ncino
Auto Added by WPeMatico
Auto Added by WPeMatico
Software valuations are bonkers, which means it’s a great time to go public. Asana, Monday.com, Wrike and every other gosh darn software company that is putting it off, pay attention. Heck, even service-y Palantir could excel in this market.
Let me explain.
Over the past few weeks, TechCrunch has tracked the filing, first pricing, rejiggered pricing range, and, today, the first day of trading for BigCommerce, a Texas-based e-commerce company. You can think of it as a comp with Shopify to a degree.
Image Credits: IMGFlip (opens in a new window)
In the wake of the Canadian phenom’s blockbuster earnings report, BigCommerce boosted its IPO range. Yesterday the company did itself one better, pricing $1 per share above that raised range, selling 9,019,565 shares at $24 per share, of which 6,850,000 came from BigCommerce itself.
Before some additions, there are now 65,843,546 shares of BigCommerce in the world, giving the company an IPO valuation of around $1.58 billion.
Given that the company’s Q2 expected revenue range is “between $35.5 million and $35.8 million,” the company sported a run-rate multiple of 11.1x to 11x, depending on where its final revenue tally comes in. That felt somewhat reasonable, if perhaps a smidgen light.
Then the company opened at $68 per share today, currently trading for $82 per share. Hello, 1999 and other insane times. BigCommerce is now worth, using some rough math, around $5.4 billion, giving it a run-rate multiple of around 38x, using the midpoint of its Q2 revenue range.
Powered by WPeMatico
Today Jamf, a software company that helps other firms manage their Apple devices, raised its IPO price range.
The company had previously targeted a $17 to $19 per-share range. A new SEC filing from the firm today details a far higher $21 to $23 per-share IPO price interval.
Jamf still intends to sell up to 18.4 million shares in its debut, including 13.5 million in primary stock, 2.5 million shares from existing shareholders and an underwriter option worth 2.4 million shares. The whole whack at $21 to $23 per share would tally between $386.4 million and $423.2 million, though not all those funds would flow to the company.
At the low and high-end of its new IPO range, Jamf is worth between $2.44 billion and $2.68 billion, steep upgrades from its prior valuation range of $1.98 billion to $2.21 billion.
Jamf follows in the footsteps of recent IPOs like nCino, Vroom and others in seeing demand for its public offering allow its pricing to track higher the closer it gets to its public offering. Such demand from public-market investors indicates there is ample demand for debut shares in mid-2020, a fact that could spur other companies to the exit market.
Coinbase, Airbnb and DoorDash are three such companies that are expected to debut in the next year’s time, give or take a quarter or two.
In anticipation of the Jamf debut that should come this week, let’s chat about the company’s recent performance.
Observe the following table from the most-recent Jamf S-1/A:

From even a quick glance we can learn much from this data. We can see that Jamf is growing, has improving gross margins and has managed to swing from an operating loss to operating profit in Q2 2020, compared to Q2 2019. And, for you fans out there of adjusted metrics, that Jamf managed to generate more non-GAAP operating income in its most recent period than the year-ago quarter.
In more precise terms:
Profits! Growth! Software! Improving margins! It’s not a huge surprise that Jamf managed to bolster its IPO price range.
Finally, for the SaaS-heads out there, the following:

This data lets us have a little fun. Recall that we have seen possible valuations for Jamf at IPO that started at $1.98 billion to $2.21 billion, and now include $2.44 billion and $2.68 billion? With our two ARR ranges for the end of Q2, we can now come up with eight ARR multiples for Jamf, from the low-end of its initial IPO price estimate, to the top-end of its new range.
Here they are:
From that perspective, the pricing changes feel a bit more modest, even if they work out to a huge spread on a valuation basis.
Regardless, this is the current state of the Jamf IPO. Rackspace also filed a new S-1/A today, but we can’t find anything useful in it. A bit like the Jamf S-1/A from Friday. Perhaps we’ll get a new Rackspace document soon with pricing notes.
And, of course, like the rest of the world we await the Palantir S-1 with bated breath. Consider that our white whale.
Powered by WPeMatico
Welcome to The Exchange, an upcoming weekly newsletter featuring TechCrunch and Extra Crunch reporting on startups, money and markets. You can sign up for it here to receive it regularly when it launches on July 25th, and catch up on prior editions of the column and newsletter here.
It’s Saturday, July 18, and this is The Exchange. Today we’re wrapping our look at second-quarter VC, capping off the recent IPOs of some venture-backed startups, and digging into the hottest VCs while peeking at a new startup trend.
As July rubs along we’re getting deeper into the third quarter of 2020, meaning it’s time to close the books on Q2. To that end The Exchange combed through all the second-quarter VC data that we could this week.
