf of other companies such as Carrefour, Continente, and Kaufland, as well as a lot of independent retailers, companies that have not built their own (costly) B2C delivery networks but have wanted to provide that service to consumers nonetheless.

Although the company today promises deliveries in 29 minutes, in many markets, Michaud said, it’s already averaging 10-15 minutes and the aim is to make that the norm everywhere. This is in part an operational challenge, but also a technical one: this is one reason why the company is adding in more engineers and building out its platform.

Restaurant delivery of hot food remains the biggest category of business for Glovo, he added, but the company has seen a surge of demand for the other kinds of items and is expanding that accordingly.

“With Covid, we’ve been delivering pretty much anything you want in your city,” Michaud said. “Covid has been an accelerator and has educated the market. Instead of crossing city and spending time waiting and buying items, anything I want and Glovo will bring it to me. Why wouldn’t I do this?” He believes the more traditional rush of people doing in-person shopping is “definitely not gong to come back,” with groceries to be in the same position as restaurants in a couple of years. That’s leading the company to expand into more areas: “clothing, fashion and pharmacy, flowers. Hopefully we’re now in a good position to do that.”

That position, of course, will involve an important component of this three-sided marketplace. In addition to the restaurants and retailers that partner with Glovo, and the consumers who use the app to buy and get things delivered, there are the delivery people and couriers that do the first- and last-mile work to get the goods into the system, and then to customers. The couriers in the system work today largely on a freelance basis, often balancing jobs on competing apps, and their efforts, and how they are compensated for them, have been the focus of a lot of scrutiny both here and in the U.S.

In short: the companies say couriers have an amazing opportunity to earn money; but many couriers and organizations supporting their cause believe the reality to be far from that.

That has played out with a number of very public protests and is starting now to trickle into formal legal moves to ensure these workers’ rights. Apart from the ethical angle here, it’s of concern also to investors focused more on the bottom line and the costs that they might mean for businesses that already work on thin margins (or in many cases, losses). Indeed, it’s very likely that these issues formed part of what weighed on Deliveroo in its public listing and poor debut.

This has also been playing out for Glovo very directly. The company lost a supreme court case in Spain in September last year, where the court rejected its attempt to classify a courier as self-employed rather than an employee. Now, the country is working on more formal reforms to put in place guidelines and requirements for companies to mandate benefits to those workers. That will take some time to play out, and in the meantime there are also wider European efforts underway to harmonize the approach across all countries in the EU.

This is a complicated issue, but essentially Glovo advocates to keep the couriers as self-employed, but supports the idea of benefits provided to those workers nonetheless by those taking their services (such as Glovo), and it wants the approach to be Europe-wide.

“We think there needs to be more social rights for workers,” Michaud said. “We believe in a freelance model with additional social rights that companies like Glovo would give them, but in many countries the regulations are not there for that to happen.”

But it’s also not all cut-and-dry since it doesn’t support some of the other aspects of that labor reform. “We think the rigid strict tables and minimum wages are not the way to fix the problem,” he added, explaining that the flexibility of the business model does not support that. In short, it’s negotiating and hoping that it can claw in some expenses while conceding others.

Investors seem ready for these kinds of questions and their longer-term impact, given that the trade-off for them is a foothold in what has been one of the most successful tech efforts in the region.

“Our investment in Glovo reflects our commitment to a company and leadership team that continues to innovate and disrupt in the on-demand delivery space,” said Jonathan Green, founder and porfolio manager at Lugard Road Capital, in a statement. “As a long-term investor in Glovo, we are excited to watch the company continue to delight its customers through its unique multi-category offering, amidst an enormous market opportunity in both existing and new geographies.”

from TechCrunch https://ift.tt/3fwXFLu

Celonis announces significant partnership with IBM to sell its process mining software

Before you can improve a workflow, you have to understand how work advances through a business, which is more complex than you might imagine inside a large enterprise. That’s where Celonis comes in. It uses software to identify how work moves through an organization and suggests more efficient ways of getting the same work done, also known as process mining

Today, the company announced a significant partnership with IBM where IBM Global Services will train 10,000 consultants worldwide on Celonis. The deal gives Celonis, a company with around 1200 employees access to the massive selling and consulting unit, while IBM gets a deep understanding of a piece of technology that is at the front end of the workflow automation trend.

