First off: I can reassure all my readers that I will not be coming out with an opus on Yahoo’s turmoil in 2012. Nor rounding out a trilogy of books on AOL in 2013, for that matter, full of lessons learned and bridges burned.

But that’s not true for other players in Silicon Valley, including three sure-to-be prominent books coming out in the next three months.

First off, on Jan. 25, will be the work of Fortune magazine writer Adam Lashinsky, who turned his cover story on the inside workings of Apple into a book called … “Inside Apple.”

The subtitle, “How America’s Most Admired — and Secretive — Company Really Works,” promises the “secret systems, tactics and leadership strategies that allowed Steve Jobs and his company to churn out hit after hit and inspire a cult-like following for its products.”

Apparently, we’re all about to find out about concepts like the “DRI” — or assigning a Directly Responsible Individual to every task (which I call DYS, or Do Your Story, here at AllThingsD); and the Top 100, “an annual ritual in which 100 up-and-coming executives are tapped a la Skull & Bones for a secret retreat with company founder Steve Jobs.”

Sadly, not anymore on that retreat, but I am still looking forward to reading more about the management techniques of the late tech visionary.

On Valentines Day, well-known VC, entrepreneur and Start-Up Whisperer Reid Hoffman’s book with co-author Ben Casnocha also comes out, touting lessons from Silicon Valley.

Titled “The Start-up of You: Adapt to the Future, Invest in Yourself, and Transform Your Career,” it is described as a “blueprint for thriving in your job and career in today’s challenging world of work by applying the lessons of Silicon Valley’s most innovative entrepreneurs.”

Let’s hope it’s not the dudes from Color handing out the advice!

According to the authors, “the key is to manage your career as if it were a start-up business: a living, breathing, growing start-up of you.”

If I were a start-up, I would sell virtual doughnuts. Hey Reid, gimme a badillion dollars!

Finally, on March 12, the grumpy investor Peter Thiel teams with entrepreneur Max Levchin and chess grandmaster Garry Kasparov for “The Blueprint: Reviving Innovation, Rediscovering Risk, and Rescuing the Free Market.”

It’s funny that they, and also Hoffman, are using the hopelessly analog term “blueprint,” but I like the retro feel.

No surprise, Thiel’s posse is unhappy with the pace of innovation, presumably underwhelmed by “Plants vs. Zombies” compared to the internal combustion engine.

“Challenging the notion that we are living in an age of technological progress, three of the world’s most original thinkers demonstrate that we have become a risk-averse society, hobbled by tort laws and government regulations, short-term financial thinking, and mind-numbing complacency,” the book’s description reads. “Eager to end ‘paper entrepreneurialism’ and avoid another financial meltdown, they propose that we expand research and development in breakthrough ‘disruptive technologies,’ create millions of jobs through science-based engineering and genuine innovation, shore up our crumbling infrastructure, stop squandering money on misspent ‘horizontal education,’ and restore financial discipline.”

Phew! And here I was very pleased that I can Instagram filtered pictures of my dinner last night around the world.

In any case, before the zombies arrive to steal them, get your brains ready to think big thoughts.

Salesforce just announced that it is buying Rypple, an oddly-named outfit that specializes in performance management and goal-setting. It’s a cloud-based platform for giving employees feedback on how well they do their jobs, and which attempts to make the annual performance-review process — dreaded by so many employees and managers — less, well, dreadful.

Salesforce says in its press release that it plans to relaunch Rypple under the name Successforce, which to me sure sounds a lot like SuccessFactors, the cloud-based HR software outfit that software giant SAP acquired earlier this month for $3.4 billion. That makes the third acquisition of a cloud-based software firm in recent months. Oracle, you’ll remember, acquired RightNow for $1.2 billion in October. Expect a new round of speculation around other companies in the space, chief among them Taleo, whose stock has picked up considerably since the SuccessFactors deal, but which was down today.

Rypple’s customers run the gamut: Facebook is mentioned as one of them in the press release; Spotify was named as another in a Wall Street Journal blog post earlier this week. Jive Software, a social enterprise software outfit that IPOed this week, is another.

Financial terms haven’t been disclosed, but Rypple’s investors include Bridgescale Partners and EdgeStone Capital Partners, as well as several individual investors, including Peter Thiel, the PayPal founder.

Salesforce’s statement follows; below that is a short video explaining what Rypple does:

Salesforce.com Signs Definitive Agreement to Acquire Rypple — First Step Toward Human Capital Management for the Social Enterprise

Acquisition marks salesforce.com’s first step into Human Capital Management

Rypple’s next generation social performance management app to be re-launched as “Successforce”

New HCM business unit to be run by John Wookey

Rypple to extend value of existing salesforce.com products

Hundreds of companies like Facebook, Gilt Groupe, and Spotify embrace Rypple’s new social model to empower teams to share goals, recognize great work, and improve performance

SAN FRANCISCO, Dec. 15, 2011 — Salesforce.com [NYSE: CRM], the enterprise cloud computing company (http://www.salesforce.com/cloudcomputing/), today announced it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire Rypple, a cloud-based social performance management company. The acquisition signifies salesforce.com’s entry into the human capital management (HCM) market for the social enterprise. Salesforce.com plans to re-launch Rypple as “Successforce” and create a new HCM business unit, which will be run by John Wookey. Rypple’s unique social technologies will also extend the value of salesforce.com’s existing core products. The transaction is expected to close in salesforce.com’s fiscal first quarter ending April 30, 2012, subject to customary closing conditions.