But, despite working to grasp the health of the global venture scene, the United States’ own venture capital totals, and diving more deeply into AI/ML startups and how women-founded startups fundraised in Q2, there’s still more data to sift.
Keeping brief as we are a bit charted-out, New York City-based venture capital group Work-Bench released a grip of numbers detailing the city’s enterprise-focused startups’ Q2 VC results. Given that Work-Bench invests in enterprise tech, the data’s focus was not a surprise.
The numbers, per the firm, look like this:
The data is not surprising. B2B startups are raking in a larger share of venture capital rounds as time goes along, so to see NYC’s own enterprise-focused startups doing well is not shocking. (And if you add in the recent $225 million UIPath round, the Big Apple’s enterprise startups are even closer to their 2019 venture dollar benchmark, though the UIPath deal came in Q3.)
One last bit of data and we are done. Fenwick & West, a law firm that works with startups, released a report this week concerning Silicon Valley’s own May VC results. Two data points in particular from the digest stood out. Chew on these (emphasis TechCrunch):
The percentage of up-rounds declined modestly from 71% in April to 67% in May, but continued [to be] noticeably lower than the 83% up-rounds on average in 2019. […] The average share price increase of May financings weakened noticeably, declining from 63% in April to 43% in May. The results for both April and May were significantly below the 2019 average increase of 93%.
The Q2 data mix then shakes out to be better than I would have expected with plenty of highlights. But if you look, it isn’t hard to find weaker points, either. We are, after all, in the midst of a pandemic.

nCino and GoHealth went public this week. TechCrunch got on the blower afterwards with nCino CEO Pierre Naudé and GoHealth CEO Clint Jones. By now you’ve seen the pricing pieces and notes on their companies’ early performance, so let’s instead talk about why they chose to pursue traditional IPOs.
Our goal was to understand why CEOs are going public through initial public offerings when some players in the venture space have soured on traditional IPOs. Here’s what we gleaned from the leaders of the week’s new offerings:
nCino: Naudé didn’t want to dig into nCino’s IPO process, but did note that he read TechCrunch’s coverage of his company’s IPO march. The CEO said that his firm was going to have an all-hands this Friday, and then get back to work. Naudé also said that becoming a public company could help the nCino brand by helping others understand the company’s financial stability. The company’s larger-than-expected IPO haul (one point for the old-fashion public offering, we suppose) could provide it with more options, we learned, including possibly upping its sales and marketing spend.
GoHealth: Jones told TechCrunch that GoHealth’s IPO was oversubscribed, implying good pre-IPO demand. When it came to pricing, GoHealth worked through a number of scenarios according to the CEO, who didn’t have anything negative to share about how his company finally set its IPO valuation. He did bring up the importance of collecting long-term investors.
The method by which a company goes public is only a piece of the public-markets saga that companies spin. Once public, either through a direct listing or SPAC-led reverse-IPO, all companies become lashed to the quarterly reporting cycle. Even more common than complaints about the IPO process among Silicon Valley is the refrain that public investors are too short-term-focused to let really innovative companies do well once they stop being private.
Is that true? TechCrunch spoke with Medallia CEO Leslie Stretch this week to get notes on the current level of patience that public investors have for growing tech companies; are public markets as impatient as some claim?
According to Stretch, there can be enough space in the public markets for tech shops to maneuver. At least that was his take a year after Medallia’s own 2019 IPO (transcript edited by TechCrunch for clarity; additions denoted by brackets):
[Our] partnership with public investors has been phenomenal. They really test you, you know? They really test your proposition, [and] they test your operational resilience in a way that just makes you better. And they give you feedback. Our philosophy is feedback always makes you better.
What people want to do is they want to crest the really big growth rate [that] is unassailable, it can’t be challenged. And then you come out in public, and it’s a no brainer. And some companies managed to do that. But of the [thousands of Series] A rounds that took place in early 2000s, you know, only 75 companies made it public. Right? We’re one of them.
I’m not fearful. I don’t think people should be fearful of [going public]. They should partner with public investors. The stock price, and the quarter-to-quarter, will be what it will be. Don’t worry about that. It’s what are you building for the long term, and make sure you have enough cash, of course, to meet your ambitions. [But] also a bit of fiscal discipline actually makes your products better, because you think how about how you invest, and harder about your priorities. That’s my view on [the] public piece.
Who wants to bet that unicorns keep putting off their IPOs anyways?

Let’s wrap with some fun stuff, kicking off with the TechCrunch List, a dataset that set out to figure out which VCs were the most likely to cut first checks. I’ve already used it to help put together an investor survey (stay tuned). It’s in front of the Extra Crunch paywall, so give it a whirl.
