The ride-hailing app Uber, which also operates as a food delivery company UberEats will acquire Postmates for $ 2.65 billion (approx €2.34 billion) in an all-stock transaction, after all the struggle to buy out Grubhub tanked previously.
Plans to close deal in Q1 2021
This acquisition could boost Uber’s delivery business and help compensate the company’s core ride-hailing business, which has plummeted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Notably, the San-Francisco-based company reported $ 2.9 billion (approx €2.6 billion) loss in the first quarter of 2020. The company is planning to close the deal in Q1 2021. Post the acquisition, Postmates app will continue to run separately but with a more efficient, combined merchant, and delivery network.
Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi, said, “Uber and Postmates have long shared a belief that platforms like ours can power much more than just food delivery—they can be a hugely important part of local commerce and communities, all the more important during crises like COVID-19. As more people and more restaurants have come to use our services, Q2 bookings on Uber Eats are up more than 100 percent year on year. We’re thrilled to welcome Postmates to the Uber family as we innovate together to deliver better experiences for consumers, delivery people, and merchants across the country.”
Soaring demand for online food delivery
According to Uber, consumers will benefit from expanded choice across a wider range of restaurants and other merchants. For restaurants and merchants, Postmates and Uber Eats will together offer more tools and technology to more easily and cost-effectively connect with a bigger consumer base.
Even though the company is not profitable, the demand has soared since mid-March, with 89% YoY gross bookings growth in April. On the other hand, Uber Eats is shutting down its business in unprofitable markets.
60,000 restaurants and retailers, 50 states
Founded by Bastian Lehmann, Sam Street, Sean Plaice in 2011, Postmates led the creation of on-demand delivery in the U.S and has grown to be the number one platform in Los Angeles.
Right now, the platform operates in all 50 states and offers customers access to the most selection of merchants in the US with more than 600,000 restaurants and retailers available for delivery and pickup, many of which are exclusive to Postmates.
“Over the past eight years we have been focused on a single mission: enable anyone to have anything delivered to them on-demand. Joining forces with Uber will continue that mission as we continue to build Postmates while creating an even stronger platform that brings this mission to life for our customers. Uber and Postmates have been strong allies working together to advocate and create the best practices across our industry, especially for our couriers. Together we can ensure that as our industry continues to grow, it will do so for the benefit of everyone in the communities we serve,” said Postmates Co-Founder and CEO Bastian Lehmann.
Main image credits: rafapress/Shutterstock
The post Uber acquires Postmates for €2.34B after losing Grubhub deal to Just Eat Takeaway appeared first on Silicon Canals .
According to the Times, the talks are still ongoing and the deal could fall through.
For those that have been paying attention to Uber, this appetite is not new, albeit consistent. A little over a month ago, the ride-hailing company was reportedly pursuing an acquisition of Grubhub, another food delivery company. Grubhub was ultimately acquired by Just Eat Takeaway in a $ 7.3 billion deal, but only after the deal with Uber fell through over a variety of concerns.
Food delivery market has set to benefit largely from the COVID-19 pandemic, as stores remain shuttered or switch operations to takeout only. Latest earnings from the public ride-hailing company show that its ride-hailing business is slowing while its food delivery service is growing like hell. Gross bookings for Uber Eats last quarter were $ 4.68 billion.
So even though Uber still loses a ton of money ($ 2.94 billion including all costs), its Uber Eats growth is staggering. And the green shoots might be fueling some of this interest in other competitors.
If regulatory concerns were an issue, Postmates may make a better fit.
With a valuation of $ 2.4 billion, Postmates is significantly smaller than Grubhub. And while the company filed to go public nearly 16 months ago, it held off eventually citing “choppy market” conditions.
So if Uber Eats and Postmates combined, the result would still be smaller than Doordash’s market hold, but would be competitive nonetheless. DoorDash, last valued at $ 13 billion, confidentially filed for an IPO nearly four months ago.
Also, Postmates delivers more than just food.
Postmates declined to comment on rumors or speculation. Uber did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Last week, we discussed what the ‘new normal’ could look like for different startup sectors. In particular, we did a survey with our readers, and found that 83% of respondents expect more than 25% of the working population to continue working remotely.
Remote work has several benefits employees and companies enjoy (such as eliminating commute time, increasing productivity, reducing expenses, adapting the work environment for each person’s needs and many more), but there are also a set of disadvantages and risks (like team communication problems, team motivation, feeling lonely, and house distractions). Luckily for us, there are tools, methods, and key elements to overcome them and allow us to maintain a remote team working without losing our heads.
We believe the three most important elements in remote work are culture, communication, and tools. We’ll cover them and give you a handful of recommendations on how to get them right.
Many successful founders agree that the culture of the company should be established from the initial stages of a company. Most of the time us founders are so focused on getting the desired product-market fit, that we forget we must start to embed culture in our ventures from the first day.
Remote team culture proposes additional challenges. Some of them are easier to handle than others, like establishing company values, developing company identity, great external and internal communications, all of which can be solved through training sessions, documents, and support. However, on the other hand social and interpersonal relations can be difficult to handle when working remotely.
Trust is one of the most important interpersonal traits coworkers need to develop, and remote teams require special attention to detail and effort to make sure this is happening. Wade Foster, co-founder from Zapier, explains in his article ‘How to build culture in a remote team’, that culture is more than just ping pong tables. Culture is how you work, and paying extra attention to trust, development, encouraging workers to hold remote coffee chats and clarifying that in-person meetups are still important. Sharing activities together helps team members know each other and overcome the social and interpersonal challenges remote work can arise.
Often when building a remote team we can overlook the previous experience candidates have working remotely. Remember to look for candidates with previous remote experience, but if there is no remote experience and the candidate is a good fit, seek for adaptability to the remote culture, familiarity with technology, and other traits that will allow them to work smoothly.
After you hire them, your onboarding and training process should be digitized and include the remote culture you want to achieve with your teams as well as remote working guidelines. Every document, video, training session, process diagram, etc. should be available and easily accessible online, making sure everyone has access to the important information. Lastly, a great practice is to assign more experienced people to remote work to mentor the newcomers.
This is one of the most important aspects of teamwork. When communication is done right, teams can thrive and deliver amazing solutions to challenges and problems. If communications are not flowing on the right path, the end result can be pretty ugly.
Remote teams have a bigger risk of failing in this aspect since there is a layer of personal communication that does not get through the internet. Previously we published an article on how to hire freelancers in the age of digital nomads. We were really insistent on getting the communication aspect right, to avoid issues and this principle also applies for remote teams.
Communication in remote teams should be frequent, structured, and purpose-driven. There should be little room for improvisation to get things right, on this matter it is too easy to drift away from the standards and things can get messy. Even though it’s not the same as real communications, remember to stay in touch through video calls, as putting a face to the voice is of extreme importance when speaking with your team, otherwise the messages might not be transmitted as clearly as expected and conflicts may arise.
Establish periodical and frequent meetings for different purposes depending on the needs of your teams and the work you need to complete. Perhaps your teams could do daily stand-ups, set sprint planning meetings every two weeks, monthly team status meetings, quarterly reviews and always make sure things are clear for everyone.
Leaving written records of meetings about important information, decisions made, required actions, identified blockers, roadmaps, etc. is a great practice for building strong communications and using tools like emails, project management boards, online documents, and work tools will make your lives easier.
Keep in mind communication through remote tools can easily become a one-way conversation and this is a great recipe for failing at this aspect. Whenever possible seek to have two-way conversations with people, fully listening and understanding what the others are stating, showing respect for their ideas and thoughts and giving positive feedback when needed, making sure everyone feels comfortable sharing their thoughts without being judged or belittled.
Technology is here to help us overcome the barriers we face while working remotely. For example, there are many AR and VR startups that are helping us work remotely and if you search online you’ll find several tools for jazzing up your online and work meetings.
Choosing the right tools for your remote work is crucial to avoid losing your minds. The first step to choose the right tools should be to define the goals and purpose of each of the tools. Generally many remote teams need tools for communication, scheduling, project management, online work sessions, document sharing, code sharing, report sharing, client management systems, etc. Think about the nature of your work and which tools will help teams accomplish their goals and achieve their objectives.
When choosing technology and tools, think about the return over the investment of the tool, even if it is a free tool (time spent on the tool is money invested). We can easily get overwhelmed by all the tools and offerings currently available, so before making a decision over a tool, think about how the tool will improve processes, or how it will allow teams to move forward. Also make sure to check statements on whether it will increase revenue, reduce costs, increase joy or decrease stress for your business and teams.
On a final note, remote work will fail if one of those three aspects is broken. You might have the most amazing set of tools, but due to a lack of good communication and culture, will see your teams burning down. Alternatively, you might have great communication and great tools without culture, which is a great recipe for a revolution. So these three aspects should be kept in balance – and don’t forget to celebrate when you achieve it, because it will ensure you have a great remote working experience.
I’ll start with some background bullets points:
- Bootstrapped a company, profitable (couple of millions I’ve mostly taken home)
- Ran said company (almost) into the ground
- I’m creative but bad with money and management (probably related to the fact that I’m bi-polar).
As part of a re-organization I realized I need “grownups” running the company, but most importantly I realized I need LESS control.
I’m a very charismatic type, and past management personnel found it hard to oppose me and allowed me to harm the company (extreme example: taking an irresponsible dividend).
While I’m not comparing myself to WeWork’s Adam Neumann, I can see how I can become a problem for myself and the company if/when we get really big.
On the other hand seeing how people like Elon Musk and Zuckerberg retained control of their companies is inspiring, and emotionally, this is my “baby” I’ve built from zero.
At the moment I’m in the process of adding people to balance me out
- A new, stronger CEO who is very experienced with bigger companies and will be getting most his compensation in equity (vesting over 4 years), and eventually maybe a seat on the board)
- A strong, experienced businessman I trust, as a partner who will get about 20% in equity (probably w/ vesting), and will be on the board with me (just the two of us for now).
I’m retaining 80% for now.
We’ll both also have titles, he’ll probably be a CFO for a year, and I’ll be CMO.
We’re also considering a strategic investor who is interested in buying 10%.
Here’s the issue:
The current contract I’m working on with said partner gives him the right to veto decisions in some areas (most importantly: financial decisions, up to $ 100k, over this amount both signatures are required).
I get to veto in other areas that are my expertise.
We each get one seat on the board, I.e. equal voting rights.
The thing is that while he gets 20%, in terms of the day to day operations, his control over the company is just as mine, as if he had 50%.
Now, I can probably change it so I have more voting rights or something like that’s kind of missing the point.
I’m trying to think of a mechanism where I can retain control of my company, but also be restrained so I can’t fuck it up.
At the time being I don’t mind that he has more control, I worked with him closely and on some joint ventures, he’s just much better than me at it and he takes a huge load off my shoulders.
I don’t even see it as a problem in the long term.
What I’m worried about is missing something that – is there a scenario I can’t think of where this would come back to bite me in the ass?
I feel like the decision to give up the control is a big one.
Would love to hear any thoughts and advice.
More departures are taking place at Bó, the digital bank developed by RBS-owned Natwest. Following the departure of Bó CEO Mark Bailie in January, the latest to seek a new opportunity is chief product officer Ollie Purdue, TechCrunch has learned.
According to sources, Purdue is joining Antler, the company builder and early-stage venture capital firm that operates in Amsterdam, London, New York, Stockholm, Sydney, Nairobi and Singapore. He’s expected to join the VC in the next few weeks as a Partner, bringing his product background and expertise to Antler. Prior to working at Bó, Purdue founded millennial bank account Loot in 2014 while still at University, aged just 20.
Founded in 2018 by Magnus Grimeland (co-founder of Zalora, which sold to Global Fashion Group), and initially launched in Singapore, Antler runs a company-builder program in multiple locations, not entirely dissimilar to London-headquartered Entrepreneur First, which pioneered the pre-team, pre-idea model of talent investing.
Like EF, Antler invites applicants to apply to its various programs with the aim of helping them find a co-founder and settle on a new startup idea. It provides a stipend for the first two months to cover participants’ basic living costs, and then pre-seed funding. In addition, later-stage capital is also available for successful companies, with Antler operating local funds in each geography.
Meanwhile, Purdue has a coloured history with Bó, and RBS specifically. RBS was an investor in Loot and the incumbent bank was thought to be close to acquiring the startup before ultimately pulling out of the deal. This led to Loot scrambling for additional funding, which it was unable to obtain in time before running out of cash entirely after existing investors decided not to follow on.
Not long after, Purdue and around 17 other ex-Loot team members — spanning product, marketing and design functions — were recruited to Bó by then CEO Bailie.
I’ve reached out to Bó/RBS and will update this post if and when I hear back.
Update (15.50 GMT):
Magnus Grimeland, CEO and Founder of Antler, provided TechCrunch with the following statement: “At Antler, we back founders who demonstrate that they have the grit and determination that it takes to build a business. That’s why we’re excited to have Ollie on board. He’s an entrepreneur, he’s rolled his sleeves up, and knows what it takes to build. We’re also excited to be growing the Antler team at this moment. At a time when there’s a lot of uncertainty in the tech industry, we are very pleased to be reaffirming our commitment to early-stage startups and supporting exceptional entrepreneurs, by growing our presence in London.”
Adds Ollie Purdue, Partner (UK) of Antler: “I can’t wait to get started at Antler. The European technology industry is burgeoning with potential, and I’m keen to help the next generation of founders build world-beating companies. My personal experience is in fintech, which is one of many tech sectors in which you see a perfect combination of opportunity and talent.”