Comments on the News
• “Salesforce.com and Rypple share a vision for extending the social enterprise to transform the way we work,” said Marc Benioff, chairman and CEO, salesforce.com. “The next generation of HCM is not just about a cloud delivery model, it’s about a fundamentally better way to recruit, manage and empower employees in a social world.”
• “Our social enterprise strategy continues to accelerate, and is at the root of the broad-based transformation and innovation we are seeing from customers today,” said John Wookey, executive vice president, advanced applications, salesforce.com. “With the launch of Successforce, salesforce.com plans to revolutionize HCM starting with an exciting social performance management app that will delight millions of employees around the world.”
• “We chose Rypple to be the core of Facebook’s employee performance management platform because it’s designed from the ground up to be social,” said Tim Campos, CIO, Facebook. “We are delighted to see it become part of salesforce.com’s social enterprise strategy.”
• “Rypple was designed from the start to be fun, social, and mobile — an app that can delight managers and employees in entirely new ways,” said Daniel Debow, co-CEO and co-founder, Rypple. “As the leading social enterprise company with more than 100,000 customers worldwide, salesforce.com will allow us to not only strengthen our offering for the hundreds of high-performing organizations that use Rypple today, but also scale it to reach many more.”
• “We took the science of team performance and applied the collaborative, transparent, and real-time power of social networks to create a completely new model for managing people and the work they deliver,” said David Stein, co-CEO and co-founder, Rypple. “Salesforce.com gives us the opportunity to apply our expertise and extend our vision for Rypple with Successforce.”

Salesforce.com Redefines HCM for the Social Enterprise
Traditional HCM software that many businesses use today was designed 30 years ago for personnel departments whose goal was to minimize the cost and risk of employing people. While HCM software hasn’t changed in decades, the way people work has radically changed.

Today’s workforce demands new performance and leadership tools that are completely transparent and allow employees to be connected to their company’s mission and each other. Social enterprises and progressive HR leaders are embracing apps like Rypple, which focus on the inherent social nature of performance management — goal setting, feedback, recognition and continuous dialogue — to help employees align more effectively around the company mission.

The acquisition of Rypple and its planned re-launch as Successforce signify salesforce.com’s entry into the HCM market. The company plans to expand into other areas with a new social model that will revolutionize the way companies recruit talent, build teams, empower employees and achieve results.

The new HCM business unit, including Successforce, will be led by John Wookey, salesforce.com’s executive vice president of advanced applications. Wookey comes to salesforce.com with more than 20 years of experience in enterprise software, including senior leadership positions at Oracle and SAP.

Extending the Value of Salesforce.com’s Existing Products
A social revolution is taking place today. The number of social networking users has surpassed e-mail users. Nearly a quarter of all time spent online is spent on social networks like Facebook. People access the Internet more from mobile devices than from desktops. Today, companies must change the way they collaborate, communicate and share information with customers and employees to stay competitive. Salesforce.com is helping companies meet the challenge of this social revolution with its social enterprise strategy.

With this acquisition, salesforce.com will embed some of Rypple’s next-generation features into its existing products. For example, people will be able to thank colleagues, win badges and provide recognition – all from within Salesforce Chatter. And customers of core Salesforce products — the Sales Cloud, Service Cloud, and Force.com platform — will be able to connect with new employee feedback tools to help drive business goals and power the future of their employee social networks.

Rypple: Pioneers of Social Apps
Founded in 2008, Rypple pioneered a new approach to performance management — one that empowers managers and their teams to learn faster and perform better. Rypple is a social performance app built for the way we work today — in real time. With Rypple, teams can share key priorities and get the continuous feedback, coaching, and recognition they need to consistently achieve their goals, making performance management painless and effective. Hundreds of companies including Facebook, Gilt Groupe, and Spotify use Rypple’s social performance app, which is based on 50+ years of behavioral science, focusing on what really keeps people passionate about their work.

Details Regarding the Proposed Acquisition
The transaction is expected to close in salesforce.com’s fiscal first quarter ending April 30, 2012, subject to customary closing conditions. The transaction is not expected to have a material impact on revenue for FY13. Salesforce.com will initiate EPS guidance for fiscal 2013 on its fourth quarter conference call in February.

About Rypple
Rypple is web-based social performance management software that helps managers and employees improve performance through social goals, continuous feedback and meaningful recognition. Designed to build a transparent, results-driven work culture, Rypple replaces the traditional performance review with an easy, social and collaborative approach so people know where they stand and are accountable for achieving their goals. Hundreds of high-performing organizations use Rypple, including Facebook, Gilt Groupe, Kobo, Mozilla and Rackspace. Founded in 2008, Rypple is funded by Bridgescale Partners, Edgestone Capital Partners, Peter Thiel and a veteran team of angel investors. Learn more at www.rypple.com.

There is a very cathartic crisis that’s gone on, and it’s not clear where it’s going to go. But at least everyone knows things are rotten. We’re in a much better place than when things were rotten and everyone thought things were great.

Facebook investor and futurist Peter Thiel, profiled in the New Yorker (article only available online to subscribers)

Here’s some electric weekend reading for those interested in the push and pull between venture investors and start-ups in the frothy Web 2.0 environment.

In an email to Airbnb CEO and co-founder Brian Chesky (which I obtained, embedded below), former Facebook exec Chamath Palihapitiya, who now runs an investment fund called the Social+Capital Partnership, is passing on participating in the recent $112 million round for the hot online rental site that was announced in July.

The deal — which values the company at $1.2 billion — has not officially closed yet, but includes venture firms such as DST Global, Andreessen Horowitz and others. Previous investors include Sequoia Capital.

Palihapitiya confirmed to me that it was his email and that his possible investment in Airbnb was small.

That said, his concerns center on how much voting control of new investors’ preferred shares the founders have in the latest round and also a $22.5 million cashing out, $21 million of which is going to those founders.