Miguel Milano, chief revenue officer at Celonis says that digitizing processes has been a trend for several years. It has sped up due to COVID, and it’s partly why the two companies have decided to work together. “Intelligent workflows, or more broadly spoken workflows built to help companies execute better, are at the heart of this partnership and it’s at the heart of this trend now in the market,” Milano said.

The other part of this is that IBM now owns Red Hat, which it acquired in 2018 for $34 billion. The two companies believe that by combining the Celonis technology, which is cloud based, with Red Hat, which can span the hybrid world of on premises and cloud, the two together can provide a much more powerful solution to follow work wherever it happens.

“I do think that moving the [Celonis] software into the Red Hat OpenShift environment is hugely powerful because it does allow in what’s already a very powerful open solution to now operate across this hybrid cloud world, leveraging the power of OpenShift which can straddle the worlds of mainframe, private cloud and public cloud. And data straddle those worlds, and will continue to straddle those worlds,” Mark Foster, senior vice president at IBM Services explained.

Celonis pushes beyond process mining into automated workflow tooling

You might think that IBM, which acquired robotic process automation vendor, WDG Automation last summer, would simply attempt to buy Celonis, but Foster says the partnership is consistent with the company’s attempt to partner with a broader ecosystem.

“I think that this is very much part of an overarching focus of IBM with key ecosystem partners. Some of them are going to be bigger, some of them are going to be smaller, and […] I think this is one where we see the opportunity to connect with an organization that’s taking a leading position in its category, and the opportunity for that to take advantage of the IBM Red Hat technologies…” he said.

The companies had already been working together for some time prior to this formal announcement, and this partnership is the culmination of that. As this firmer commitment to one another goes into effect, the two companies will be working more closely to train thousands of IBM consultants on the technology, while moving the Celonis solution into Red Hat OpenShift in the coming months.

It’s clearly a big deal with the feel of an acquisition, but Milano says that this is about executing his company’s strategy to work with more systems integrators (SIs), and while IBM is a significant partner it’s not the only one.

“We are becoming an SI consulting-driven organization. So we put consulting companies like IBM at the forefront of our strategy, and this [deal] is a big cornerstone of our strategy,” he said.

IBM CEO Arvind Krishna wants to completely transform his organization

from TechCrunch https://ift.tt/2PQAJfu

Tips for founders thinking about doing a remote accelerator

Hello and welcome back to Equity, TechCrunch’s venture capital-focused podcast, where we unpack the numbers behind the headlines.

For this week’s deep dive, the Equity team got ahold of three founders from the recent Y Combinator batch (more here, and here) to chat through their experiences with a remote accelerator. TechCrunch was curious if the program lived up to founder expectations, how extreme timezone differentials were handled, and how easy it was to build camaraderie during a digital program. Oh, and how their demo day went.

Here’s who is on the show:

• Benjamin Croc, a founder at BrioHR (TechCrunch coverage here)
• Trisha Bantigue, a founder at Queenly (TechCrunch coverage here)
• Adam Alpert, a founder at Pangea (TechCrunch coverage here)

The short version is that the founders were generally happy with Y Combinator being remote, and that the setup allowing them to stay in their normal location was plus. We also asked the founders for learnings regarding how to best handle remote accelerators in the future.

More from Equity on Friday, at which point we’ll put Y Combinator aside for a good while.

Equity drops every Monday at 7:00 a.m. PST, Wednesday, and Friday morning at 7:00 a.m. PST, so subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, Spotify and all the casts.

from TechCrunch https://ift.tt/2PK0UUS

Facebook denies its algorithms are a problem, but launches a tool to more easily view a non-algorithmic News Feed

Following years of backlash over its algorithms and their ability to push people to more extreme content, which Facebook continues to deny, the company today announced it would give its users new tools to more easily switch over to non-algorithmic views of their News Feed. This includes the recently launched “Favorites,” which shows you posts from up to 30 of your favorite friends and Pages, as well as the “Most Recent” view, which shows posts in chronological order. It also introduced new controls for adjusting who can comment on your posts, and other changes.

The features themselves aren’t entirely new, in some cases, but they’ve been made easier to get to with the addition of a Feed Filter Bar on mobile for changing the view of the News Feed, and an option menu on your posts to control who can comment.

