Most recently, it was the risk factor that helped take down Facebook’s ill-fated IPO roadshow, when the company warned at the last minute publicly (and perhaps more emphatically privately) that mobile monetization really wasn’t keeping pace.

So it’s quite topical that today at D10, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers venture capitalist and former Wall Street analyst Mary Meeker is delivering one of her famed Internet trends presentations by depicting the opportunity for mobile advertising.

Here’s how Meeker describes it; there are a lot of stats in here, but they actually tell a rather smooth narrative:

There are 1.1 billion global mobile 3G subscribers, which is 37 percent growth but just 18 percent penetration. That’s compared to 2.3 billion global Internet users, with growth of just 8 percent from last year.

Adoption of new smart devices is happening faster than ever — the iPad and Android growth curves are way steeper than that for iPhone. But there’s still a long way to go; there are only 953 million smartphone subscriptions of the world’s 6.1 billion mobile subscriptions.

In May of this year, mobile usage hit 10 percent of total global Internet traffic, up from about 5 percent at the same time last year.

Okay, now over to the monetization side: Right now, it’s not just ads. Mobile e-commerce is 8 percent of the total e-commerce market in the U.S. Today, payments for and within applications account for 71 percent of revenue versus 29 percent for mobile advertising.

Meeker concludes there’s a “material upside” for advertising in mobile because it’s currently out of whack with the percent of total media consumption.

And that’s a pressing issue, because mobile Internet usage is replacing desktop Internet usage. In India this month, total mobile Internet was bigger than desktop Internet for the very first time.

There are lots of places to find evidence of the mobile monetization gap. Effective desktop CPMs are five times the price of mobile Internet CPMs in the U.S.: $3.50 versus $0.75. And companies like Pandora, Tencent and Zynga currently report that average revenue per user is as much as five times lower on mobile. Google’s and Facebook’s financials show mobile is constraining revenue growth.

Meeker doesn’t provide solutions to those problems, but she does surface some light at the end of the tunnel. For instance, in the more mature Japanese market, mobile game maker GREE has seen rapid growth in average revenue per user, up to $24 per user per year at the beginning of 2012. Another player, CyberAgent, has seen a similar curve, and is now up to $418 average revenue per paying user on mobile, more than what it sees on the desktop.

Using pattern recognition from the Japanese market, Meeker predicts that mobile monetization levels in the U.S. could surpass those on the desktop within one to three years. She says she thinks this pattern of dollars following eyeballs is inevitable, but “it just takes time.”

According to the report, social networking is becoming a more important means of communication and information gathering in China, where 36% of PC users said social media sites are their favorite source of content. Chinese users spend an average of 46 minutes per day on social media sites, the report says, while users in the U.S. and Japan spend 37 minutes and seven minutes on the sites per day, respectively.

Read the rest of this post on the original site »

For instance, despite her recent endorsement of Path, Britney Spears — someone who almost everyone knows a little and very few people know well — is not necessarily a natural fit for the personal network. In order to keep within Path’s limit of 150 friends, Spears’s team is reportedly planning to rotate fans through the available slots.

Another way private social tools might handle this weirdness is to effectively “break” themselves for celebrities — to let super users have super powers to communicate with lots of people.

This week, the private mobile social network Weixin did exactly that, with one of the biggest celebrities in China, pop artist Wang Leehom. For background, the American-born singer has released 25 albums since 1995, with an eclectic musical style that’s heavy on romantic ballads (see below). He’s a spokesman for Coke, Nikon, Nike and others.

Meanwhile, Weixin is a mobile messaging app from Tencent that has seen explosive growth in the past year, with more than 100 million users. Users can send voice, text, pictures and video updates in one-on-one or group conversations. Almost everything is private; users are limited to 20 friends, and there are no public posts.

Wang Leehom is one of the most popular users of Sina Weibo, with 16 million followers, and he just performed the first solo pop concert at the Beijing Olympics venue the Bird’s Nest on Saturday — for an audience of 90,000.

On the occasion of the concert, Tencent expanded Weixin to allow Wang to connect to his millions of fans in a more personal way. Through a custom integration, Wang Leehom’s voice, video and text updates arrive in users’ inboxes, in line with their private conversations.

A sample Weixin screenshot

There’s actually a Silicon Valley angle here — the whole arrangement was brokered by Andreessen Horowitz partner Connie Chan, who is a personal friend of Wang Leehom’s. For now, it’s exclusively available to him.

This isn’t a totally new idea; I’ve written a bit about a “voice Twitter” with celebrity users called Bubbly that’s big in India and elsewhere, and is backed by Sequoia Capital. But it’s particularly interesting in the recent context of the rise of mobile social apps and more private alternatives to Facebook.

On April 12, the day his celebrity Weixin account launched, Wang Leehom sent out a short video message that almost immediately brought down the Weixin servers, and he received 220,000 replies from fans, Chan told me.

When I spoke to him earlier this week, he said he’d gotten about 600,000 video responses alone, including people singing to him, reviewing Saturday’s concert and telling him not to stay up too late.

“It feels like I’m sending them a text message,” Wang Leehom said of his Weixin account. “It’s very familiar. I think people almost feel like it’s more personal to receive a message on a cellphone than to see someone in person.”

A careful and conscious social media user, despite his many brand endorsements, he writes his posts himself, and will rarely, if ever, include sponsored content or personal promotions. He said he tweets from his Sina Weibo account once a day — at night — so his fans know what to expect. A typical post gets tens of thousands of comments.

But Wang Leehom is not cross-posting his Sina Weibo updates on Weixin. “Because the medium is different, you can share different things,” he said.

For example, he said, the day he performs at a concert, he makes a practice of not talking at all, in order to save his voice. His team and his friends know well that his lips are sealed. So, this past Friday, before the Bird’s Nest show, he recorded a Weixin message, saying, “This is the very last thing I’m going to say today.” Fans loved that intimacy.

I doubt that the combination of a celebrity presence and a more private social network will always make sense. As soon as more celebrities come on board, this will become less of a novelty — and these networks won’t really be private at all. But maybe it’s less about the network itself and more about the intimacy of mobile.

Weixin is made by Chinese Internet giant Tencent, and it combines a bunch of different app functions from products you may be familiar with, like WhatsApp, Voxer and Skout. It offers individual and group chat with friends with text and voice, as well as flirting features to find people nearby and around the world.

Weixin has a few cute gimmicky features. For example, users can shake their phones and be virtually connected to someone else shaking his or her phone at the same time. I sent out an anonymous “message in a bottle” on the app and virtually immediately got replies from five people who wanted to chat. Unfortunately, I don’t speak Chinese and only one of them spoke English.