Another $9.6 million is being used to buy secondary stock from current Airbnb shareholders, who have to render parts of their vested stakes for the money.

Such wrangling between investors and entrepreneurs is not uncommon in Silicon Valley these days, as ever-dumber money chases ever-more-powerful geeks. But Palihapitiya’s email is a smart, reasonable and well-written argument to stop the madness.

According to sources close to Airbnb, the numbers that he refers to below are accurate, as is what appears to be an unusual level of voting control by its founders. Presumably, it is to protect the company from possible future sales on the secondary markets and to keep control with its founders as the number of investors grows.

In any case, the Palihapitiya email to Chesky is well worth the read (I have removed email addresses as a courtesy):

From: Chamath Palihapitiya
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 11:16:05 -0700

To: Brian Chesky

Subject: Airbnb financing…

Brian,

Cc Marc, Reid, my deal team

Thanks again for giving me the chance to participate in your latest financing. I had a chance to review the docs at length yesterday and I wanted to follow up as, quite honestly, I’ve never seen a deal like this over ~60 investments I’ve done and I’m pretty concerned.

I’m all for getting the best valuation you can, minimizing dilution and maximizing control. We did this brilliantly at Facebook…all of our financings (except our first $$$ from Peter Thiel) were done not out of necessity but opportunity. As such, our investors had virtually no control and it resulted in a much better outcome. As we’ve discussed, I generally don’t believe investors add much to a success story and so minimizing their impact is a great strategy when you are onto something that is working.

This said, while several of these concepts are reflected in the current deal, there is one big thing that I am fundamentally against and violates my principles and will prevent me from participating in your round. When I saw that you guys were taking $31M out of the company, I didn’t think much of it as I just assumed it would entirely be via a secondary sale.

But as I understand the deal, it seems that you are doing only $9.6M in secondary and $22.5M as a dividend to common (of which $21M goes to you and your co-founders). I am really uncomfortable with this and don’t think its in the spirit of building a good, long term business. Effectively, it is a strategy that allows you guys to take money out of the business and not dilute yourself — I’m not sure why this is such a big deal when you guys are almost 90% vested and the financing is at $1.2B where your dilution is marginal. Further, it excludes many of the employees that probably have helped you and your co–founders get the company to this place as most of these folks probably don’t have any stock but have unexercised stock options and thus won’t get a dividend.

My basic principle on this stuff is that if you want liquidity, that’s fine, but you should make it available to everyone. Otherwise, no one should get it. Your current deal is the farthest away from this principle that I’ve seen in a while…this strategy has been done once before — at Groupon. We can see how “well” they are doing and how short term the investor community is now viewing their motives. I really think you can do better than this…and that you are better than this.

Separately, when you look at successful tech companies, it seems that dividends are an approach used by cash rich operations to distribute excess earnings — in fact, the most successful, cash rich tech company in the world, Apple, hasn’t issued a dividend and they have more than $75B in cash! Again, while I think Airbnb will be a good company, this is nowhere near the truth now — you guys still need to scale and build this thing for the future.

I really think you are onto something but I would implore you to not take the easy way out. Treat your employees the same as you’d treat yourself. Do things that you will be proud of and can defend to anyone including your Board, employees, prospective hires etc. In such a competitive hiring market, you are competing with not just your obvious competitors, but also any successful tech company who is also looking for great talent. A principle that treats your employees as well as you’d treat yourself is a huge strategy for differentiation, retention and long term happiness of the exact types of people you will need to be successful. In contrast, if you are viewed as self-dealing and shady, it will only hurt your long term prospects…

In summary, I’m passing on this financing because I strongly disagree with what’s going on. I’m not sure who advocated this approach but I did mention this to Reid [Hoffman, another Airbnb investor via Greylock Partners] last night and he was of a similar mind to myself and surprised this was the approach being taken. If you want some good advice — I would ask that you consider pinging him about different ways to think about going about the liquidity portion.

If you change your mind on how to close this financing, let me know and I’d love to reconsider. Otherwise, good luck and lets keep in touch.

Take care,

Chamath

That’s not easy. Given what it does — develop software that essentially helps government intelligence agencies root out and track terrorists and other criminals with sophisticated data analysis technology — it’s generally known for keeping its mouth shut. Its name is taken from the mystical seeing stones in the “Lord of the Rings” novels.

The company takes huge reams of data and subjects it to analysis to find connections between people and entities, and to find patterns that aren’t obvious. It has been used to track suicide bombers in Iraq and to sniff out abuse of government stimulus money in the U.S., and naturally most of its business is with the government, though banks, always on the lookout for fraud, are also said to be enthusiastic customers.

Yesterday, Palantir reported in a filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that it had just raised $68 million in funding, though, as is usually the case with Form D, the filing doesn’t say who it came from. This, of course, would come on top of $50 million that TechCrunch reported it had raised in May, and another $90 million it raised in June.

The idea for what became Palantir emerged out of antifraud work at PayPal, but then grew into something bigger. PayPal alum and Facebook investor Peter Thiel talked Alex Karp (pictured) into the idea of building it into something that could root out terrorists. Thiel and his Founder’s Fund led a $12 million funding round in 2006, some of which came from the CIA’s In-Q-Tel. Thiel led another round in 2008.

I’ve got a call in to Palantir and hope to find out more behind the details in this filing, and will update the post if I hear from them. Until then you can watch Karp’s interview on “Charlie Rose” from 2009, and a Peter Thiel interview with The Wall Street Journal from last month.

Three of Silicon Valley’s more prominent venture firms — Khosla Ventures, Redpoint Ventures and the Founders Fund — are nearing the closing of new funds that will total almost $2 billion.

This despite a bad economy, turbulent markets and lackluster venture returns of late. That said, limited partners looking for an investment edge apparently seem to still be adding more dough to the VC kitty.

Sources familiar with the fundings, in fact, said the raises have been much easier than previous ones.

Khosla has raised almost $2.4 billion since 2009, including $1.3 billion in 2010. Its fourth is now nearly completed, at just under that, which the firm had previously signaled in regulatory filings it planned to raise.

The third fund has been spent on cleantech companies, but also on early-stage high-profile Internet start-ups such as Square.

Redpoint will focus its fund — which sources said was $400 million — on growth opportunities.

Its last fund in 2010 was $400 million, too. It has invested that money in start-ups, such as Jumptap, Kabam and Pure Storage.

Lastly, the Founders Fund — with high-profile partners Peter Thiel and Sean Parker — is aiming at a $350 million fund with a $150 million “cushion” to raise more. Its last fund of $250 million was raised last year.

Founders Fund has recently made investments in Path, Azumio and Topsy.

The funding comes after a $100,000 fellowship grant to Airy’s founder, Andrew Hsu, from Peter Thiel’s much-publicized and politicized “20 under 20″ grant program, in which the PayPal co-founder paid 20 young entrepreneurs to leave or forgo college in favor of starting companies.

The announcement also makes Hsu the first alum of Thiel’s program to get a business idea venture funded.

Airy’s mission, according to Hsu, is to “make games that parents can feel good about handing to their kids … and that don’t suck.”

The games, which will initially teach English, math and memory building, will be targeted at the 5 to 13 age range, which is coincidentally about the same age Hsu was when he started studying neuroscience at the University of Washington.

It’s somewhat ironic that the first funded Thiel fellow has spent almost half his life in college.

While Hsu said that Thiel’s cash was “nice to have,” he said he knew he’d have to raise a lot more to build out his vision for cross-platform learning games.

Hsu said Airy’s first products would be offered initially on Apple’s iOS and Google’s Android platform, with the hope that the games will evolve “into a larger platform where social learning can take place.”

The plan is to raise as much as $1 billion at an implied valuation of $10 billion, though The Wall Street Journal, citing people close to the situation, says the offering could raise as much as $2 billion and value the company at $20 billion. The company didn’t give a price range but said it had 562.5 million shares of Class B common stock as of March 31, plus an additional 20.5 million shares of class C stock.

The big number that everyone is going to focus on is the value of the $43 million compensation package going to executive VP and former Myspace CEO Owen Van Natta. That includes nearly $29 million in options and more than $14 million in stock awards. His base salary is $77,000 a year and he earned a $48,000 bonus is 2010.

Behind Van Natta was Steve Chiang, co-president of games, whose total compensation was north of $28 million, including $25.7 million in stock and a $2.9 million bonus. The bonus included more than $600,000 in a relocation bonus, the filing says.

Another big earner is CFO David Wehner, whose package is worth $18 million, $16 million coming from stock awards and $1.8 million paid in a bonus. Half a million of that was a retention bonus.

So who owns what? Founder and CEO Mark Pincus owns a big piece of the action. The filing shows he owns 91.4 million shares, or about 16 percent, of the Class B stock, and 20.5 million shares of the Class C stock. Both classes of stock are convertible into Class A common shares. Assuming the Journal’s sources are right and Zynga is worth $20 billion, then Pincus’s stake should be worth $3.2 billion on the Class B shares alone. (I’m not sure exactly how the Class C shares work into the calculation, but Pincus is the only one who has any, except for a block of 5.3 million shares that were sold to a bunch of mutual funds let by Morgan Stanley.)

Pincus, incidentally, is not only founder and CEO, but also Zynga’s landlord. The filing shows that the company leases office space he owns and paid him $500,000 in 2009 and $400,000 in 2010. The lease puts the current rent on the office space at $28,000 a month. Zynga also reimbursed Pincus $25,000 in 2009 and $120,000 in 2010 for the use of his personal plane, on occasions where he uses it for business travel.

Venture Capital firm Kleiner Perkins holds 11 percent, or slightly more than 64 million, of the Class B common shares. That works out to a stake worth $2.2 billion, assuming the $20 billion valuation.

Other venture funds with a piece of Zynga: Institutional Venture Partners, which owns 34.3 million shares, or 6.1 percent of the equity, worth $1.2 billion. Foundry Venture Capital and Avalon Ventures also have 6.1 percent of equity, or another $1.2 billion each. Union Square Ventures has a stake worth 5.5 percent, or $1.1 billion. And Russia’s DST Limited has a stake at 5.8 percent, worth $1.16 billion.

The filing says that Zynga has raised $845 million in three rounds of funding, though the filing makes it look like some rounds were closed in smaller increments. Other funds and individuals known to have invested — but not listed as major shareholders in the filing — include Andreessen Horowitz, the Pilot Group, Tiger Global Management, and Peter Thiel, head of Clarium Capital, according to its Web site.

Reid Hoffman, the former LinkedIn CEO who’s also a Zynga director, has 3.1 million shares, which amounts to less than 1 percent of the equity, though elsewhere in the filing, the value of stock awards as a director is valued at $9.5 million, assuming a grant price of $6.435 per share on the date of the grant.