The “Most Recent” view of the News Feed has long existed but has been buried in the extended “more” menu (the three-bar hamburger icon) on the Facebook mobile app. It’s not as useful as it sounds because it shows you all the posts from both friends and Pages in a single chronological view. If you’ve been on Facebook for many years, then you’ve probably “Liked” a number of Facebook Pages for brands, businesses and public figures. These Pages tend to post with more frequency than your friends, so the feed has become largely a long scroll through Page updates.

However, if you still prefer the “Most Recent” view, the Feed Filter Bar will give you a tool to easier switch back and forth between this and other views. The feature will launch on Android first, then roll out to iOS.

Meanwhile, Facebook has offered a way to prioritize who you see in your News Feed through a “See First” setting, but the newer “Favorites” feature rebrands this effort and gives you a single destination under Settings to select and deselect your Favorites, including favorite Pages.

The updated commenting controls are a new take on a habit many Facebook users have already adopted — when they share a post only to a given audience, like family or friends, while excluding other groups like work colleagues or even specific people. Now, users will have the option to instead share their posts but control who can engage in conversations. Public figures, for example, may choose to adopt the feature to restrict their audience to only those brands and profiles they’ve tagged.

Facebook says it will also show more context around suggestions it displays in the News Feed with its “Why am I seeing this?” feature that will explain how its algorithmic suggestions work. It says several factors may be at work here, in terms of what’s shown and why — including your location, whether you or people like you have engaged with related topics, groups or Pages, and more.

The changes arrive at a time when Facebook, along with other tech giants, has come under fire for its role in spreading misinformation leading to deadly events, like the storming of the U.S. Capitol, and serious public health crises, like vaccine hesitancy during a pandemic. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg last week testified before the House’s Subcommittee on Communications and Technology about its failures to remove dangerous misinformation and its allowing of extremists to become more radicalized and to organize online.

Facebook’s official position, however, is that it doesn’t play a role in directing people towards problematic content — they seek it out. And people’s News Feeds are only a reflection of their own choices, in that way.

These thoughts and more were detailed today by Nick Clegg, VP of Global Affairs for Facebook, where he insists personalization algorithms are common across tech companies — Amazon and Netflix use them, too, for instance. And ranking simply makes what’s most relevant to the user appear first — effectively blaming users for the problems here. He also throws back the decisions to be made around Facebook’s role in misinformation peddling to the lawmakers, adding: “It would clearly be better if these [content] decisions were made according to frameworks agreed by democratically accountable lawmakers.”

from TechCrunch https://ift.tt/31NemKF

Ensemble raises $3M to help divorced parents avoid arguing about money

At the age of 14, Jacklyn Rome saw firsthand how divorce can impact families, and how arguing about finances both during and after the process can impact children.

The experience stuck with her. As an adult, after leading new product launches at Uber and Blue Apron,  Rome came up with the concept behind her startup, Ensemble. The expense tracking app quietly launched in the App Store in 2020 with the mission of reducing tension among co-parents and making sure kids’ needs aren’t negatively impacted by a divorce.

Today, Ensemble is coming out of stealth with $3 million in seed funding from TTV Capital, Lerer Hippeau and Citi Ventures.

Put simply, Ensemble’s mission is to improve the lives of co-parents and their children by giving parents a streamlined way to track shared expenses.

“Most co-parents either figure out finances on their own ad hoc or rely on child support payments — however, child support only covers food, shelter and clothing, which is only half of the cost of raising a child,” Rome points out. The other half of expenses, including medical bills, extracurricular activities, transportation, etc., often end up being discussed by co-parents via text messages and spreadsheets.

Ensemble founder and CEO Jacklyn Rome. Image courtesy of Ensemble

Ensemble kicked off a six-month pilot in January 2020, when the credit-first version of the app went live. In April 2020, the dual functionality version — where two parents could connect their accounts — went live.

Since its App store launch last spring, Ensemble has seen “strong organic growth and referrals” from its users, according to Rome. Ensemble’s users, on average, are tracking over $1,000 per month in shared expenses for their children.

Roughly 30% of Ensemble’s downloads were organic in people discovering the app in the App Store, she said.

“Even in the most amicable divorces, money is the number one thing that divorced parents end up arguing about. In more contentious divorces, it often gets used as a power lever among two emotionally charged individuals with no other tools at their disposal,” Rome said. “We set out to build a product that eases tense communication about shared finances and serves the nuanced needs of separated parents.”

