Brian Rich to FCC - lifting ownership restrictions could be a “big yawn”

March 4th, 2010

The American Law Journal covered the FCC debate about whether to lift cross-ownership restrictions between broadcast stations and newspapers.  It quotes Catalyst Managing Partner Brian Rich’s FCC testimony:

Brian Rich, the managing partner of Catalyst Investors in New York who specializes in media and telecom deals, said that, even if the FCC did repeal the ban, it might be too little, too late. “If they lift or alleviate restrictions, it could end up being a big yawn,” he said. “Broadcasters after the advertising recession of last year have enough troubles of their own, and print is even worse off. I’m not sure we’d see a giant rush to merge these things together.”

But he added, “If they don’t change the rules, it could be self-fulfilling process — there will be fewer voices because they’ll be out of business.”

Brian Rich testifies to the FCC

January 13th, 2010

Catalyst Managing Partner Brian Rich testified to a FCC panel on media ownership limits on January 12, 2009.  He describes why the FCC should view media as a total market including the internet, and not a series of individual markets.  Traditional media is in trouble, and policies that impede their ability to become stronger entities and competitors harm their ability to compete with digital media.

His testimony can be found on the FCC website by clicking on this link and advancing to minute 26.

Interview with John Tredennick of Catalyst Repository Systems

November 17th, 2009

Colorado Biz Mag interviews John Tredennick, CEO of Catalyst Repository Systems, where John explains how CRS helps lawyers be more productive.

How will IT have changed by 2020?

November 16th, 2009

At the Catalyst Investors 2009 Annual Meeting, Catalyst partner Tyler Newton asked the 4 panelists on the cloud computing panel for their “most surprising” predictions for how information technology will have changed by 2020.

John Tredennick, CEO of Catalyst Repository Systems, starts with the contrarian prediction that we’ll be surprised at how little things change between now and then.

Rick Stollmeyer, CEO of Mindbody, says we’ll be literally connected to the internet, with implanted chips in our bodies.

John McKinley, Partner at Great Falls Ventures, ponders what the demise of newspapers means for our country and its politics, and whether we’ll end up with a US equivalent of the BBC.

Phil Spencer, CEO of Codero, says we’ll come to view IT as a utility, the same as we view electricity today.

Ten Trends for the Tens

November 12th, 2009

The following article also appeared on Forbes.com on 11-25-09, that version can be found here.

A new decade is right around the corner. I expect we’ll start to see a lot of prognostication soon, so I will attempt to get out ahead of the crowd. At Catalyst we research growth industries and invest in businesses that have recurring, advertising or subscription-based revenue. Growth industries ride the big product adoption trends. Here are ten big industry trends we intend to capitalize on:

  1. Applications move to the “cloud” – An obvious prediction, but its importance cannot be overstated.Software and content will continue to migrate to the internet, or the “cloud”.Devices on the edge will therefore be able to simplify and specialize, like net books for web surfing, iPods for listening to music, Blackberrys for accessing corporate information, Kindles for reading.  Business applications will rapidly move to the internet, where they are cheaper to deliver, more frequently upgraded and will allow access to more real time information.
  2. The tribal internet – Social networking and internet content will evolve into networks of sites and information streams focused around common interests. Whether it’s for work, hobbies or issue advocacy, interest groups will form virtual “tribes” online, sharing content, ideas, opinions, advice and information among themselves. Magazines, blogs, email newsletters and video content are already interlinked and shared and promoted via RSS feeds and social networks like Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook. Because these tribes are built around natural affinities, in many ways they will have a more powerful hold on us than our existing groups based on schools and location. Marketers will not be successful with old-fashioned advertising that interrupts this flow of content. Successful marketers will be those that are able to join and gain the trust of the tribes, where people WANT to receive the marketing message.
  3. The internet is all around you – As applications, content and communities move to the web, we become increasingly dependent on the web and will demand access everywhere and at all times. The functionality of smartphones and other wireless access devices will keep increasing, so that we can wirelessly do most of what we currently do on the computer. Wireless networks will dramatically increase the amount of data capacity and will at least rival the speeds of today’s DSL lines. We will get to the point that we’re connected to the internet 24/7, both for work and for fun.
  4. The web gets smart, really smart – As more information flows through the internet, parallel processing technology will enable an internet that understands the relevance of information as it appears in real time. The confluence of all of this data and these technologies will necessitate sophisticated algorithmic models to aid interpretation and decision making. Many of the great advances will be in what is today called business intelligence or business analytics. The speed in which managers and marketers can react to changes in the business environment will accelerate dramatically.
  5. Sensors, sensors everywhere – With a smart web analyzing data and ubiquitous wireless network access, internet-connected sensors will be measuring all sorts of data. Our vital signs, energy usage, soil moisture, traffic patterns, manufacturing efficiency…it will all be tracked remotely and analyzed in real time and fed into the Smart Web, increasing business productivity. Some have called this the “Internet of Machines”, “machine-to-machine communications” or “M2M”. Asset productivity and utilization will soar immensely, reducing the relative demand for business investment overall. The combination of web-based software, the Smart Web and M2M will create one of the fastest leaps in worker productivity in human history over the next 10-20 years.
  6. The decentralization of medicine – The current hospital-centric health care system is an inefficient amalgamation of disparate systems that do not communicate with each other. Networked medicine, information record standards and focus on prevention and wellness could break it all apart. Data tracking can revolutionize disease management, nutrition, exercise, home health care, and remote medicine. The centralized delivery model is more of an industrial-age organization form relative to the networked-based economy of today. The use of hospitals will decline in favor of doctor house calls, “video visits” and visits to (or visits from) specialists loaded with high tech equipment and software.
  7. The decentralization of education – The current one-size-fits-all educational system seems even more industrial age than our health care system. People learn in different ways and follow different life paths. Parents will want more choice in programs for kids. Adults will want more access to programs that help advance their careers. More learning will be done online and outside of a “school”. Apprenticeships will make a comeback. More charter schools and private schools will be built. More will be invested in early childhood education. A much larger percentage of colleges and universities will be specialized and “for profit”, while many non-profit universities will leverage their brands to broaden their revenue streams to include some for-profit activities. Americans will have more opportunity to invest in themselves and to make themselves more productive.
  8. Building the “electricity superhighway” – The shift away from fossil fuels will increase our reliance on electricity, particularly in transportation. The smart grid initiatives pursued today are equivalent to the Telecom Act of 1996 – a catalyst that will lead to the transformation of the utility industry as the electricity superhighway gets built out. The implementation of a smart grid will allow for more efficient and balanced use of the electrical grid. Energy storage systems will take energy from intermittent sources like sun and wind or from traditional power plants during off-peak times for use during peak times. Power will continue to be sold from utility to consumer, but also flow from small-scale power sources like rooftop solar panels back to the utility when not being consumed. Small-scale energy storage systems like reversible fuel cells or batteries could do away with the whole concept of peak/off-peak pricing altogether. The move to electric or hybrid cars, combined with investments in more electrical generation capacity (from nuclear, alternatives and natural gas) and a smart electrical grid will dramatically reduce the largest cause of the US trade deficit: our reliance on foreign oil.
  9. The integration of transportation – If the last 50 years in US urban development were about the buildout of the suburbs and the last 20 years were about the buildout of the outer suburbs, or “exurbs”, then the next 10-20 years will be about lashing together our far-flung metropolises with an integrated transportation network. There will be a great deal of investment in rail, both commuter rail and inter-city rail (within 300 miles). Rail will also be more integrated with our other transportation hubs. Rather than a trend of suburbanites moving to the cities (a “trend” not supported by any data), the city will likely move to the suburbs as density increases and transportation patterns evolve. Very light jets, or “VLJs” will get rolled out, allowing for more direct flights between non-hub destinations.There will be a movement in favor of time-shifting commutes and increased adoption of telecommuting. A more integrated and efficient transportation network will benefit both the environment and the productivity of the American workforce, which currently wastes $87 billion per year in fuel and lost productivity by sitting in traffic jams, according to a 2009 report by the Texas Transportation Institute.
  10. Workers of the world, connect! – Tom Hayes wrote an interesting new book called Jump Point: How Network Culture is Revolutionizing Business, that hypothesizes how the world will change when the 3 billionth person (~50% of the world’s population) becomes connected to the internet in 2011. Change will accelerate and volatility will increase.New companies and ideas will arise seemingly out of nowhere and spread around the world in no time (see Twitter) and old, steady industries will appear to collapse in the blink of an eye (see magazines). These ideas and companies can come from anywhere in the world. Since young people are often the most creative inventors of new ideas, and the vast bulk of young people reside in the emerging world, many of the great new ideas of the decade will flow from the emerging world. Governments and companies that rely on hierarchy and control will struggle to adapt to a world of decentralization and volatility. While individuals will be empowered for good (blogging) and for ill (terrorism), they will also be more connected as a global community (see Facebook). Brace yourselves for a wild and interesting ride.

At Catalyst we intend to capitalize on these trends. That means we will continue to invest in software-as-a-service, managed hosting, data centers, vertical ad networks, online marketing, smartphone applications, wireless infrastructure, machine-to-machine communications services, for-profit education, education software, and potentially remote medical services, medical software, smart grid services, energy efficiency services, and next-gen transportation services and infrastructure.

MINDBODY nominated as a “Game Changer” on the Huffington Post

November 6th, 2009

CEO Rick Stollmeyer of Catalyst portfolio company MINDBODY was nominated as one of the “game changers” in health & wellness on the Huffington Post.

FOLLOW THIS LINK and vote MINDBODY!

What is “Cloud Computing”?

November 4th, 2009

Tyler Newton asks 4 panelists to define “cloud computing”.  Phil Spencer, CEO of Codero; John McKinley, former CTO of AOL; Rick Stollmeyer, CEO of Mindbody; and John Tredennick, CEO of Catalyst Repository Systems all give very different answers that all drive at the same concept.  (from the 2009 Catalyst Investors Annual Meeting)

Jack Welch Sets Out to Upend Online Business Education

November 4th, 2009

The Chronicle of Higher Education has a good article about the soon-to-be-launched Jack Welch Management Institute for online MBAs at Catalyst portfolio company Chancellor University.

Catalyst Repository Systems named Top Company

October 14th, 2009

Shameless plug alert:

Catalyst Investors portfolio company Catalyst Repository Systems was given the 2009 Top Company award by Colorado Biz magazine, Delloite, UMB and Holland & Hart.

Here is a video interview with CEO John Tredennick with CoBizMag.com talking about the company:

Catalyst Repository Systems is a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) company. Its technology and service provides tools for managing discovery documents for large corporate litigation cases.

The VC Roadmap for Buyouts

September 24th, 2009

The following article by Tyler Newton was originally published on www.pehub.com on September 24, 2009

In a recent DealBook column by Andrew Ross Sorkin, Guy Hands of buyout firm Terra Firma provides an unvarnished appraisal of the buyout industry’s bubble-era mistakes and its post-bubble outlook. It will surprise no one if the large majority of buyout deals completed during the credit bubble of 2006 to 2008 turn out to be bad deals. If that was the only issue facing buyout funds, everyone could just take their lumps and move on in a couple of years. The core problem is much more fundamental.

The buyout industry has sized itself based on management fees drawn not only on the record amount of capital invested during the bubble years, but also on the record amount of committed capital for investments yet to be made. The pressure to maintain high management fees and the large amount of undrawn capital commitments conspire to create an environment in which even the deals that get completed after the credit bubble (i.e. from 2009 to 2012) are also likely to produce poor returns in the aggregate. Unless the industry reforms itself, the net returns for vintage year 2006 to 2010 buyout funds are likely to be worse than even Mr. Hands predicts.

I base this assumption on observing what happened to venture capital after the bursting of the dot-com bubble. While the circumstances are different, venture capital and buyout funds are structured the same way. After a fundraising bubble, general partners get addicted to the high management fees that come with larger fund sizes. To protect the fee stream, many managers may (1) continue to fund poor prior investments to avoid taking large write-downs and (2) engage in overly aggressive dealmaking to invest the entire fund prior to the end of the five-year investment period.

  • Good money after bad. In theory, there should be no reason to favor a follow-on investment in a troubled portfolio company over a fresh investment in a new company. Each new funding should compete with all available opportunities, yet by propping up prior investments with follow-on investments, general partners can avoid some write-downs that would result in a decline in management fee income.In the early 2000s VCs made follow-on investments in multiple rounds, creating byzantine capital structures that obscured the true value of their investments in struggling e-commerce and telecom equipment companies. Buyout fund purchases of portfolio company debt and band-aid “amend-and-extend” loan modifications are examples of activity that merely delays the day of reckoning. While human nature is the most likely culprit, the beneficial effect on management fees cannot be ignored.
  • Too much money, too little time. After the investment period, a fund can only collect management fees on invested capital. To maintain fees, the huge amount of capital raised during a bubble needs to be deployed before the expiration of the investment period. The competition to deploy capital results in overvaluation and overcapitalization of new portfolio companies. The “echo” venture capital bubble of 2004 to 2006 created a huge number of copycat “Web 2.0” companies with high capitalizations and little revenue. Signs of the same can already be seen in buyout land. Good quality deals are attracting many aggressive bidders offering high prices with little leverage.

Venture capital results speak for themselves
In August 2009 Landmark Partners published “Hope is Not a Strategy”, a study on the results of venture funds raised during the dot-com boom relative to those raised in other periods. The VC industry raised an average of nearly $40 billion per year for the vintage years 1997 to 2003, more than triple the average amount raised from 1992 to 1996. The mean reported return of vintage 1997 to 2003 funds was only 1.01 times invested capital, while vintage 1992 to 1996 funds achieved a return of 3.35 times invested capital.

Additionally, vintage 1997-2003 funds, which are past or near the end of their 10 –year fund lives, have only returned 32 percent of the capital they have called. Unrealized investments represent the bulk of the reported value of these funds. An April 2009 Landmark Partners study, “The Denominator Dilemma”, estimated that the unrealized investments of VC firms are being valued at around twice what they are actually worth. The ultimate return of vintage 1997-2003 venture capital funds will likely be substantially negative.

Venture capital provides the roadmap for buyout investors
Unless buyout firms reform themselves, vintage 2006 to 2010 funds are likely to produce similar returns to those of vintage 1997 to 2003 venture capital funds. Too much capital will chase too few deals in a compressed period of time. The question is whether buyout firms can overcome the short-term incentive to maximize fees and focus on the long-term incentive of protecting the interests of their limited partners.

The key for vintage 2006 to 2010 private equity funds with capital left to deploy will be to focus on their core competencies and maintain price discipline. Buyout funds should expect a longer-than-usual period to deploy capital. Disciplined funds might not be able to deploy their whole fund before the end of the investment period. Like some high-profile VC funds after the dot-com boom, buyout firms may want to consider downsizing the size of their funds to reduce the drag of high fees on net returns. Buyout firms should determine the appropriate staff level to perform reduced deal activity, just as they would for their portfolio companies.

The buyout business will survive the upcoming shakeout, but that does not mean that managers should stick their heads in the sand and hope for the best. I may be naïve, but I believe those firms that are proactive about protecting the interests of their limited partners during this difficult period will be rewarded in the long run.

Tyler Newton is Partner and Research Director at Catalyst Investors, a growth private equity fund based in New York. He blogs about economics and the financial markets at www.tylernewton.com.