17/ And they and others are funding an increasingly global set of fintech companies
18/ All of this has made fintech the #1 category for unicorns
19/ So we have smart founders paired with smart investors tackling a giant market
Add in recent successful fintech exits which ultimately serve to spur more financing
The venture "circle of life"
20/ So a ton of smart innovation capital is flowing into fintech
The 2nd force is unbundling of financial services
When legacy FS companies think about markets, they only get excited by giant markets
We can call this the "curse of the TAM"
21/ Bastardizing Jeff Bezos quote on margins, we find legacy banks, payment firms, insurers, etc obsess on TAM
And thus leave openings for startups who are unafraid to 'niche down' to build a beachhead in a market
22/ Here are examples of what most legacy FS folks might argue are small TAM markets that startups are willing to tackle and building valuable franchises in
"Teen-focused challenger banks"
23/ BNPL comes to every service, product imaginable
You think a large legacy financial services firm is going to tackle BNPL for weddings or auto dealers?
Hell no
Ain't no TAM in that
24/ How about giving access to an asset class like supply chain financing or sports memorabilia or startups?
No legacy FS firm is going to put resources ($$, their best people, etc) on this
And these are where startups build credibility and grow from
25/ Imagine being at a big bank or payments co and pitching
"We should build an app to help divorced parents manage shared expenses"
or
"Let's focus on unbanked workers, mostly 1st and 2nd immigrants"
These are not the types of ideas you bring if you want to move up
26/ I'm not saying all these cos are great ideas / will succeed
But a handful of them will make it and start doing other things
Look @stripe's relationships which suggest their moves into BNPL, banking, b2b payments, etc
Product "land & expand"
27/ So lots of capital + great unbundling means these startups can and will grow quickly
Now let's go back and look at the most valuable financial services firms from 2018
28/ Since then, 9 of 14 have actually seen market cap declines
This is against the backdrop of a crazy bull market
29/ Now, let's look at the valuation climbs of some of the insurgent fintech companies
Quotes are by media outlets / pundits over time :)
30/ God I wish I bought Square at its vastly underperforming IPO
31/ Coinbase has gone from Series A to ~$50B market cap in 8 years
32/ And Stripe, everyone's favorite unicorn has grown to $95B in 10 years
33/ Can't do animations on Twitter so bear w/ me on this one
x-axis is age of co
y-axis is valuation
The OGs in FS are 60-200+ years old (the dots on the right)
On the left is the new guard
They're not as big (yet) but they've created massive value in a fraction of time
34/ I was reminded of this great graphic on technology adoption over time
The telephone took 105 years to reach 90% of US households
While the internet & cellphone did it in 15 years
Something similar is occurring in financial services
35/ The level of creative destruction coming to financial services is massive and it is now coming not gradually, but suddenly
Last thought
Or actually a question
All the fintech unicorns at present are worth ~1 JP Morgan Chase
Who would you buy?
36/ Want the full "Gradually, then Suddenly: The Sequel" presentation?
Lots of good data and dataviz on financial services and why incumbent FS firms better get their isht together
So it's public peers are 4x to 5x larger in terms terms of revenue
And they're growing 2.5x to 4.5x faster
Add in a further discount for illiquidity given Airtable is private, the valuation is prob south of $991 million
Asana has the lowest price/revenue multiple of the bunch at 6.61x which is how we arrive at the $991M
Asana is also growing at almost 3x the rate of Airtable off revenue that is 4x larger
It's not hard to imagine that this brings down the multiple of Airtable to 3 to 5x which would equate to a valation of
$450M to $750M
That'd be a discount of 93-96% vs that Dec 2021 valuation
The company is cutting costs and repositioning for profitability which makes sense in this market but given the current likely valuation, all investors after the March 2018 Series B are likely underwater
They're also talking about a future IPO but getting back to anywhere close to that $11.7B valuation would require reigniting massive growth and making that price:revenue to growth ratio look more appealing
As always, if you believe any of my assumptions in the above are incorrect, please comment and I'll update the analysis if the additional context dramatically changes the results
If you want to go deep on the space, we analyzed @airtable & peers as well as products in the space in Jan 2023
The numbers have evolved a bit but the storyline remains the same.
The massive Airtable equity funding tally was something that caught our eye then as well
If you're a fan of math, you might also like this analysis of Flexport's valuation
Bragging about headcount was 1 of the most corrosive trends in startup land over the last many years
I was guilty of it too
Somehow larger growing headcount became a positive signal of success for companies
When in reality, it may more often than not be a negative signal
If you look at articles about unicorns, you'd rarely see revenue figures but you'd see founders/CEOs bragging about taking the team to 800 by year-end
Fundraising and headcount became 2 false proxies for success
But what are the real negatives of more headcount?
It may be symptomatic of or lead to ("may" is important here)
- indicate lack of focus
- belief that scale comes from ppl not systems
- a lack of focus on culture
- a non-performance driven culture
- execs motivated by empire-building
- excess complexity & slower velocity