For now, the app is free. Ensemble plans to begin monetizing with the use of funds from its seed round.

Eventually, the company is planning to build out a paid subscription model. Over the long term, it’s also planning to expand beyond being an expense tracking app to offering a suite of financial products and primarily banking products, for things like shared credit cards with tight spending controls, Rome told TechCrunch.

“Ultimately, we want to help make sure that the children of divorced parents are not at a financial disadvantage when it comes to building for their financial future,” she said.

Are subscription services the future of fintech?

Rome founded Ensemble while she was an Entrepreneur in Residence (EIR) at Co-Created, a venture studio based in New York, with support and funding from Citi Ventures’ D10X program.

“A key insight that Citi had given us was that for them as a bank, it’s incredibly hard to acquire new customers because people don’t often change banks,” Rome said. “One of the few times in life that people regularly change banks is when they get divorced. And that sparked the thought process around the pain points that people feel through their divorce, specifically as it relates to finances.”

Luis Valdich, managing director of venture investing at Citi Ventures, says the bank has been “tracking for some time” how the financial needs of individuals have been evolving given societal trends, while at the same time identifying potential investment opportunities in startups that address underserved needs.

“One growing gap is for divorced or separate parents to track and manage shared expenses,” Valdich said. “Ensemble solves this problem by striking the optimal balance of delivering ease of use, visibility and empathy for modern co-parents, minimizing the need for back-and-forth communications. While it is early, we found its user experience to be substantially superior to the alternatives in the market, and Jacklyn brings a unique perspective on the challenge Ensemble is trying to solve.”

And while he could not speak to specific plans between Citi and Ensemble, Valdich said that Citi Ventures’ approach has always been to invest in companies with an eye toward future collaborations.

“We are proud that the majority of our portfolio has been commercialized within Citi and/or with Citi clients and we will certainly explore opportunities for collaboration when mutually convenient for both parties, as we always do,” Valdich added.

Meanwhile, TTV Capital Partner Mark Johnson said his firm has been investing in fintech for over 20 years and that it’s clear “people are craving digital tools to simplify communication and finances.”

He called Ensemble’s app “a sleek and simple platform” that addresses those needs for co-parents.

from TechCrunch https://ift.tt/39wTxXV

Diversity-focused Harlem Capital raises $134M

Harlem Capital is announcing that it has raised $134 million for its second fund — well above its target of $100 million and its initial cap of $125 million.

The firm was founded in 2015 by managing partners Henri Pierre-Jacques and Jarrid Tingle. It started out as an angel syndicate with the goal of investing in founders from diverse backgrounds, then announced its first VC fund of $40 million at the end of 2019. The firm’s investments include e-commerce companies Pangaea, CashDrop, Malomo and Repeat, as well as wellness startups, Wellory, Expectful, Wagmo and Shine. 

It hasn’t invested all of that initial $40 million yet — the firm says it’s aiming to make five more investments from Fund I. Apparently 61% of Harlem Capital’s Fund I portfolio companies are led by Black or Latinx executives, while 43% are led exclusively by women. While the firm was founded in New York City’s Harlem neighborhood — where I live and am typing these words — it invests in startups across the United States.

Meanwhile, with Fund II, it’s shifting its focus to seed stage investments in companies that are post-product, aiming to invest between $750,000 and $1.5 million and take a 10% stake or more. The firm says it’s industry agnostic, but will be focusing on both consumer and enterprise tech with the new fund. It will also introduce the idea of “culture carry,” where the founders backed by the fund will split 1% of the carry — basically, they’re getting a stake in the fund’s profits and in each other’s success.

The focus on diversity extends to the limited partners who invested in Fund II, with 42% of LPs being women or people of color.

“We are focused on building an institution and platform to support diverse founders for many generations,” said Managing Partner Henri Pierre-Jacques in a statement. “Fund II is one step closer to our mission, but we know the work and journey continues. We are excited to provide more capital and resources to even more diverse founders tackling unique problems.”

Last week, Harlem Capital also announced that it had promoted Brandon Bryant to partner and Gabby Cazeau and Kelly Goldstein to principal.

from TechCrunch https://ift.tt/2Pf4832