It is 7 a.m., 50° and headed to 57° and raining again! Details for the next 10 days are here.
SF Gate ran a story yesterday on Oakland as the new hub for tech start-ups. Interesting comment by Brennen Byrne, who began in the start-up world in SOMA and likes the diversity of Oakland. I had an appointment last week in SOMA and felt the same way returning to the Mission. Everyone in SOMA seemed under 40, male and appeared particularly dextrous at checking a cellphone while walking. Nothing against men under 40, but it felt a little like being on a well-heeled campus.
Brian Singer, a graphic designer, took his texting while driving campaign to another level, putting up billboards across the city, including one in the Mission District where he met with a reporter from CBS local to talk about the campaign.
A piece in the Sunday NYTs by Jeff Sommer explains how 2014 does and doesn’t feel like the last dot.com bubble. How it does: Facebook’s $19 billion for WhatsApp and $2 billion for Octulus VR, both companies with modest sales. A look at the revenue for tech start-ups purchased recently, however, proves that they aren’t as dismaying as those for biotech start-ups.
In the first quarter this year, 45 percent of all companies that conducted initial public offerings were in biotech and not a single one reported “positive earnings,” according to Professor Ritter, who is an authority on I.P.O.s. In other words, they all lost money, yet they were valued at a median of $199 million.
Half of those biotech I.P.O.s had no revenue at all. For those that did have some, their median 12-month sales amounted to only $200,000, he said. That compares with a median of $125 million for nonbiotechs with initial offerings. READ MORE TO SEE HOW THIS BUBBLE DIFFERS.