Related posts

• The Zynga IPO: Who Owns What, Who Makes What
• Zynga Has Raised $845 Million in Capital, But No Mention of Google as an Investor
• The Zynga-Facebook Codependency Becomes More Clear
• Here’s the Zynga S-1 to Play With (Get It?!?)
• Zynga Finally Files for IPO to Raise $1 Billion
• Day 3: Zynga Holds Tech Reporters Hostage in Endless IPO Watch
• What to Expect When You’re Expecting a Zynga IPO (Insider Selling, Natch!)
• A Sneak Peek at Zynga’s IPO: How to Turn Virtual Goods Into Real Money
• Exclusive: Zynga About to File for IPO
• Zynga Full Coverage

So exactly how fecund is “FarmVille”?

If reports hold, we’ll all find out today what the yield is from the online gaming phenom Zynga, which will finally be filing its regulatory documents sometime today.

The S-1 for a public offering valued at up to $20 billion, which will contain all kinds of juicy information about the San Francisco-based start-up’s business, is likely to come out after the markets close. Zynga is expected to raise $2 billion in the offering.

Before everyone gets to see what’s in it, there’s a lot that investors should be looking out for, based on recent IPO filings by similar companies, such as Groupon.

Digging Up New Accounting Ground

As Tricia Duryee pointed out, Zynga will be the “first major U.S. company supported primarily by the sale of virtual goods” to file.

That’s what will likely make the Zynga filing very interesting, from an accounting point of view.

How Zynga handles its accounting is sure to be much scrutinized, especially since Groupon attracted all kinds of ugly from its unusual treatment of its financial results.

To defocus from its money-losing under GAAP acounting, the Chicago-based social buying service used the more attractive “Adjusted CSOI,” which is defined as adjusted consolidated segment operating income.

My definition: Sketchy!

Zynga’s finances are expected to look better, reportedly generating about $400 million in profit last year on about $850 million in revenue.

It will be important to pay attention to the breakdown of those revenues and about what period of time the company accounts for them.

As Duryee wrote, Zynga has several choices:

Game-based model: The company recognizes revenue over the life of the game.

User-based model: Revenue is recognized over the estimated life a user plays the game.

Item-based model: Revenue is recognized based on the implied or explicit life span of the item — in other words, how long it would last in the real world. Examples of more durable goods are virtual vehicles, furniture or weapons. Revenue from these would be recognized for as long as the player stays active in the game. Revenues from a more consumable item, like a virtual cup of coffee or a jolt of energy, would be recognized almost immediately.

And there are still other factors to take into consideration, such as whether the goods were paid for with virtual currency or real cash, and how much information a company has for establishing the averages.

In the Revenue Weeds

Another interesting thing to study will be the revenue breakdown for Zynga, especially as it relates to its biggest platform provider, Facebook.

Such as: How many in-game items are purchased directly on Facebook versus through gift cards purchased in the store? How big (or small) is Zynga’s advertising business? What about mobile games? Will the profitability of individual games be called out, with details about their performance?

And, of all its various distribution platforms for its games, where does it get the most mojo?

That’s important, since Zynga will be seen as a proxy for Facebook’s business. Thus, a lot of investors might find some nuggets of information, since the pair are so tightly intertwined as businesses.

Facebook, of course, has been famously trying not to IPO, so any indication of the social networking site’s business will be carefully studied.

Reaping the Insider Rewards

Lastly, it’ll be important to see who is selling what and when among current Zynga investors.

Groupon ran into a buzz saw of criticism from the giant payouts its founders took out of the company from its massive venture funding rounds.

As Peter Kafka wrote:

Groupon raised a total of $946 million in two funding rounds last winter. It kept $136 million of it to help run the money-losing company. The remaining $810 million was paid out, via stock purchases, to CEO Andrew Mason and some of his backers, including Eric Lefkofsky, and, notably, the Samwer brothers, who sold their CityDeal company to Groupon in 2010 … Of note: This wasn’t the first time Groupon had raised money and taken cash off the table. In April 2010, the company raised $130 million, and handed $120 million to many of the same people.

My definition: Even sketchier!

Along with its founder and CEO Mark Pincus, Zynga investors are the pantheon of venture players, including Digital Sky Technologies, Kleiner Perkins, Union Square Ventures and angel investors LinkedIn founder Reid Hoffman and Peter Thiel.

How much Pincus and others inside the company have taken out and are selling should be one of the first places new investors should look.

Because with the hyped valuations that many of these Web 2.0 companies are getting, who’s zooming who should be a key sign to pay mind to.

There’s been lots of attempts to convert doctors to electronic medical records and it’s a key part of health care reform. However, a study by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control found that as of 2009 less than half of all doctors had moved to an electronic system by the end 2009.

Practice Fusion is a start-up founded in 2007 that aims to make the move to electronic records easier for groups of nine doctors or less. The company announced a $23 million round of funding led by Founders Fund, with participation from Artis Capital Management and Glynn Capital Management, as well as returning investors Morgenthaler Ventures and Felicis Ventures. The round brings the company’s total funding to $30 million. 

While most electronic medical record systems cost about $50,000 per physician, cloud-based Practice Fusion is free. The company makes its money conducting analytics on the health data store in the system. Doctors can use the system to securely chart patient visits, review their records, schedule appointments and write prescriptions, and do all the other routine medical administrivia that is usually done on paper. More than 75,000 healthcare professionals are using Practice Fusion, and the system stores data on 9.5 million patients through Practice Fusion’s network. The network is adding doctors at a rate of 350 a day.

This is the latest deal for Founder’s Fund and its founder Peter Thiel, notable as Facebook’s first outside investor. The fund’s other investments include Mint, which was acquired by Intuit in 2009, Yammer, Spotify, SpaceX, and Palantir Technologies.

That’s the vision for CapLinked Inc., a new start-up that wants to be the go-to place for setting up and closing deals, as well as managing portfolio companies after the close.