If you are part of Extra Crunch, Danny also pulled out an even more exclusive list that we built off the back of thousands of founder comments.
And I have two trends for you to think on. First, a wave of startups are trying to make our new, video-chatting based world a better place to be. It will be super interesting to see how much space is left in the market by the incumbent players currently battling for market leadership.
Second, some startups are raising extension rounds not only because they need defensive capital, but because they’ve caught a tailwind in the COVID era and want to go even faster. So, from a somewhat safe move, some extension rounds these days are more weapons than shields.
And that’s all we have. Say hi on Twitter if there’s something you want The Exchange to explore. Chat soon!
Powered by WPeMatico
Hello and welcome back to Equity, TechCrunch’s venture capital-focused podcast, where we unpack the numbers behind the headlines.
This week was full of news of all sorts, but as we recorded, both Danny and Natasha “not Tash” Mascarenhas were still locked out of their Twitter accounts after a proletariat revolution on the social platform saw the ruling Blue Checkmark Class forced into silence. That’s not really what happened, but it sounds better than what actually went down at Big Social.
Anyway, Twitter accounts or not, the three of us gathered to parse through a wave of news:
It was a lovely time and there is a bit of show news. Namely that Equity is coming back to YouTube either this week or the next. So if you want to see us talk, soon you will be able to! Again!
Oh, and follow the show on Twitter. If you can, that is.
Equity drops every Monday at 7:00 a.m. PT and Friday at 6:00 a.m. PT, so subscribe to us on Apple Podcasts, Overcast, Spotify and all the casts.
Powered by WPeMatico
When Salesforce launched Force.com in 2007, it was the culmination of years of work to bring together a way to customize Salesforce and eventually to build applications on top of the platform. By using a set of Salesforce services, companies could take advantage of work that SFDC had already done, speeding up building time and reducing time to market. Today, the successor of Force.com is called Salesforce Platform.
But going that route didn’t come without some risk, because back in 2007 building atop a Platform as a Service (PaaS) wasn’t a common way of developing software. Even by 2012 when nCino launched its banking software solutions on Force.com, it likely raised some eyebrows by using a cloud platform as the backbone of its fintech offering.
Even though it probably took resolve, the approach worked, as evidenced this week when nCino went public — a debut that was met with a strong investor response. And nCino is notably not the first time that a company built atop Salesforce’s PaaS has gone public; nCino’s own IPO follows Veeva’s 2013 debut.
But astute observers for the Salesforce ecosystem will note that other successful companies have been built on the Salesforce cloud. As you will see, many successful companies have benefited from building on top of Salesforce.
Powered by WPeMatico
On the heels of nCino’s blockbuster debut, GoHealth’s public offering proved a more sedate affair, at least when comparing the two companies’ initial trading days.
GoHealth priced above its anticipated IPO range, selling more shares than initially planned in the process. By vending 43.5 million shares at $21 apiece — $1 per share more than the top of its preceding $18 to $20 range, and four million shares more than its target of 39.5 million — the insurance technology company put more than $900 million onto its balance sheet this week.
The debut is a win for Chicago’s industry and tech scenes. GoHealth was worth a little less than $6.7 billion at its IPO price, not counting shares that may be sold to its underwriters, which would boost its valuation.
Despite its better-than-anticipated pricing, however, GoHealth shares sagged in afternoon trading, slipping to $19.00 per share, down 9.5% as of the time of writing. The declines stand in contrast to the recent debuts of nCino, Lemonade and others, which saw their shares instantly gain value after going public.
GoHealth’s CEO, however, stressed the long-term vision of his company in an interview with TechCrunch. Speaking with Clint Jones during GoHealth’s first trading day, the executive told TechCrunch that his company’s offering was oversubscribed, and had met its goal of accumulating long-term investors during its IPO process.
The company intends to hire with its new funds, including 1,000 more licensed insurance agents, the CEO said.
Asked whether the company has plans to acquire smaller companies with its IPO funds, Jones told TechCrunch that it could be “opportunistic” regarding buying tech platforms, or smaller teams with particular talent. For the many startups competing in other parts of the insurance marketplace world — TechCrunch has covered the space extensively, including a bevy of funding rounds for insurtech startups — a newly wealthy public company could provide an interesting exit opportunity.
The company’s strong IPO pricing, if somewhat slack first-day’s trading, feels akin to a wash for related, smaller firms watching its public offering with interest; how GoHealth trades moving forward could help set the tone for select insurtech startup valuations.
For today, however, we have yet another unicorn tech-ish offering all wrapped up. GoHealth’s path to the public market’s wasn’t as straightforward as some, but it got there all the same.
Powered by WPeMatico