“It’s really crazy how few people in the Valley know of this app,” said a Silicon Valley VC who is currently traveling in China.

Tencent’s QQ is China’s dominant instant messaging service and Weixin is compatible with QQ accounts, but the mobile app has attracted more of a “white-collar” or “fancy” user base, according to the Chinese tech blog TechRice. The app is available for iOS, Android, Windows Mobile and Symbian.

I’ll include Weixin in my feature story next week, but thought it was worth flagging for now.

Silicon Valley’s Silver Lake and DST Global of Russia, as well as Chinese private equity firm Yunfeng Capital, are leading a $1.6 billion tender offer for privately held employee and shareholder stock of China’s Alibaba Group, according to sources close to the situation.

Yunfeng, by the way, was co-founded by Alibaba Chairman and CEO Jack Ma, as well as other prominent Chinese entrepreneurs.

Along with DST, Silver Lake and Yunfeng, Singapore-based investment firm Temasek is also participating in the tender offer as an investor, but in a smaller way.

The deal, which has been discussed for some time, was signed earlier today and will be presented to its employees in an internal company blog, which will be in Chinese.

To get around persistent foreign ownership issues in China, sources said, DST and Silver Lake are ceding voting control of their stakes to Alibaba management.

If the tender is fully subscribed, that would mean a stake of just under five percent for the group, sources said, and it gives Alibaba a $32 billion enterprise valuation.

The impetus for the tender offer, which begins today, appears to be trying to address a cash-out, paper-rich issue for Alibaba employees.

There are no active secondary private markets in China, as is the case for tech start-ups in the U.S., and there is also no IPO in the foreseeable future for Alibaba. Thus, management has been looking for a way to give its employees and also other shareholders some liquidity.

This tender offer is not a capital raise by Alibaba and is only aimed at eligible employees and shareholders. The purchase of the Alibaba shares is expected to close before the end of December.

It will be done via a special investment vehicle, specifically aimed at this purchase, that includes a spate of investors. Giant Interactive Group, a Chinese online game developer, for example, said it had committed $50 million to the fund.

It’s not clear what the implications are for Alibaba’s biggest shareholder, Yahoo, which sources said is not selling shares in the tender offer. Yahoo’s fully diluted Alibaba 39 percent stake is now worth $12.5 billion in the deal.

That’s discounted due to tax issues and also the inability of the Silicon Valley Internet giant to sell its Alibaba shares.

In other words, investors will likely welcome this higher valuation, but realize a public offering is farther away than ever.

But it is interesting in that it clearly shows a strong relationship between DST and Silver Lake, which have jointly been mulling a possible bid for Yahoo along with Silicon Valley venture firm Andreessen Horowitz, as I previously reported.

Some will speculate that Silver Lake and DST now have an in with Alibaba, which is important, since a large slug of Yahoo’s market valuation is due to its Alibaba and also Yahoo Japan! assets.

If Yahoo is sold, of course, the disposition of the Alibaba asset is an important part of the deal.

More to come, including the implications for Ma, who has been under siege of late around his spinning out of Alibaba’s Alipay payments service and the noisy battle that later ensued with Yahoo. Yahoo and Alibaba, as well as its other large shareholder, Japan’s SoftBank, settled that dispute earlier this summer.

His involvement in Yunfeng, which is buying the company’s shares in a special fund that Ma is not in, will likely attract some scrutiny, anyway.

Sources said Ma is a minority investor in Yunfeng itself, has no control rights and is not a director. In addition, Yunfeng has no relationship with Alibaba.

In another interesting twist, Alibaba rival Tencent has close ties with DST’s Internet affiliate that used to share the same name, having invested $300 million last year in the affiliate that holds major Russian Internet properties.

“Going to China” is a trend we began to see among start-ups early last year, and it has picked up considerable momentum since then. Given the track record of U.S. Internet companies in China — which could at best be described as “mixed” and, at worst, “disastrous” — one might wonder why today’s upstarts believe they’ve got what it takes to be successful in the world’s largest Internet market. China has an estimated 400 million Internet users today, and will have 750 million by 2015, according to a recent McKinsey & Company study.

From our vantage point, it’s not that American entrepreneurs and CEOs suddenly feel they’ve cracked the code on China. Rather, the Chinese market opportunity has become so large, they simply can’t ignore it. The massive potential rewards of “going to China” now outweigh the massive potential risks — especially now that the U.S. market, with all its recent troubles, is no sure bet itself.

The market potential in China is easy to see when you visit the bustling streets of Shanghai or Beijing. As investors in both China and the U.S., we have our own take on why we think China is rapidly becoming a core strategy for every high-growth Internet company today.

• Growth for Fortune 100 companies is coming from China, not the U.S. (or Europe). Case in point: Mercedes sold more S-Class sedans in China last year than in the U.S. and Germany combined. Mercedes sales in China grew 60 percent last year versus nine percent in the rest of the world. Even if you own large-cap U.S. equities in your personal portfolio, mutual funds or 401K, those companies’ main revenue growth is likely coming from China — and economic growth in the U.S. is hardly assured at this point.
• Incomes are rising in China while remaining flat in the U.S. The Chinese middle class numbers in the hundreds of millions (100-300 million, depending on your source), with household income rising an estimated 98 percent since 2004, according to Credit Suisse Group. Even the bottom 20 percent of households saw their incomes rise 50 percent in the same time period. Contrast this with the U.S., where household income growth has stagnated, barely keeping pace with the rate of inflation since 1990. This flat-line income stagnation isn’t likely to change anytime soon, especially in today’s challenging economic climate.
• The Chinese have money, and they’re spending it. Chinese consumers buy an estimated 12 percent of the world’s luxury goods, growing at a 30 percent clip per year, according to Barclays Capital. Spend a day in Shanghai, Beijing or Hong Kong and you’ll be blown away at the breadth of luxury stores in major downtown areas — and the number of shoppers crowding the shops.

So what does this mean for U.S. Internet companies? It means the same thing it does for Mercedes, Apple or P&G — you simply can’t ignore China anymore.

To date, most success stories among U.S. tech companies in China are enterprise or mobile companies in the Fortune 1000 — HP, Microsoft, Cisco, Intel, etc. Each of these companies has built a $1B-plus business in China, but it took them decades to do so, with many speed bumps along the way.

We can’t argue with the dismal results of most U.S. Internet companies thus far in China — first-generation Internet companies like Amazon, eBay, Yahoo and Google have largely failed in China, and newcomers like Facebook and Twitter have been hampered due to strict Chinese government regulations. But we can highlight a few data points that suggest smart U.S. companies can and will attain success in China in the next five to 10 years.