The company has raised $525,000 in angel funding from Peter Thiel, Dave McClure’s 500 Startups; Joe Lonsdale, co-founder of Palantir Technologies; Aman Verjee, chief financial officer at Sonos; and David Anderson, managing partner of 7th Rig. CapLinked previously raised about $400,000 in a financing from individuals in 2010.

CapLinked co-founder and Chief Executive Eric Jackson is a former vice president of marketing at PayPal Inc. and knows investors Thiel, McClure, Lonsdale and Verjee, all formerly of PayPal.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Perusing AOL’s leaked damn-the-journalism-full-speed-ahead business plan, BoomTown was a little late to the Microsoft Bing event this morning called “Farsight: Beyond the Search Box.”

But things had certainly been cooking with gas when I walked into the meeting room at the University of San Francisco, which the organizers had decked out in white nubby rugs, white pleather couches and those white egg-shaped chairs found only in 1970s decor.

Schweeet!

First up was well-known investor and entrepreneur Peter Thiel, poo-poohing Microsoft’s prospects of ever making money in search.

“It’s difficult to produce a new search company,” said Thiel, noting that even with a growing market share it’s curtains for Bing, given the huge fixed costs. “As far as I can tell, it’s still not breaking even.”

Ouch!

By the way, Thiel sold semantic search engine Powerset to Microsoft for upward of $100 million in 2008 to help it, you know, get ahead in search.

Way to insult your money-bearing hosts!

Then, moderator Vivek Wadhwa harangued the panelists from Google, Microsoft and Blekko in the session “Who Will Win the Spam Wars?”

And they say I’m a snarky moderator! Wadhwa is snarktastic!

Wadhwa did not like any of it–not crappy content sites that sully Web search, not the efforts the companies were making to fix things, not the vision the trio had of the future.

And, by the way, Microsoft was not ever going to make money off all the company’s efforts.

Way to insult your hosts! I like this event!

Of course, what everyone was interested in was a smackdown between Google and Microsoft, given that the search giant accused the software giant of stealing its results today.

In an excellent, if exhaustive, post by Search Engine Land’s Danny Sullivan, Google said Bing was cheating by lifting its search results, which Google said it had proved via a “honeypot” sting operation.

“I’ve spent my career in pursuit of a good search engine,” Google’s Amit Singhal told Search Engine Land. “I’ve got no problem with a competitor developing an innovative algorithm. But copying is not innovation, in my book.”

The very presence of the word “honeypot” in any story about search algorithms is superb, in my book, even though this “controversy” is pretty much a he-said-he-said geek-off.

Google’s Matt Cutts kept up the cheater pressure at the Bing event, in a short debate with Microsoft’s Harry Shum, who was not having any of it.

“It’s not like we actually copy anything,” he said.

Translation: Actually, we do borrow, just like Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg did to the Winklevii, resulting in a social networking behemoth that will soon take over all search and make this whole debate moot.

Microsoft is rubber, Google is glue. And Facebook, which was not present at the search event, is the real sticky honeypot.

Oh dear, BoomTown is still jetlagged from my recent trip to China and now Microsoft Bing is offering up a head-requiring event later this morning in San Francisco to explore the future of search.

There better be donuts.

A lot and with sprinkles, since speakers include the lugubrious investor and hedge fund philosophizer Peter Thiel and skunk-at-a-Web-garden-party author Malcolm Gladwell.

Here’s Microsoft Bing exec Satya Nadella’s blog post on the event, as well as one pre-video of what to expect from the sessions.

In it, Gladwell, noting the richness in search has yet to cure cancer, has a good point, which should be interesting with the backdrop of the protests going on in Egypt and elsewhere.

As in: If governments can block search, does it really matter?

I will be posting if someone comes up with a good answer to that one.

Bing and Big Think present Farsight 2011: “Beyond the Search Box” Event and Webcast

In the past ten years, search has transformed the way we experience the web even as the web itself has changed. New user interfaces, mobile devices, and interactive services are evolving beyond text pages intertwining the ‘web’ into all aspects of our lives and thus we expect to be able to do more online with less friction. Along with the innovation has come an explosion of information and services that are compounding at an exponential rate. Trying to get things done on the web is becoming more complex and fragmented every day. In short, unlike many consumer products, the problems facing the search industry are getting harder–not easier.

In order for us to truly realize the science-fiction dream of so many of us kids, of that ubiquitous intelligent agent, we want to elevate the discussion in search beyond next quarter’s technology. To begin to do that Bing has teamed with Big Think to bring the best minds from inside and outside the industry together for a series of spirited conversations, panels, and demos examining the “Future of Search.”

The group we’ve assembled includes Hedge Fund Manager and PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel, Recorded Future co-founder and CEO Chris Ahlberg, journalist entrepreneur Esther Dyson, contrarian journalist and “Tipping Point” author Malcolm Gladwell among others.

In addition, Farsight 2011 will include a search industry roundtable featuring Matt Cutts from Google, Rich Skrenta from Blekko and our very own Harry Shum from Bing. The panel and much of the day will be moderated by the entrepreneur and technologist, Vivek Wadhwa.

You are invited to take part in the discussion, by submitting your questions for the experts in advance at BigThink.com. Then return on February 1 to watch the conference streaming LIVE from 10:00am to 2:00pm PST on Big Think.com.

I encourage you to tune and be a part of the conversation to help all of us realize the potential that this most powerful technology can bring.

Satya Nadella–Senior Vice President, Online Services

In one memorable episode of the famous old short films “The Little Rascals,” after not getting invited to a party, the Our Gang little dudes decided to form their own group, comically called “The He-Man Woman-Haters Club.”

In other words: No girls allowed!

While it was wink-wink cute when Spanky, Alfalfa and Buckwheat huffed and puffed about keeping out Darla–which they never ever could do–back in the last century, it’s not quite as adorkable when it comes to the boards of all the major Web 2.0 hotshots these days.

That would be Twitter, Facebook, Zynga, Groupon and Foursquare, none of which have any women as directors.

As in zero.

What’s most remarkable is that most of these start-ups are run by what I consider enlightened and open-minded entrepreneurs, mostly young enough to be part of a generation more inclined to value equality and diversity in the workplace.

In addition, each of these companies has a massive base of women consumers, in some cases well over 50 percent of its audience.

Thus, it would seem logical that in casting about for those to help guide these companies, one or two women leaders might slip in.

To be fair, it’s not for lack of trying, but of completion, as was the case with Twitter’s recent addition of three new board members.

They were longtime Silicon Valley exec Peter Currie, Flipboard CEO and co-founder Mike McCue and former DoubleClick leader David Rosenblatt.

All are deeply qualified for the Twitter board, which is obviously prepping for its next stage of growth and maturity.

But in its search, the San Francisco microblogging site did not manage to cast the net quite wide enough.

While sources said at least one prominent online woman exec was considered, there were some legitimate issues with her appointment, and it was not completed.

Still, one might imagine Twitter could have tried harder to find other workable choices.

Currently, the Twitter board is made up of the new trio, as well as Benchmark Capital’s Peter Fenton, Union Square Ventures’ Fred Wilson, Bijan Sabet of Spark Capital, CEO Dick Costolo and co-founders Evan Williams and Jack Dorsey.

Things are not any better over at Facebook, which has several prominent women execs running the show, most especially its high-profile COO Sheryl Sandberg.

But, inexplicably, though she does attend board meetings, she is not yet a director of Facebook, nor is any other woman.

In fact, here is Sandberg on topic at a recent TED event for women, in an eloquent speech titled “Why We Have So Few Women Leaders”:

Instead, the Facebook board is all men, all the time, composed of CEO and co-founder Mark Zuckerberg, prominent techie and venture capitalist Marc Andreessen, investor Peter Thiel, Accel Partners’ Jim Breyer and Washington Post head Don Graham.

It is no better at three of the most prominent recent Web 2.0 start-ups, which one source attributes to the lack of woman VCs, who are often the first board members after major investment rounds.

At Zynga, the hot social gaming company in San Francisco, it continues, with an all-male board, despite a very heavily female audience for its casual social games.

That would be co-founder and CEO Mark Pincus, COO Owen Van Natta, investor Bing Gordon of Kleiner Perkins, investor Reid Hoffman and Brad Feld of the Foundry Group.

The same is true at woman-targeted–spas, spas and more spas–social buying site Groupon, which has an unusually large board for a start-up and made up of–as per usual–all men.

The list: Co-founder and CEO Andrew Mason, Accel Partners’ Kevin Efrusy, former AT&T President and COO John Walter, New Enterprise Associates’ Harry Weller and Peter Barris, former AOL exec Ted Leonsis, 37Signals co-founder Jason Fried and early investors Eric Lefkofsky and Brad Keywell.

And, much smaller, is Foursquare’s board, which is the trio of co-founder and CEO Dennis Crowley, co-founder Naveen Selvadurai and Union Square Ventures’ Albert Wenger.

New investors–Ben Horowitz of Andreessen Horowitz and O’Reilly AlphaTech Ventures’ Bryce Roberts–have observer status and both are, needless to say, dudes.

There is no question it is tough to make sure there is a good balance of qualified women leaders to men in tech–it is an issue we wrestle with every single year for the program of speakers at our own All Things Digital conference, although we are most excellent on this issue on our Web site and conference staff.

But it can be done, especially at public tech companies. Google has two women on its board of nine directors; Yahoo has three of 10; even Oracle has two of a dozen.

But a grand total of zero at the leading companies of Web 2.0 is not just a coincidence.

It’s a shame.

Tomorrow, BoomTown will post a list of great women who would be superb directors for any of these companies, but until then, let’s not follow in Spanky’s steps:

That doesn’t mean Mr. Thiel is giving to traditional causes. Instead, his Thiel Foundation supports futurism and liberty through organizations such as the Sens Foundation, which is focused on regenerative biotechnologies, and Imitatio, which concentrates on a theory that people imitate others and desire objects that others own, thereby spurring competition and violence. Underlining his unconventional approach, Mr. Thiel recently sponsored a program to give $100,000 each to 20 students to forgo college and instead spend their time on innovative projects.

Last week, the 43-year-old held an event dubbed “Breakthrough Philanthropy” in San Francisco to build awareness for some of those causes. His efforts come as Bay Area tech entrepreneurs such as Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg and others announced last Wednesday that they had agreed to give the majority of their wealth to charity.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

Yardsellr is announcing today that it has closed a $5 million Series A funding round led by Accel Partners.

Harrison Metal, which is run by investor Michael Dearing and gave the social listings and transactions site seed financing last year, also participated in the round.

Yardsellr says it uses “social plumbing to power all interactions between buyers and sellers, although users create listings and consummate transactions.”

Welcome to eBay, Facebook-style!

Online shopping with a social element is starting to boom, at least in terms of financings.

Earlier today, Svpply–a social retail discovery site stocked with stuff you and your friends think are cool–got a $550,000 seed round investment led by Spark Capital and Founder Collective, along with high-profile angels like Ron Conway, Foursquare co-founder Dennis Crowley and former Myspace co-President Jason Hirschhorn.

And Topguest, a check-in loyalty service that was founded just five months ago, announced last week that it nabbed $2 million in Series A funding, as well as nabbing well-known Facebook investor Peter Thiel as an adviser.

Yardsellr takes yet another social tack, organizing the Internet shopping experience around “Blocks”–using the traditional neighborhood yard sale as an analog inspiration for innovation.

Blocks are micro-communities of people interested in the same products, determined via social networking, specifically following them on Twitter or liking them on Facebook.

Founder Daniel Leffel said in an email that it was better to organize this way “instead of categories, because categories organize products while Blocks organize people.”

Then, he said, when sellers list items, for free, they go out into the feeds of members who have joined the relevant blocks. Sellers can then buy additional traffic to their listings.

Yardsellr also handles payments for sales, with the buyer paying a small transaction fee.

That’s opposite from eBay, where Leffel once worked. Several former eBay execs are also working at the start-up.

Topguest, a check-in loyalty service that was founded just five months ago, has gotten $2 million in Series A funding, as well as nabbing well-known Facebook investor Peter Thiel as an adviser.

Investors in the round include: Thiel’s Founders Fund, as well as angels such as Ron Conway, Keith Rabois, Jeff Clavier and Naval Ravikant.

Topguest is exiting its beta phase today with partners that include Virgin America, Hilton, Wyndham Worldwide, Kimpton and others.

Using Topguest, those companies can offer deals, making large travel and hospitality loyalty programs social by plugging them into smartphones and geolocation.

Users check in with their existing services–such as Foursquare, Twitter, Facebook Places and Gowalla–in order to get benefits such as air miles for your Virgin Elevate account and hotel points for Hilton HHonors.

Topguest is competing in a crowded market, where a lot of such services are offering many kinds of deals.

The San Francisco start-up is most like another service aimed at retailers called Shopkick, where you get points when you check in to its mobile app.

Topguest said the differentiator is that it links into geolocation services already in use, instead of requiring another different check-in and offers points in already existing loyalty programs.

The venture and hedge fund investor, who was an early backer of the company well before it became a global social networking phenomenon, said it is “relatively undervalued” at its current secondary market valuation of approximately $30 billion.

“It’s the least overvalued of the major Internet companies in the world…If it’s a choice between Google and Facebook you should be long Facebook,” Thiel said at the TechCrunch Disrupt conference in San Francisco on Monday.

That doesn’t mean he is particularly bullish on the consumer Internet sector in general. He believes that much of the growth will be captured by existing large Internet companies. For example, existing companies such as Yelp or Google could be dominant on mobile devices.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

I saw a screening of the movie last week, and can report back that it’s just as rough on the Facebook CEO as his people feared it would be.

Not because of scandalous scenes involving sex and drugs–there aren’t many of those, and they’re quite tame*. It’s because the film portrays him as an insecure jerk who screws over people and becomes a much-richer insecure jerk.

At the end of the movie, there’s a suggestion that Zuckerberg may not actually be a jerk–he may just be someone who acts like one. That’s about it when it comes to the upside of his character: He’s the bad guy in his own creation myth.

But I liked the movie a lot–I’ll see it again once it comes out in October. And given that you’re seeing these words, it’s a good bet that you will, too. If you like reading about start-ups and growth rates and valuation, then you’ll like seeing it on a big screen, right?

The best hope for Zuckerberg and his team is that the wider audience for this one could be relatively small.

The movie may not be accurate–it’s based largely on Ben Mezrich’s “The Accidental Billionaires,” which Mezrich admits has many doses of make-believe–but there is lots of inside tech/investing baseball here**, and it spends a lot of time in lawyers’ conference rooms. It’s a dark movie with a climax that hinges on stock dilution, and the only vampire to be seen is Justin Timberlake’s version of Sean Parker.

So that may be a hard sell for a really big audience, at least at first. But no matter how well it does, it’s the only version of Mark Zuckerberg that most people are going to know about, and it’s a terribly unflattering one.

If that doesn’t make you feel at least a twinge of sympathy for the guy, then I definitely don’t want to be your Facebook friend.

*Note for Henry Blodget and crew: The coke and boobs scene made it into the movie but the girls keep their bras on. There is also a scene involving a 12-foot bong, which Zuckerberg is not involved in, and another one involving two couples having bathroom sex. He is in that one.

**The movie is chock-full of real names that the start-up set will recognize, from Dustin Moskovitz to Peter Thiel, but there’s one glaring omission. Sequoia Capital and partner Mike Moritz, both singled out by name in a version of Aaron Sorkin’s script that surfaced last year, have been replaced with fictional entities in the final cut. Would love to know the backstory there….

But there are still investors willing to place some bets, even on the most nascent companies. Via the angel-investing program he’s running for the Founders Fund,
Dave McClure is one of those guys.

Founders is a VC fund run by Valley bigshots like Peter Thiel, most of whom made a lot of money when they sold PayPal to eBay (EBAY) many moons ago. Last year, they brought on McClure to handle smaller investments than they would normally make.

Founders Fund, which already owns a piece of Facebook, has already made bets on the burgeoning Facebook app ecosystem via the “fbFund,” so McClure is particularly interested in those types of companies. Which explains why I found him at the Facebook “Developer Garage”–a Facebook-sponsored mini-convention held on the outskirts of SXSW.

But McClure chatted with me about non-Facebook investments as well, and why it’s easier to find interesting deals now that he isn’t competing with amateur angels who made their money at Google (GOOG) and Yahoo (YHOO).

Bonus footage: Want to see what I look liked during this interview? I don’t recommend it, because grooming standards got a little relaxed over the weekend. But for diehards, here’s a (sped-up) version of our chat, from a different angle, via The Interwebs, which filmed me filming McClure. Down the rabbit hole we go: