Mattermark

Danielle Morrill( https://twitter.com/DanielleMorrill ). Cofounder and CEO of Mattermark ( https://mattermark.com/ ). She is one of the most brilliant founders I can think of, regardless of gender.

My favorites: MatterMark Daily - https://mattermark.com/ Designer News Digest - https://news.layervault.com/ Product Hunt Digest - http://www.producthunt.com/ Ray Winderlich iOS - http://www.raywenderlich.com/

I think people that like this will also love https://mattermark.com/ . It's like Bloomberg for the startup world.

When I was interviewing a few years ago, one of the interviewers I spoke with mentioned they'd used Mattermark[0] to prospect for companies they might be interested in applying to. That seemed like a novel idea given it seems to be targetted primarily towards investors. [0]: https://mattermark.com/

Mattermark Daily (https://mattermark.com/category/mattermark-daily/). Best curated startup/VC news, once a day in your inbox, done in 5 minutes or less. No affiliation.

Mattermark Daily - "A human curated newsletter that brings you the best perspectives, insights, and lessons learned from investors and operators in the startup ecosystem." https://mattermark.com/newsletters/

Hey Craig, I love podcasts, and as a matter of fact host one myself called Veni Vidi VC. Despite the shameless plug, I would love to hear from successful YC founders who have had exits. The entire process is fascinating to me, including: - building a company - raising funds, and - making it ready to be absorbed as part of a corporation or better yet, becoming a public company Infact, all founders from every startup in this list is interesting to me - https://mattermark.com/mattermark-startup-index-top-10-y-combinator-co…

I wonder why http://MatterMark.com isn't covering more about this. I'd be interested in seeing what they have to say since their entire business is monitoring these trends.

Would be cool to add in other startup stats at some point! Could potentially use http://mattermark.com/.

San Franciso Mattermark is looking for some great engineers to change the face of deal intelligence and help us become the Google for B2B. Our open positions include the following: - Senior front end engineer, 3 to 5 years of experience - DevOps engineer, 1 to 3 years of experience - Full Stack engineers (various positions and experience levels open) - Machine learning engineers (5 years of experience) You can find our open jobs here: https://mattermark.com/jobs/

"The ironic thing about the niche in question is that it's arguably one that can be tackled quite happily without VC money" At what scale and how long would that take? The VC/angel money allows you to move faster, take more chances and perhaps hire better and faster. And lose money. Important point. Look at their pricing: http://mattermark.com/#pricing Then this: "Today, Morrill’s curiosity and her 27-person team’s" Imagine the payroll for those 27 people and how many subscriptions they have to sell with what is (for now) a niche product. What are the figures on fully loaded labor costs for a 27 person team?

You could "Ask HN"! Or find similar startups perhaps with http://mattermark.com or http://cbinsights.com.

Does this mean Mattermark https://mattermark.com/ have started a tech arms war amongst the larger VC firms to create their own toolsets to differentiate their deal flow from others? Mattermark has gone some way to provide proof that data can make a difference, at least at highlighting opportunities that might not have been visible before. I wondered whether this would result in herding investors towards some companies, which means differentation and opportunity comes from spotting things the others miss... finding the outliers that Mattermark miss. Interesting that the test is "make a dashboard", well into the standard skillset for most analyst programmers who work for financial institutions (I built a lot of this stuff for the finance sector in London).

AFAIK they haven't. The way they score [1] seems to suggest that they might be missing out on companies like https://gorickshaw.com and enterprise focused companies because these company might not perform well on mobile downloads, inbound links, twitter followers, facebook followers and linkedin followers (the six metrics they track and score on). I personally feel that inbound links, twitter + facebook + linkedin followers don't add all that much to painting a complete picture of the companies that might not be in the "social" space but I feel that if they keep at it long enough and keep iterating, they will eventually figure out how to be less wrong (Even most top VC firms aren't able to consistently pick only winners). [1] https://mattermark.com/mattermark-score/

Hired.com. If you don't want to deal with a lot of BS and are able to make decisive choices, you can't go wrong. Otherwise, you end up interviewing at places were recruiters are just trying to get another body in the door and half of them are not prepared. I was very skeptical but it got the job done. http://join.hired.com/x/XfELvW if you want to toss me a referral but honestly, it doesn't matter to me either way. The quick decisive moment is the hard part but Hired.com really does take care of the rest. Also Mattermark is hiring and I would encourage anyone interested in full stack or dev ops to apply: http://mattermark.com/jobs/ (other business roles are on there too) Why Hired.com is good: if you are a bad negotiator, you'll learn very quickly that you need to filter out jobs early on based on salary expectation. Nobody talks to engineers/geeks about that. But once you go through the hired.com process, you realize that hey, it's an open field -- you can establish up front what your criteria are in terms of compensation and discuss that early in the potential interview process. Because time is money, hiring is complicated and compensation is all over the place. You are the best judge of your value. It's complicated. But you are also the best judge of what you'll accept in terms of tradeoffs (cash vs equity). Everyone single person who contacted me via my Hired.com profile was a founder (or a recruiter pretending to be the founder). Either way, I got a great summary…

Hi Sam, I was able to pull some data on these things via Mattermark. http://mattermark.com/yc-portfolio-stats-mattermark-crunches-the-numbe… 267 companies currently have 2 or more employees 8,164 people are currently employed by a YC company [1] 121 companies have disclosed an exit (no IPOs, all acquisitions so far) 66% of YC companies are based in the Bay Area, followed by New York (7%) and Boston (2%) 76 un-exited companies have raised a venture round of funding (Series A or beyond) There is a nearly 50/50 split between B2B and B2C startups in the portfolio The average Series A stage YC company has 26 employees and has raised $10.2M of funding in its lifetime. [1] The total number is probably much higher, many of these companies do not have LinkedIn pages or employees on LinkedIn, Crunchbase, news, and other sources until they are further along. I think an estimate of 9,000 to 10,000 current jobs created by current YC companies is reasonable.

A team at Morgan Stanley or wherever looks at the company's numbers (cash flow, debt, growth rate, etc), and comes up with a valuation based on very concrete factual information. What if I told you that these "concrete factual information" numbers are just as made up as Daily Active Users, Monthly Active Users, number of downloads, etc. It doesn't matter what the number is, it's just whatever the market values. Right now the market values the numbers behind DAU, MAU, because well... Facebook and Google exist. They set the precedent of valuing MAU/DAU and have made money doing it, so the assumption is that any other company that also values these same metrics should follow suit. Where I think we are in full agreement is the fact that DAU/MAU is not fungible. Meaning, the same 3hrs a day someone uses Facebook isn't the same 3hrs that someone uses twitter. But, lest we forget, the market is irrational. EDIT: The fact that this "Mattermark" number exists explains the story even better than I can: http://mattermark.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/fundersclub…

Cool idea! A few random ideas and thoughts that may or may not be useful: 1) seems like a perfect complement to something like mattermatrk: http://mattermark.com/ perhaps try reaching out to those guys? They offer startup tracking so pairing it with this fantasy-investment style game could work well. 2) learning from fantasy football - perhaps you get people to sign up in groups and compete against each other with new money being released into the pool each month/quarter? 3) you could bring people back into the app when the startups they have invested in get in the news? This would involve building a lightweight RSS-scraper and some logic but might not be too hard and would add a nice feedback loop for the product. 4) maybe you let people use (small amounts of) real money to invest in the startups, and let people buy and sell their investments? Kind of like a second market platform? this would make it inherently more compelling for people to stick around but it's almost certainly a lot more work to build...

A significant amount of the tech that comes out of silicon valley has been either requested, developed for or funded indirectly by their VC [1] I would wager some people don't even know they have several items created at their behest operating in their data-centers. Doing security reviews for the hardware can be fun. Any push-back will result in meeting members growing exponentially in most cases. I'm not mentioning vendor names but some of them also get really nervous if they believe you have super-user access to their devices. Some of them are here on HN. The In-Q-Tel website [2] can give you an idea of some of the less obscure vendors. [1] - https://mattermark.com/q-tel-cias-vc-arm-busy-years/ [2] - https://www.iqt.org/

Many startups were still founded during 2008 recession. There are new needs after every crisis, and entrepreneurs just have more time and motivation to build something. Investors also try to diversify their capital like always. They're just more careful now. Crisis definitely has a negative impact overall. But, it can't stop everyone. https://news.crunchbase.com/news/lessons-from-2008-how-the-downturn-im… https://mattermark.com/2007-2009-financial-crisis-surprisingly-kind-te…

Matriculation/graduation rate from round to round seems pretty low (that is, new funding failure rate is high), based on this chart cited by pg: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/781743196963540992 Tracked down the original post here: https://mattermark.com/startup-graduation-rate-surprisingly-low/

It is indeed misleading to say that $80b in value was created, because Uber and Twilio were not Techstars companies. "The market cap on Techstars website is $7.5B, whereas YC’s portfolio was valued at $30B in 2014" [1] A more interesting days point (that ignores outliers) is the number of startups that raised a Series A round; and using that metric, you can rightfully claim Techstars to be #1 [2] [1] https://blog.routific.com/which-startup-accelerator-is-right-for-you-7… [2] https://mattermark.com/500-startups-accelerator-company/

"Investing" in those days was "speculating." Hundreds of dubious companies made it to IPO that would never make it that far today, and most of those lost all their public investors' money. https://mattermark.com/technology-company-ipos-then-now/

Hey sedzia - from shippo here, saw your comment. We actually just published this piece on Mattermark on how we sustained the business and build up our API in the early days. https://mattermark.com/focused-long-tail-get-traction-enterprise/ Doesn't necessarily have benchmarks, but maybe the story will trigger some ideas.

https://mattermark.com/blog/ used to create reports and infographics on startups and were quite active on HN. Their product and marketing evolved a bit. https://mattermark.com/mattermark-weekly-1-sent-sunday-june-9-2013/ https://mattermark.com/mattermark-startup-traction-report-2014-release… http://www.schumacher.me/blog/the-berlin-start-up-scene-according-to-m…

Some tech blogs: Benedict Evans: http://ben-evans.com/benedictevans/ Hunter Walk: https://hunterwalk.com/ Coding Horrow: https://blog.codinghorror.com/ Feld Thoughts: http://www.feld.com/ Mattermark: https://mattermark.com/ BEN THOMPSON: https://stratechery.com/ The Angel VC: http://christophjanz.blogspot.com/

My assumption (based on the last few tech IPOs) is that late stage investors are putting lipstick on a pig and trying to get out the door before the music stops. https://mattermark.com/2015s-tech-ipos-performing-even-worse-thought/ And Steve Blank: > Steve Blank on the Tech Bubble: 'VCs Won't Admit They're in a Ponzi Scheme' http://www.inc.com/zoe-henry/steve-blank-tech-bubble-burst-ponzi-schem…

This company's burn rate is over $400,000 now according to http://mattermark.com/how-we-spend-money-at-mattermark/.

This was indirectly discussed here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9705832 ... and included a link that discusses the WSJ article about half way down under the heading "Revenue": http://mattermark.com/important-financial-indicators-for-startups-at-e…

Here's an eclectic list to get started: Company intel: http://mattermark.com Hacker Newsletter: http://www.hackernewsletter.com Curated design links: http://sidebar.io Minimalism: http://nosidebar.com Daily news and culture: http://nextdraft.com Random pub trivia: http://nowiknow.com Curated design and dev: http://mergelinks.com Metal trivia: http://www.skulltoaster.com Music mixes: http://noonpacific.com Front end dev: http://hackingui.com