• Demographics. Internet demographics keep getting better in China. Robin Li, founder and CEO of Baidu, spoke at our 10th anniversary event in Shanghai last November. He pointed out that when he launched Baidu in 1999, there were fewer than 30 million Internet users in China, and the total Internet ad market was worth less than $50 million. Today, Baidu sports a $50 billion market cap and Robin is a billionaire. Today there are more than 400 million Internet users in China. Combine this audience size with the rising incomes mentioned above, and you just can’t get a better audience for an Internet company.

• Market share. More than 70 percent of the world’s virtual goods sales in 2010 occurred in the Asia/Pacific region. It’s no wonder why Tencent, which pioneered the virtual goods market now being replicated by Zynga, generates more than $4 billion in annual revenue from gaming and virtual goods, and sports a $45 billion market capitalization. China’s Internet advertising market is growing at an estimated 50 percent or more per year.
• Platform diversity. In the U.S., Facebook is the go-to outlet for social marketing, accounting for more than 80 percent of the market (though it will be interesting to see if Google+ makes a dent in this over the next 12 months). In China, there are social platforms you’ve never heard of that each have hundreds of millions of users. Sina Weibo (think “China’s Twitter”) has more than 140 million users, more than 50 million monthly actives, and is adding more than 10 million new users per month. YY has millions of users, many of whom spend hours per day on the platform. Last year, YY users consumed more Internet voice minutes than Skype. (Disclosure: Our firm, GGV Capital, is an investor in YY.)

In recent months, several U.S. Internet companies have made their move on China. Zynga recently announced a partnership with Tencent to launch its games in China. Earlier in the year, Groupon entered China through an investment into local group-buying site GaoPeng.com. Both of these companies are going after China a mere two to three years after launching in the U.S. — an unheard-of undertaking just a few short years ago.

Our bet is there will be hundreds more U.S. Internet companies talking about China in the boardroom over the next two years. We’d wager more than 90 percent of high-profile American Internet companies will spend a lot of time, money, and energy to enter China — either on their own or via local partnerships. Many will fail to catch on with Chinese consumers. But for the relatively small percentage of companies that succeed, China will bring massively outsized returns. Internet companies that win the hearts and minds of Chinese consumers are the companies to bet on for long-term growth.

Jeff Richards (Menlo Park) and Jenny Lee (Shanghai) are Partners at GGV Capital, a $1 billion venture capital firm investing in the U.S. and China since 2000. Representative GGV investments include Alibaba Group, Pandora Media, YY, Buddy Media, Tudou, SuccessFactors, Square, and 21ViaNet.

Facing a barrage of negative press about its upcoming IPO, Groupon CEO and co-founder Andrew Mason took up a pen to counter critics of the social buying service.

Especially under scrutiny has been the Chicago-based Groupon’s accounting of its finances — along with worries that its torrid growth is slowing — both of which Mason addressed in detail in a pugnacious email memo to his thousands of employees.

Specifically referencing a recent article speculating that the daily deals site was running out of money, Mason said, in part:

“While we’ve bitten our tongues and allowed insane accusations (like in the article above) to go unchallenged publicly, it’s important to me that you have the context necessary to brush this stuff off.”

Mason also took on the controversial ACSOI — or adjusted consolidated segment operating income — metric that Groupon used in its initial filing and later stepped back from.

“The reason we didn’t realize everyone in the world would hate ACSOI (no, it’s not the same reason we didn’t realize everyone in the world would hate our Superbowl ad), is that we think it actually does a pretty good job at describing our marketing expenses in a steady state — we just didn’t realize there would be so many skeptics,” wrote Mason.

Mason also took some aim at competitors, such as LivingSocial and Yelp, in the email.

As for the public offering, which is expected next month:

“If there’s a silver lining, it’s that we’re almost on the other side, and the negativity leaves us well-positioned to exceed expectations with an IPO baby that, having seen the ultrasound, I can promise you is not one of those uglies.”

Then again, that is exactly what a dad-to-be would say about his baby, whatever it looked like.

Mason, when asked about the memo, declined to comment.

There is a lot more than that, so here’s Mason’s full email for all you pencil pushers to peruse:

Dear Groupon,

This weekend, I did a Google News search on our company — my first in awhile. The first story that popped up was called The Fall of Groupon: Is the Daily Deals Site Running Out of Cash? I laughed when I read the headline (in the car by myself, weirdly). First — with this article, the degree to which we’re getting the shit kicked out of us in the press had finally crossed the threshold from “annoying” to “hilarious.” Second, I was struck by the irony — I had just finished a board meeting last Wednesday saying this to myself: I’ve never been more confident and excited about the future of our business.

I realize that this sounds like the kind of thing that CEOs say when they’re trying to pep people up. First of all — I’m all about not pepping people up. If you don’t believe me, just ask my fiancée, Jenny “why don’t you ever say anything nice about me” Gillespie. Want another example? Look at the magazine covers in our lobby, which are there to make you sad by reminding you of the impermanence of success.

I’m going to spend the rest of this email explaining why I’m so excited. You need some ammo to argue back against your blog-reading “friends” (silently argue in your mind, that is — you can’t actually say any of this yet), and I’ve been told that the “what have you ever done with your life that’s so great?” rebuttal isn’t working as well for you guys as it has for me.

While we’ve bitten our tongues and allowed insane accusations (like in the article above) to go unchallenged publicly, it’s important to me that you have the context necessary to brush this stuff off.

I’ll summarize my excitement with four points: 1) Growth in our core business is strong 2) Our investments in the future — businesses like Getaways & NOW — look great, 3) We are pulling away from competition, and 4) We’ve built a great team that I would pit against anyone. In other words, all the stuff that one would want to look good? It looks good.

Many of the long-term unknowns of our business are becoming known, and we like the answers. I will now elaborate in a level of financial detail that will give Jason Child a stomach ulcer.

1. GROWTH IN THE CORE BUSINESS

Thanks to a tremendous effort by our sales team, August in the U.S. is shaping up to be a pivotal month. It appears that will revenues grow by about 12% over last month (which is a lot), while we cut our marketing expenses by 20% in the same period.

Beyond their obvious goodness, these numbers are important because they answer one of the main criticisms thrown at us in the past few months, relating to a metric we put in the S-1 called ACSOI (adjusted consolidated segment operating income) to help people understand how we think about marketing expenses. The reason everyone in the world seems to hate ACSOI is that it makes us look magically profitable by subtracting a bunch of our customer acquisition marketing costs from our expenses. The reason we didn’t realize everyone in the world would hate ACSOI (no, it’s not the same reason we didn’t realize everyone in the world would hate our Superbowl ad), is that we think it actually does a pretty good job at describing our marketing expenses in a steady state –we just didn’t realize there would be so many skeptics. I think it’s worth going deep on this one more time — brace yourself.

Our internal forecast shows two different types of marketing: what I’ll call “normal marketing” — which is NOT excluded from ACSOI — and “customer acquisition marketing,” which is. The way Groupon spends on marketing is unique in three ways:

1. We are currently spending more than just about any company ever on marketing — in Q2, we spent nearly 20% of our net revenue on marketing, while a typical company spends less than 5%. Why do we spend so much? The simple answer is “because it works.” But thats only part of what makes our situation special.

2. Our marketing — at least the customer acquisition marketing that we remove from ACSOI — is designed to add people to our own long-term marketing channel — our daily email list. Once we have a customer’s email, we can continually market to them at no additional cost. Compare this to Johnson and Johnson, McDonald’s, or most other companies. If I’m a Johnson, and I’m trying to sell you a box of Band Aids, I have to keep spending money on commercials and magazine ads and stuff to remind you about how sweet Band Aids are, even after you’ve bought your first box. With Groupon, we just spend money one time to get you on our email list, and then every day we email you a reminder of the sweetness of our metaphorical Band Aid. There is no cost of reacquisition — that’s unusual (and we created ACSOI to point that out). If Johnson wanted to follow the Groupon strategy, he would have to start a free daily newspaper about bandages and then run Band Aid ads in it every day.

3. Eventually, we’ll ramp down marketing just as fast as we ramped it up, reducing the customer acquisition part of our marketing expenses (the piece that we remove in ACSOI) to nominal levels. We are spending a ton now because we’re acquiring as many subscribers as we can as quickly as we can. We aren’t paying attention to marketing budget (just marketing ROI) in the way a normal company would, because we know that even if we wanted to continue to spend at these levels, we would eventually run out of new subscribers to acquire. So our customer acquisition spend drops severely to reflect the fact that eventually we’ll run out of people we can add to our email list. We view this internally as a very large one-time expense and then our job forever after will be to continually convert these subscribers into customers and to make sure our customers keep buying from us. Ongoing, the normal marketing dollars we spend are not something we would remove from our internal calculation of ACSOI.

I tried my best to explain this simply, but it’s not lost on me that if you actually understood this, you probably had to read it three times. It’s not easy stuff. It’s much easier to assume that we’re goons. So people can be forgiven for being suspicious. In fact, feel a little bad about how downhearted the critics will be when we don’t turn out to be a Ponzi scheme — those are good impulses for journalists to have, and I hope our non-evil ways don’t destroy their spirits.

Anyway, there’s a reason that I just went on about ACSOI. One of the questions that skeptics ask is, “when you ramp down marketing, won’t revenues stop growing as well? Aren’t you just buying growth?” Over the past several months we’ve been consistently reducing our marketing spend and yet revenues are still increasing at a significant pace. In Q1 of this year, marketing represented 32.3% of our net revenues. By the end of Q2 it had fallen to 19.4%. And it has continued to fall over the past several months all because we’ve been investing in our own long-term marketing channel — our email list.

Internationally we see the same trends — marketing is down, but revenues are up — every country is either losing less or making more. Even in young markets like Korea, where we’re still making massive investments, we’re seeing unprecedented growth. We started building our Korean team this January, despite the presence of two competitors that were larger than any we’d previously battled from behind. Thanks to the brilliant execution of the Korean team, we are set to be the market leader within months. We’ve never had a country grow as fast as Korea!

What about our joint-venture with Tencent in China? Did you read the article that Gaopeng’s CEO has kidnapped the first born children of all our employees and is putting them to work building a laser beam he’ll use to slice the moon in half? It turns out that that one isn’t true either. China is definitely a different market, but every month we inch closer to profitability. As has been our strategy in launching other countries — Germany, France, and the UK, included — our China growth strategy was to hire quickly and manage out the bottom performers. So far, that strategy has improved our competitive position in China from #3,000 to #8. Will we one day reach the dominant status we enjoy in most (come on, Switzerland!) other countries? It’s too soon to tell, but there’s no question in my mind that we’re building a business that will be around for the long haul.

2. NEW BUSINESS LINES ARE BOOMING

Travel and Product are enormous opportunities. After only a few months, they’re already making up 20% of revenue in some countries. We sold $2M worth of mattresses in the UK — in one day! Groupon Getaways will do $10M in its first calendar month — which you might think is awesome, but we’re actually disappointed with those results because we know how much better we’ll be doing soon.

While there’s still a ton of work to do, Groupon Now! continues to see weekly double digit growth. The model works and I believe it will play a major part in the future of our global business as more merchants and customers join the marketplace.

3. WE ARE PULLING AWAY FROM COMPETITION

If there’s a question I’ve received from Groupon skeptics more than any other, it’s, “how will you fend off the competition — especially massive companies like Google and Facebook?” I could give a dozen reasons to bet on Groupon, but it’s impossible to predict the future or the actions of others. Well, now the sleeping giants have woken up — and the numbers are showing that what was proven true with literally thousands of other competitors is just as true with the incumbents of the Internet: it’s kind of hard to build a Groupon. And since anyone with an Internet connection can track the performance of our competitors, I can be more specific:

Google Offers is small and not growing. In the three markets where we compete, we are 450% of their size.

Yelp is small and not growing. In the 15 markets where we compete, our daily deals are 500% of their size.

Living Social’s U.S. local business is about 1/3rd our size in revenue (and smaller in GP) and has shrunk relative to us in the last several months. This, in part, appears to be driving them toward short-sighted tactics to buy revenue, like buying gift certificates from national retailers at full price and then paying out of their own pocket to give the appearance of a 50% off deal. Our marketing team has tested this tactic enough to know that it’s generally a bad idea, and not a profitable form of customer acquisition.

Facebook sales are harder to track, but are even less significant at present.

My point is not that our competitors will fail — some may actually develop sustainable businesses, or even grow — after all, local commerce is an enormous market. The real point is that our business is a lot harder to build than people realize and our scale creates competitive advantages that even the largest technology companies are having trouble penetrating. And with the launch of NOW, I suspect our competition will have an even harder time in light of the natural barriers to entry that are needed to build a real-time local deals marketplace.

4. OUR TEAM

This is the fluffiest of the four points, but maybe the most important — we’ve built a global team of hungry entrepreneurial operators and seasoned executives that rivals any team I know of. Almost every day, I find myself in a scenario where I silently think, “I can’t believe I got this person to work for me — that failure of judgement is perhaps their single flaw.”

I point out the team because while today the business is strong and it appears we must endure success for awhile longer (despite its impermanence), we will inevitably be challenged with issues we didn’t predict — and when that happens, the quality of our team will be a deciding factor in our ultimate long-term success.

FINAL THOUGHTS

I wrote this email because when I read some of the press this weekend, I realized a rational person could read this stuff and wrongly conclude that we’re in trouble. The irony is hopefully clear: We’ve never been stronger.

And while we’ve refrained from defending ourselves publicly, you’ve continued to create our best defense, with every department innovating new practices that are taking our business to the next level. Thanks for staying tough, determined, and agile throughout this process. For now we must patiently and silently endure a bit more public criticism as we prepare to birth this IPO baby — a breed for which there are no epidurals. If there’s a silver lining, it’s that we’re almost on the other side, and the negativity leaves us well-positioned to exceed expectations with an IPO baby that, having seen the ultrasound, I can promise you is not one of those uglies.

I’ve been as candid as possible — hope this sheds some light on things. Reply with your questions if anything remains unclear. Amidst all this, I hope you remember what we’re doing here — we are making history together. I guess you don’t get to build something that reshapes the local commerce ecosytem without getting a few bruises. I’m so proud of the work we’re doing, and I feel extraordinarily lucky to work on what I think is the best thing that’s happened to small businesses since the telephone We’ve invented something that is catalyzing millions of dollars of local commerce every single day in 45 countries and fills the lives of millions of customers with unforgettable experiences — it’s pretty remarkable.

Looking forward to getting this behind us!

Andrew

P.S.: I almost forgot to address the nonsense about us running out of money in the article above. If you apply the same logic used in the article, you’d have concluded long ago that companies like Amazon and Wal-Mart were running out of cash too. Both have often had payables far in excess of their cash. Finance geeks call this a working capital deficit. It’s normal, manageable and a lot of folks actually believe it’s good thing and would kill to get paid from their customers long before they have to pay their suppliers. We are generating cash, not losing it — we generated $25M in cash last quarter alone, adding to the $200M we had before. In other words, we’re doing the opposite of running out of money.

Speaking of “it looks good,” here is Conan O’Brien with a Tourette’s version of Mason’s new catchphrase:

But tonight it is announcing that it has partnered with Tencent, a massive Internet company in China, to roll out a beta version of CityVille, which will launch under the name Zynga City.

The partnership is important for the largest social games developer on Facebook, which is looking to diversify by expanding the number of partners it works with and by entering new markets.

Zynga first entered the Chinese market in May 2010 by acquiring XPD Media, a company developing social games. Since then, Zynga says the office has become one of its largest internationally and that it continues to grow. To date, it has launched games in Hong Kong and Taiwan — but not mainland China, where Facebook is blocked.

Zynga City will operate on Tencent’s Open Platform as a beta and then will be more widely launched on several Tencent platforms down the road.

Zynga City will look and behave a lot like the CityVille game, which is played by more than 80 million users a month and is the most popular app on Facebook.

Users will build up their city by adding homes, businesses and government buildings, but this version will be localized to make the game play more fitting for a Chinese audience, ranging from special decorations and architecture to being able to send street peddlers to their friends’ cities.

Zynga has agreed to several game title exclusives with Facebook, and while CityVille is not listed as one of them, it’s unclear whether this would be considered breaking the agreement because the name has changed, along with several of the game elements.

It’s hard to tell if any of Zynga’s other games, like FarmVille or Mafia Wars, will also launch on the Tencent platform.

Last week, PopCap accepted Electronic Arts’ bid of $1.3 billion, including earn-outs, and opted to turn down a smaller — but all-cash — $1 billion offer from Zynga.

With that kind of dough raining down on the games industry, it’s obvious that more blockbuster purchases will ensue.

If that’s the case, the question is who will be next?

First, it’s important to understand why there’s a sense of urgency. Right now, nontraditional digital gaming platforms, like mobile and social, are really starting to take off, and game publishers need new content and expertise to be a player on those platforms.

“The general conversations have increased,” said Kushal Saha, the managing director of the Information Technology practice at Cascadia Capital, a Seattle-based investment bank. “We are seeing a lot more activity in financings as well. When you have a $1.3 billion acquisition, that really creates a lot of tailwinds from investors and strategics.”

Tim Chang, a partner at Norwest Venture Partners, has a theory as to who will be the most active in the next wave of acquisitions: It will be companies from China and Japan that are trying to get a foothold in the lucrative U.S. games market.

Here are just some of the recent transactions: Tencent, the giant Chinese Web holding company, bought Los Angeles-based Riot Games for about $400 million; OpenFeint was purchased by Japan-based Gree for $100 million in April; and Japan-based DeNA bought San Francisco-based ngmoco for $400 million late last year.

Specifically, he says these companies will be looking to buy game studios, which can create content for new platforms.

Ngmoco is building a mobile social network, and while it develops some games in-house, DeNA will need much more content to be successful. Same goes for Gree, which purchased OpenFeint, a mobile social platform that has 100 million players signed up.

Gree’s Senior Product Manager Jori Pearsall said that Gree is trying hard to get up and running in the U.S., where they have hired about 40 employees who are independent from OpenFeint.

Pearsall says its first game is expected to launch soon on the OpenFeint mobile social network.

In other words, first comes distribution. Next up: content.

One example of this already taking place is the merger between 6waves and Lolapps, which was announced earlier this week. San Francisco-based Lolapps is making social games for Facebook, while Hong Kong-based 6waves has been more focused on building a publishing platform.

Together, the two will have a publishing platform with its own games.

One of the companies that is being considered an obvious acquisition target is Glu Mobile, which is making social games for smartphones and tablets. Since the PopCap acquisition was announced, Glu’s stock has been trading close to $6 a share, up from $5.20 early last week. It is now trading at $5.64.

Are people sniffing around Glu?

“Nothing is off the table. We’ll do what’s best for the shareholders. We have a vision and a strategy and we are executing on the goal of transitioning to one of the top three feature phone companies to our goal of being one of the top freemium tablet and smartphone games company,” said Michael Breslin, Glu’s VP of marketing.

Other potential acquirers are in the U.S., ranging from content companies like Time Warner and Disney to other game makers like Activision, THQ or Ubisoft. Zynga has been acquiring more than one company every month for nearly a year. Google could even be a candidate if it’s truly serious about its Google+ games network.

Other companies for sale that would have the content and the talent include any of the independent studios in the top 20 on Facebook or iOS, ranging from Crowdstar to RockYou, or even a virtual world like Linden Lab.

Photo Credit: Jason Pratt.

Tencent Holdings Limited, the giant Chinese Web holding company, has invested in $84.4 million for a 16 percent stake, and Expedia has invested $41.2 million to increase its stake to 56 percent.

Tencent said the investment marks its first in the travel industry. In the future, Tencent may form a business partnership with eLong to distribute its hotel database to its community of 674 million active users in China.

The investment by Expedia follows previous investments and partnerships with the company.

“China is a key region for us from a strategic perspective,” said Dara Khosrowshahi, Expedia’s president and CEO. “Aligning ourselves with the online industry leader in China, and increasing our own investment in eLong, strengthens our position in this critical market, and will allow eLong to strengthen its outstanding online hotel services and provide air and hotel products to more and more customers in China.”

ELong covers more than 150,000 hotel properties worldwide, including more than 19,000 hotels in China, and 130,000 internationally through its partnership with Expedia.

The bigger push into international markets comes a month after Expedia announced it would spin off TripAdvisor into a separate public company. The company also announced a joint venture with AirAsia to sell hotel, air and holiday packages.

Because while the country is a key global market, doing business there is rife with all kinds of thorny challenges and troublesome compromises.

So, despite its progressively weaker denials, numerous sources said Facebook is preparing to launch in China. Now, the social networking giant is working out the details of a localized Chinese offering and trying to execute them as quickly as is prudent.

Perhaps the most important detail of Facebook’s planned China offering is that it will likely be connected to the greater international Facebook community, rather than operated as an independent social network.

While some had advised Facebook to start with a closed Chinese service, sources said the company seems inclined to launch it as a network linked to the rest of the world.

That’s not a decision without controversy, due to the strictures of operating within an authoritarian state.

When Facebook users outside China connect with users inside China, sources said they will need to click through a warning that any material visible to Chinese users may also be visible to the Chinese government.

Over the past few weeks, NetworkEffect has spoken to numerous sources in and around Facebook about how Facebook.cn will come to be.

Picking a Partner

As has been reported elsewhere, Facebook will almost certainly launch its China version in partnership with Baidu.

While Facebook insists that no deal has been signed with anyone, sources within and around the company described Baidu as the most serious competitor.

Alibaba had also been in the running, but sources said its leaders had voiced disagreement with Facebook’s vision for connecting Chinese users to one global social graph, rather than first starting with a closed system.

Alibaba advised the more conservative approach, given that the Chinese political situation is currently quite tricky and the U.S. government would likely find fault with Facebook seeming to play any role in censoring its users in China, said sources.

A source familiar with those talks said of Facebook’s inclination to go with Baidu over Alibaba, “It was an issue of Mr. Right Now instead of Mr. Right.”

Other partners considered included Sina, Tencent and China Mobile, but Sina and Tencent have their own social offerings that were judged to be too competitive with Facebook, said sources.

In the meantime, Baidu–often called the Google of China–is very much like Google in that it has little in the way of social strategy.

Facebook, led by its CEO Mark Zuckerberg, has increased its sense of urgency about having a presence in China. Zuckerberg visited China in December, where he met with entrepreneurs from Baidu, Sina and China Mobile.

Baidu leaders then came to visit Facebook twice in February, at which point some say a deal to work together was struck, although Facebook emphatically denies any official papers have been signed.

Facebook’s current official statement on the matter: “We are currently studying and learning about China, as part of evaluating any possible approaches that could benefit our users, developers and advertisers.”

Baidu had no comment.

The Perfect Time Is Never

Facebook, which is currently blocked in China, finds the market hard to resist despite the ethical implications of cooperating with its government. Zuckerberg said in an interview at Stanford last fall that Facebook determined in 2010 that China was one of the four remaining target countries it was not yet “winning or on a path to win,” along with Korea, Japan and Russia.

Of China, Zuckerberg said specifically: “How can you connect the whole world if you leave out 1.6 billion people?”

Leaders at the company–whose mission is to “make the world more open and connected”–feel it is important to include Chinese users as part of the larger global social network, rather than keeping them separate. The solution they have apparently arrived at is to show the warning messages about connections between the larger Facebook network and the Chinese-censored Facebook.

That sentiment could be looked at as laudable–as it brings a modicum of openness to China–or cynical, in that it requires a major ethical compromise.

That said, Facebook already employs censorship in several countries it operates in currently, such as Pakistan and Germany, in order to abide by local laws.

“It was a very active dialogue inside the company, but there was no other way to operate in China,” said a person familiar with the discussions.

And there aren’t good examples of American Internet companies successfully operating in China for Facebook to draw inspiration from.

Google’s internal moral dilemmas about operating in China are well known. But while Google is primarily a search engine, Facebook’s product is a platform for communication and organizing.

The situation in China is even more challenging following revolutions in the Middle East and North Africa that have been closely tied to Facebook and social media.

Facebook has been careful not to claim any credit for popular uprisings or to align itself as a force of democracy, but others outside the company have made those connections for it.

Facebook currently has about 400,000 active Chinese users, many of whom access the site by evading the so-called “Great Firewall of China” through use of virtual private networks.

Meanwhile, social sites within China are rocketing up in usage and becoming financially significant. Sina Weibo, which is much like Twitter, is said to have something like 100 million users.

And RenRen, the social network that has followed Facebook’s execution step by step, has filed to go public on the New York Stock Exchange with a $4 billion valuation.

Sources close to Facebook said that RenRen’s U.S. fundraising, in particular, is a significant motivator for Facebook to launch its China offering sooner rather than later.

“I would not discount the need for Facebook not to sit by and watch a significant competitor gain that much advantage,” said one person close to the situation.

Nuts and Bolts

Under discussions now taking place, sources said Facebook’s proposed plan could have Facebook and Baidu share the cost of setting up servers in China, and share revenue from the local version of the site. The local partner, Baidu, would presumably manage the censoring of the site and ongoing dealings with Chinese authorities.

As described above, when users outside China opt to connect to those inside China, they would see a warning message about the Chinese government.

As we all know, users are notoriously good at clicking through pop-up warnings without reading them, although this one is sure to get more notice.

Facebook could also use a combination of what it calls input filters and display filters, where Chinese users won’t be able to post or view content that’s objectionable to the Chinese government, but the rest of Facebook can run normally, sources said.

It will be a somewhat complicated technological endeavor to ensure that non-Chinese portions of the site don’t get stored in China.

Finally, Palo Alto, Calif.-based Facebook is considering sending a small group of its employees to help manage operations, but sources close to the company said this issue is still being debated due to safety considerations related to China’s oppressive government.

Ready, Set, Controversy

Net Jacobsson, who led Facebook’s previous effort to enter China–a translated version of the site that was launched around the time of the Beijing Olympics and was live for only a few days before being blocked–said in an interview with NetworkEffect that it’s not just entering China that’s difficult, but what comes after.

Jacobsson is no longer with the company and said he does not have direct knowledge of its current plans.

In addition to complying with rules forbidding political speech, gambling and pornography, as well as government requests for user information, American companies operating in China have to deal with ruthless local competition and incensed and vocal politicians in the United States.

“It will be difficult just trying to manage those two different worlds in a world that is so transparent,” Jacobsson said.

Obviously, Facebook getting involved in censorship in China will be a difficult concept for many people to swallow. In China, censorship is largely expected and normal and citizens are used to reading between the lines.

In the U.S., it’s considered a serious compromise of freedom.

Sources close to Facebook maintain that the company already censors some user contributions in accordance with local laws in Germany, Pakistan and Italy, so abiding by Chinese censorship rules is consistent.

But China’s size, importance and–more to the point–its suppression of free speech are unmatched.

(Please see the disclosure about Facebook in my ethics statement.)

Backers include Chinese Internet firm Tencent, Japanese social network GREE, and KDDI, Japan’s second largest mobile operator. The A-Fund, as the effort is known, will be managed by DCM and is already working on closing its first couple of investments.

In an interview on Thursday, DCM general partner David Chao said that the opportunity Android presents is unprecedented.

“This is the equivalent of when Microsoft came up with Windows to combat the pioneering stuff that the Macintosh came up with,” Chao told Mobilized. “We are just seeing the tip of the iceberg in terms of Android becoming a dominant operating system in terms of mobile and connected systems.”

Of course, DCM is far from the only venture firm focused on Android, nor is the new fund the only one focused on Google’s operating system. Accel’s Rich Wong, for example, has been a huge proponent of Android and backer of firms that are focused on that platform.

Still, Chao said there are still product areas and regions where Android-based efforts are underfunded. In particular, he mentioned that companies in Japan and China as well as those focused on digital media and tablet applications are among the spots in need of further investment. The A-Fund, he said, is open to companies of all sizes and in all regions. It’s also open to companies doing services and hardware and not just those making applications.

“We absolutely do not want the world to think this is just an app fund,” Chao said.

Although the focus of the fund is on spurring the Android-based economy, Chao said the fund doesn’t mandate that those it invests in focus solely on Google’s operating system. However, the ideal companies, he said, are “Android-heavy” ones whose ideas haven’t been possible in more restrictive ecosystems, such as the one surrounding Apple’s iPhone.

“We are looking for companies that truly take advantage of the openness of Android and companies that are obviously relatively potentially frustrated with the other platforms,” Chao said.

Although it has now been a couple of years since the launch of the G1, the first Android phone, the operating system has posted significant gains in recent months and is expanding its reach later this year, in particular as devices as low as $50 or $75 arrive in developing markets. Android-based devices are expected to make up 40 percent of the smartphone market this year, according to IDC.

In about a month, the company expects to announce additional investment partners outside of Asia, as well as the first companies in which the fund is investing.

“We are closing three or four deals as we speak,” Chao said.

(Android pop image courtesy of Flickr user asirap)

China has more Internet users than any other nation, but the market here is tightly regulated by the government. And as fragmented as the online local deals business can be in the U.S., local competitors say it’s even more so in China where everything from household income to tastes in food vary widely from city to city.

Groupon, which sells daily coupons on meals, spa visits and other local deals, launched Gaopeng.com in partnership with Tencent Holdings Ltd. and private equity firm Yunfeng Capital on Monday. The new site’s name appears to be taken from a Chinese phrase meaning “cherished friend sitting around the table.”

Chicago-based Groupon’s Chinese site will be up against hundreds of Chinese group-buying and local-deals websites—plus related services provided by Taobao, the online marketplace of Alibaba Group.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

It’s yet another big-dollar buyout for the game industry, which has been in an M&A frenzy for about a year, and one of the biggest investments by a Chinese company in an American digital property.

The transaction was first reported by Bloomberg, and Riot confirmed the deal to VentureBeat, though neither outlet has the financial details. Here’s how they break down, according to people familiar with the transaction:

• Tencent, which had already invested in the game maker, will pay “just south” of $400 million to buy out other investors, primarily Benchmark Capital and FirstMark Capital, which along with angels had put approximately $18 million into the company.
• The company’s management team will receive some portion of that buyout themselves, but will also retain an equity stake; some will receive “stay packages.”
• The total investment values the company at $472 million.

The chief appeal of Tencent is Riot’s League of Legends game, which is free to play but encourages players to pay for extra goodies via micro-transactions. (Thanks to readers who educated me about what you can and can’t buy with real-world money in the game.)

In that sense it’s like Zynga’s FarmVille and other popular social games. But it’s a much more sophisticated game, with arcade-style action: Think of World of Warcraft, on steroids and amphetamines.

The deal follows a string of Web-based game deals in the last year. Among the more notable ones: Walt Disney purchased Playdom, Electronic Arts purchased Playfish and DeNA purchased Ngmoco.

Groupon is in talks with Chinese Internet giant Tencent to form a partnership to accelerate its effort in the critical Asian arena, said several sources with knowledge of the situation.

Terms of the deal are unclear, but sources said that it is likely to involve some sort of co-branded joint venture effort between the two–a key strategic move for Groupon, given the hard-to-penetrate-if-you’re-not-Chinese Chinese market.

More typical for Groupon has been to buy a top local player abroad and rebrand it, such as its launch of Groupon Hong Kong, Groupon Singapore and Groupon Philippines and Groupon Taiwan through the early December acquisition of daily deal sites uBuyiBuy, Beeconomic and Atlaspost, respectively.

Moving into the lucrative international arena, where there are innumerable clones of the dominant social buying service, is one of the big strategic reasons for Groupon’s recent $1 billion funding and also last week’s very noisy IPO toe-dipping.

(How much is BoomTown wishing I could be a fly on the wall to see all those investment bankers courting kooky Groupon CEO Andrew Mason? Memo to Andrew: Act like Snooki from “Jersey Shore” and see how they still slavishly kiss up to you like the soul-sucking suck-ups they are.)

Back to China, where cloning popular U.S. Internet brands has become an art form.

That includes one particularly appalling rip-off (pictured here) in China that looks exactly like Groupon and is actually called Groupon.cn.

(Although you’ve got to be in awe of the complete non-effort to pretend it is anything but a complete shoplifting of the brand.)

But, no matter how much that digital swiping goes on, much of Groupon’s growth recently has been outside the U.S., and the company’s strategic future lies internationally.

Of course, global expansion–especially in the famously difficult Chinese market, where the government favors native companies to an unprecedented degree–has stymied many other U.S. Internet phenoms, from eBay to Google to Facebook. (In fact, for obviously thorny privacy reasons, the social networking site has no presence in China.)

But for Groupon, especially with its public offering plans and need to distance itself from close rivals such as LivingSocial, it is a must-do to reach the deal-crazy and huge audience in China.

Thus, having Tencent as its partner is an obvious plus, given it is one of the biggest Internet services in the country, including its huge QQ instant messaging offering.

In addition, there is a strong link between Tencent and one of Groupon’s key investors, Mail.ru Group.

Mail.ru owns five percent of Groupon, said numerous sources, and Tencent is an investor in Mail.ru, which recently had an IPO.

And DST Global, an investment vehicle that is now separate from Mail.ru–although it shares Russian exec Yuri Milner, who is Mail.ru’s chairman and also DST’s CEO–is also a Groupon investor.

Got all that? As BoomTown has written before: It’s a small and way-too-connected world after all, especially when it comes to the goat rodeo of Groupon investors.

What will be interesting to see is if this makes a difference in China, which has been a consistent black hole for most major Internet companies.

Groupon declined comment, and there has been no response yet to an email query sent to Tencent’s PR group.

New user signups in China for Microsoft’s MSN Messenger, a competitor to Tencent’s leading QQ instant-messaging service, have gone “from tens of thousands normally to millions” per day since a flare-up between the two Chinese companies began, a person familiar with the situation said.

The conflict, which appears to have ignited two months ago when antivirus software company Qihoo 360 alleged that Tencent’s QQ was scanning the private data of its users and released software claiming to block plug-ins that could cause such privacy leaks. Tencent denied the allegations, then discontinued its services to QQ users who were also using Qihoo 360’s software. Qihoo 360 responded by encouraging users to discontinue use of QQ.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

After Russia-based Internet investor Digital Sky Technologies got $388 million in a stock-swapping deal with South Africa media giant Naspers–coming after an earlier $300 million investment from China’s Internet behemoth Tencent–BoomTown dialed up DST partner Alexander Tamas in London to interview him about the implications.

This developing international spiderweb of digital and media companies begged the question of what DST might do with all this new dough, especially since it has created quite a splash over the last year investing massive gobs of money in high-profile, social-focused U.S. Internet companies.

That has included, most prominently, social networking powerhouse Facebook, as well as Groupon and Zynga.

Actually, said Tamas, the money is for expansion of DST’s core businesses in Russia, Poland and the Baltics–in email, social networking, gaming and entertainment–at units such as Mail.ru, which was co-owned by Naspers and DST.

In essence, said many analysts, it will simplify its ownership structure, and could eventually lead to an IPO for DST.

For a 30 percent stake in DST and the $388 million, Naspers forked over its 39.3 percent stake in Mail.ru into DST.

“The idea was for us to be able to completely control our Russian portfolio,” said Tamas, part of a series of moves which included its recent purchase of AOL (AOL) instant messaging unit ICQ for $187.5 million in cash. “We wanted 100 percent at one company.”

Also a goal: To better link its services with those in China, owned by Tencent, which invested $300 million in DST in April, giving it just over a 10 percent stake.

Naspers, by the way, owns 35 percent of Tencent.

“It’s a pretty good dialog all around,” said Tamas (pictured here), linking companies with both global and local aspirations.

But it’s the global ambitions that have attracted the most attention to DST of late, which, Tamas noted, created some confusion and unfair maligning of the company.

Interestingly, although it is all mashed up on its Web site, DST itself is not technically the entity that maintains its investments in companies such as Facebook.

That would be DST Global, its international arm which directly hold the stakes. It is not part of the Naspers or Tencent deals.

Of course, both are run by the same people, especially DST CEO Yuri Milner, and DST has a stake in DST Global.

“Initially, DST did fund those transactions,” said Tamas. “But we wanted to separate these investments from the Internet company to give investors the clearer differentiation.”

As to its future investments, Tamas said the company will likely fund start-ups that “check the boxes,” including exponential growth and social virality.

That means only two investments annually, as opposed to 10.

He also said DST would continue to fork over large sums–its invested well over $100 million in each of its U.S. deals.

“There is a perception that we pay high prices,” admitted Tamas, who noted its Facebook investment is now valued at much more. “But we have a global outlook on what we are investing in.”

DST is also a believer in getting some of that financing in the hands of founders and early investors, since it relieves financial pressure to sell or go public before a start-up’s time.

“We want to give the companies we invest in a year or two run,” said Tamas. “That is the sweet spot.”

He said, after its U.S. flirtation, that DST is now looking more in Asia and Europe.

But, even with its expansion and getting investments from well-known media giant such as Naspers, Tamas said he is not sure DST can shake the continued questions about the sources of its funding, especially given some of its initial investors are clearly part of the much-maligned Russian business oligarchy.

“We always have to explain and justify all of Russia,” said Tamas defensively. “Obviously, Naspers did its due diligence, as have others, and they feel comfortable with DST.”

Still, Russian issues will remain a concern for the long term. As noted in a recent report by Bank of America (BAC) investment unit Merrill Lynch, for example, on the Naspers-DST deal:

“We are also concerned that DST’s dominance in the Russian internet space (close to 70% market/mind share) may attract the scrutiny of the Russian government. The precedent with the other leading Russian internet company Yandex, when the government got a veto on sale or a golden share, signals that the government may not welcome a full takeover of DST by Naspers or Tencent.”

“We know the issues,” said Tamas. “But the best digital companies going forward are going to have to understand and operate in different parts of the world that are not just in Silicon Valley.”

Naspers, a South African international media group said one of its subsidiaries was taking a nearly 30 percent stake in Digital Sky Technologies.

Russia-based DST has made a splash in Silicon Valley by investing massive gobs of money in high-profile, social-focused U.S. Internet companies, such as Facebook, Groupon and Zynga.

Both Naspers and DST are already close, as co-owners of Mail.ru, a large Russian Web firm with email, social networking, gaming and entertainment businesses.

Naspers said it will be contributing its 39.3 percent stake in Mail.ru into DST, as well as investing $388 million in cash in it.

In April, another international multimedia giant, China’s Tencent, invested $300 million in DST, giving it just over a 10 percent stake in it.

And, drum roll…Naspers owns 35 percent of Tencent.

It’s not clear what to make of this developing international spiderweb of digital and media companies, except to ask: What will DST do with all that new money now?

Until all is revealed, here is an interview I did at the seventh D: All Things Digital conference about a year ago with DST’s partner Alexander Tamas and Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg about the firm’s aspirations: