Fintech predictions and opportunities for 2023

It’s been quite an eventful year. Fintech has fallen a long way from the highs of 2021, and while 2022 was largely about the reset of the funding environment, 2023 is going to be a year of recalibration for fintech companies.

The great news is that large enterprise and midmarket companies care more than ever about bottom-line impact. As revenue growth slows down, cost savings and efficiency have become critical. Larger companies are more likely to cut back on internal innovation efforts and technology investments that are not core to the business.

This opens the door for fintechs that can deliver real improvements to the bottom line by eliminating manual processes and saving their customers money.

First, let’s take a look at the sectors likely to be most challenging: lenders, neobanks and fintechs that serve SMBs.

Online lenders

Lending is going to be hit hard. Lenders have to manage three big tailwinds in today’s market:

Rising delinquency rates and charge-offs.
Higher cost of capital for the debt they lend.
Decreasing demand from customers because of higher interest rates.

Focus on how technology can solve hard problems, and don’t worry as much about finding what’s cutting edge in fintech.

The rise in delinquency rates and charge-offs from non-paying customers will be tough to manage for newer fintechs that have been operating for less than five years. These younger companies don’t have the models fully built out to predict which customers are likelier to default.

Managing risk during a downturn can be brutal, and lenders will feel this most acutely.

Neobanks

Neobanks transformed the customer experience of traditional banks by offering better digital products and lower costs. While big players, like Chime, who raised large amounts of capital will be fine, expect to see consolidation among the smaller neobanks.

The reality is that many neobanks have customers with small average deposit balances, and deposits are critical to banking business models in the long term. Neobanks will also be downstream victims of layoffs — if any of their customers are laid off, the banks will see their direct deposit flows diminishing.

Fintechs serving SMBs

Small businesses are more likely to shut shop during a recession. In turn, fintechs that serve SMBs rather than larger midmarket and enterprise customers are more likely to lose their SMB customers. This is why you already see businesses like Brex moving away from serving SMBs.

What’s hot

The opportunities for fintechs in 2023 lie in the “boring” areas like fraud, compliance, payment operations, taxes and infrastructure. CFOs will be more focused than ever on bottom-line impact. Fintechs that are able to demonstrate a measurable improvement in payment authorization and reconciliation rates or a reduction in fraud will be able to weather the downturn and grow.

Fintech predictions and opportunities for 2023 by Ram Iyer originally published on TechCrunch

Hear from Ecobee CEO and Founder at a special, in-person TechCrunch Live at CES

Ecobee started in 2007 when connected thermostats were an entirely different product and nothing like what’s available today. Ecobee released its Smart thermostat in 2008, bringing modern connectivity and usability to the device. I’m excited to host a special irl TechCrunch Live event at CES 2023. We’re filming in the LVCC Grand Concourse on the first day of CES, and hope you can stop by to watch.

Stuart Lombard is sitting down with me to talk about the growth and development of his startup, ecobee. He started the company in 2007 with fellow Canadians to improve household energy use. He raised $159 million to fund the effort and sold the company for $750 million.

At TechCrunch Live, we host conversations with successful founders who took an interesting path, and Lombard journey is filled with twists and turns. The company raised its $2.23 million Series A in 2007, released its first product in 2008, and then in 2011, had to fight for attention after the sleek Nest Learning Thermostat release. Ecobee kept at it. In 2021, Generac Power Systems bought ecobee for $750 million.

This TechCrunch Live will be filmed at CES 2023, and it’s free to attend. Watch the broadcast at booth #60488, located in the LVCC Grand Concourse, at 11:00 on Thursday, January 5. The event will also be streamed live on TechCrunch.com, YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter.

TechCrunch Live returns to its normal, weekly schedule starting on February with Benchmark’s Sarah Tavel and Cambly CEO and co-founder Sameer Shariff.

Hear from Ecobee CEO and Founder at a special, in-person TechCrunch Live at CES by Matt Burns originally published on TechCrunch

Yet another Zomato co-founder leaves the firm

Zomato said on Monday its co-founder and chief technology officer Gunjan Patidar has left the firm, the latest in a series of departures at the Indian food delivery firm whose shares have lost over 57% of its value in the past year.

Patidar is the fourth co-founder to leave the firm. His departure also follows exits by Mohit Gupta, another co-founder, and two other senior executives last month.

“Patidar was one of the first few employees of Zomato and built the core tech systems for the Company. Over the last ten plus years, he also nurtured a stellar tech leadership team that is capable of taking on the mantle of leading the tech function going forward. His contribution to building Zomato has been invaluable,” the Indian food delivery firm disclosed in a stock exchange filing.

The exits come at a time when Zomato chief executive Deepinder Goyal, also a co-founder, is attempting to share and delegate top responsibilities with other executives. The company appointed four chief executives in August last year and rebranded its internal, broader organization as “Eternal.”

Loss-making Zomato, backed by Ant Group, Temasek and Goldman Sachs, did not say why Patidar — or any of the other recently departed top executives — had left.

The company, which went public mid-2021, reported a net loss of $30.4 million for the quarter that ended in September last year.

“Luckily Zomato has no shortage of co-founders in its company. There’s Akriti Chopra, another executive who became co-founder last year. […] Earlier this year, it elevated an executive as co-founder of Blinkit (which Zomato owns) to replace one of Blinkit’s co-founders who left last year,” Indian news and analysis publication The Ken wrote in a newsletter last year.

“At this point, I’m starting to suspect there’s someone at Zomato’s corporate governance team whose full-time job is to periodically update the document that keeps track of who is their co-founder right now, in which company.”

Yet another Zomato co-founder leaves the firm by Manish Singh originally published on TechCrunch

We need to destigmatize down rounds in 2023

A new year is upon us, and with it comes uncertain, and uncomfortable, market conditions. Accompanying those conditions are equally uncomfortable decisions. For startup founders, determining which path is right for their business may require fundamentally rethinking the way they measure success.

The business climate in 2023 will be unfamiliar to many who founded a company in the past decade. Until now, a seemingly endless stream of relatively cheap capital has been at the disposal of any startup deemed by the VC world to have high growth potential. Everyone wanted a piece of “the next Facebook.” With interest rates near zero, the risks were relatively low and the prospective rewards were astronomical.

Burning money to chase growth became the norm; you’d just raise more money when you ran out. Debt? Who needs it! Existing investors were happy to play along, even if their share in the company was somewhat diluted — growing valuations kept everyone sated.

Over the years, this pattern of rapidly rising valuations and a pie growing fast enough to compensate for any dilution — fueled by “free money” that made almost any investment justifiable — crystallized into a mythology at the core of startup culture. It was a culture that nearly everyone, from founders and investors to the media, fed into.

Climbing valuations made for great headlines, which sent a signal, both to potential employees and the markets, that a company had momentum. High valuations quickly became one of the first things new investors looked to when it was time to raise additional capital, whether that was through a private round of funding or an IPO.

The funding route you take has enormous consequences for the future of your company; it shouldn’t be clouded by ego or driven by media appetites.

But tough economic conditions tend to dispel complacency with hard realities, and we’ll see reality checking in when it comes to funding this year. Amid rising interest rates and a generally negative macroeconomic outlook, the tap will run slowly –– or not at all. Equity financing is no longer cheap and plentiful, and as drought strikes, a sense of anxiety will grip founders. They can no longer burn cash without seriously contemplating where they’ll get more when it’s gone.

When that time comes, founders will be faced with a choice that could make or break their business. Do they turn to alternatives like convertible notes, or do they approach new investors for more equity funding? Tech stocks have been pummeled in the past year, which could mean their company’s value has taken a hit since the last time they raised capital, leaving them with the prospect of the dreaded “down round.”

It’s easy to see why down rounds seem out of the question for many startup founders. For starters, they’d face the flip side of the positive media mania, which risks eroding employee morale and investor confidence. In a culture where growing valuations are worn like a badge of honor, founders may fear that taking a down round would render them Silicon Valley pariahs.

Down rounds don’t spell the end of your business

The truth is, there’s no one-size-fits-all solution. The funding route you take has enormous consequences for the future of your company, and so it shouldn’t be clouded by ego or driven by media appetites.

We need to destigmatize down rounds in 2023 by Ram Iyer originally published on TechCrunch

What to expect from the creator economy in 2023

Social media platforms and creator-focused startups haven’t looked too hot this year, as companies like Snapchat, Patreon, Cameoand Meta all waged layoffs along with the rest of the tech industry. YouTube ad revenue is declining, and creator funds for platforms like Pinterest have dried up.

It might seem like things are bad on the surface, but the creator economy is more than just a buzzword that’s losing interest among venture capitalists. Despite challenges on a platform level, creators are continuing to make a living outside of the bounds of traditional media and will only continue to grow in 2023.

Social media platforms will need to commit to creators (seriously, this time)

In my opinion, the biggest creator news in 2022 was YouTube’s announcement that it would include Shorts creators in the YouTube Partner Program, allowing shortform creators to earn ad revenue for the first time ever. Starting in early 2023, creators will be able to apply to the YouTube Partner Program if they meet a new Shorts-specific threshold of 1,000 subscribers and 10 million Shorts views over 90 days. As members of the Partner Program, these creators will earn 45% of ad revenue from their videos.

This is huge, because it’s an open secret that shortform video is hard to monetize. For example, TikTok pays creators through its Creator Fund, a pool of $200 million unveiled in summer 2020. At the time, TikTok said it planned to expand that pool to$1 billion in the U.S. over the next three years, and double that internationally. That might sound like a lot of money, but by comparison, YouTube paid creatorsover $30 billion in ad revenue over the last three years. As the pool of eligible creators becomes more saturated, creator funds are pretty useless — if you’re in TikTok’s creator program and have a video get 1 million views, you might be able to cash out for a small latte. So while these multi-million (or billion) dollar creator funds might seem like a beacon for creators, they don’t help too much. Most popular TikTokers make their money from sponsorships and off-platform opportunities, rather than from their videos.

TikTok has long been the dominant platform in short form video, while Snapchat, Instagram and YouTube largely copied the newcomer to keep up. But creators will finally be incentivized to flock to YouTube Shorts once they can actually earn ad money there. The best part? There has never been more pressure on TikTok to follow suit.

‘Creator Economy’ isn’t a buzzword

What’s a buzzword? You know it when you see it. It’s when Facebook rebrands to Meta and you suddenly get hundreds of emails about “the metaverse,” or when a crypto startup declares its commitment to fostering “community” just because it has a semi-active Discord server. You could also classify “creator economy” as a buzzword — I personally find myself cringe whenever I say it out loud, but I stand by the fact that it’s a much easier shorthand than saying “the industry in which talented people on the internet are leveraging social media audiences to develop careers as independent creatives.”

But all of these buzzwords actually represent real things. Yes, even the metaverse is a thing, though I’d argue we’re talking more about Club Penguin than whatever Mark Zuckerberg is into. The problem with buzzwords, though, is that they dilute real phenomena into fads that get further muddled by disconnected venture capitalists doubling down on the trend with over-enthusiastic investments.

On TechCrunch’s own Equity podcast last week, everyone’s favorite tweeter and brand new dad (!!) Alex Wilhelm reflected on a prediction he made last year.

“The passion economy isn’t sustainable,” he read, quoting his prediction from last year. “Nailed it! Who talks about creators these day? Nobody!”

I can forgive Alex because I do hate “passion economy” with the fire of an exploding supernova for each and every follower Khaby Lame has on TikTok. The term glorifies the relentless, soul-crushing hustle that people face while trying to “make it” in a field they love, while ignoring that industries that people pursue out of passion (art, non-profit work, politics) are often the most exploitative of all.

I think what Alex is getting at here, though, is that in 2021, venture capitalists poured money into the creator economy in the same way they pursued “trendy” tech like AI and web3. According to data retrieved from Crunchbase earlier this year, here’s the breakdown of creator economy funding for the first three quarters of 2022.

Q1: 58 rounds worth $343.2 million.
Q2: 42 rounds worth $336.0 million.
Q3: 19 rounds worth $110.2 million.

I don’t think this means that the creator economy is failing, though. It could just mean that the industry is correcting for over-investing in a bunch of creator-focused companies that creators didn’t actually want or need. Also, you know, the economy.

I’ve been saying for the entire past year that creator economy startups can only succeed if their foremost goal is truly to help creators. In 2021, a year when venture capital flowed like champagne at a Gatsby party, we joked that there were more creator economy startups than creators. But that’s a problem for investors, not creators, many of whom operate completely oblivious to the whims of a16z. It’s indicative of an environment that incentivizes tech moguls with no hands-on experience to try to solve problems of an industry that they don’t quite understand, and as a result, the space became deeply oversaturated. I cannot keep track of the number of companies I’ve encountered that attempt to automate the process of securing brand deals or help creators make white label products.

I’d go as far as to say that it’s bad for creators when there are too many startups angling for their partnership. We know that most startups are doomed to fail — what happens if you rely on a company to offer your business some sort of service, and then they fail within a few years? This is why I’ve made it a personal policy of mine to always ask creator-focused startup founders how they would plan to protect their creators from harm if their company fails.

No matter where the VC funds may fall in 2023, the playbook for creators’ success remains the same. Diversify your income streams, build trust with your audience, and make sure you don’t burn yourself out.

Venture capital will continue to intersect with creators, but not in the way you think

Investments into creator economy companies might be down, but creators are continuing to interface with VC money in a way that their audiences don’t often see. Charli D’Amelio and her family have become investors themselves. MrBeast is seeking funding at a unicorn-sized valuation, which isn’t surprising given that other especially successful creators have accomplished the same.

In less extreme cases, many creators are growing their businesses through startups like Creative Juice, Spotter and Jellysmack, which offer up-front cash in exchange for temporary ownership over a creator’s YouTube back catalog, which means the company gets all of the ad revenue from those videos. These companies operate similarly to venture capital firms. They invest in creators that they believe will turn that cash infusion into even more money, giving both parties a return.

Despite securing massive funding rounds and mammoth valuations, the model that these companies operate is still relatively new, and creators should exercise caution, as they should with any business deal.

What to expect from the creator economy in 2023 by Amanda Silberling originally published on TechCrunch

How to make the most of your startup’s big fundraising moment

Late-stage startups are facing major fundraising headwinds, but early-stage investing is still a bright spot for startups until they hit Series B rounds.

Traditional venture capital dollars are harder to come by these days, but institutional investors are still looking for smart investments, and industry watchers are hungry for the good news a new round of financing suggests. While the market is uncertain, founders need to be ready to use their capital infusions as an asset that extends beyond the cash it represents.

In any market environment, a fundraising event can act as a vote of confidence or validation from investors, supporting your company’s growth via talent acquisition and brand awareness. No matter the size of the round, securing external investment is a key milestone in many companies’ journeys, and it often takes a tremendous amount of effort. However, after putting all that work in, many founders make the mistake of letting a funding moment pass by without extracting all the value they could have.

Over the course of my 20+ years as a marketing leader at startups, venture capital firms and large tech companies, I’ve helped dozens of companies announce funding news, ranging from $1 million pre-seed rounds to $50 million raises.

Here’s my playbook for founders looking to make their “big money” moments go farther:

Rethink assumptions about fundraising news

Publicizing funding news lets you create incremental value beyond the capital investment by highlighting your momentum and driving brand awareness.

Founders may overlook the value of announcing funding news for several reasons, but the biggest one is assuming the round isn’t “big enough” to warrant attention. When you see other companies raising hundreds of millions of dollars, it can be easy to think no one will be interested in hearing about your startup’s much smaller round.

Fortunately, that isn’t true. While big numbers may draw splashy headlines, smaller rounds can still drive interest if the announcement is executed well and you can connect the news with some larger industry/technology/societal trend.

Another reason founders hesitate is if all or part of the new capital is through a debt investment. Though it’s becoming more common, especially as VC investors pump the breaks, there is still some stigma around debt funding, and founders may worry they’ll be penalized for adding debt to their balance sheets.

However, securing a debt investment often requires even more rigor than an equity investment, so highlighting a debt raise can actually indicate your business’ fundamentals and revenue numbers are strong enough to support repayment.

Founders may also worry about giving competitors too much information about their business and prefer to make progress while flying under the radar. There are benefits to keeping certain information under wraps, but it’s important not to get so focused on building behind closed doors that you miss the opportunity to get more visibility with the prospects and partners that will drive revenue.

Finally, funding announcements are sometimes just not at the top of a founder’s long to-do list, largely because they are either unsure of how to run an announcement or lack the marketing expertise to execute it effectively. This next section should help on that front.

Three steps to maximize the marketing value of your fundraise

The future is unknown, so when you have a funding round locked up and cash in the bank, you have the opportunity to make the biggest impact you can with the news you have in hand.

To leverage this moment and be successful you need to:

Step 1: Plan ahead

Preparing for a fundraising announcement takes time and strategic thinking. As soon as you’ve reached the point in your investor conversations where term sheets are a likely next step, you should assemble your marketing team to start working on a plan. This includes aligning with your investors early about their ability to participate in a news announcement.

Some key questions your marketing lead should consider include:

Who can offer public quotes or commentary on the investment?
What are the key messages you would like to communicate about this round and what messages would you like your investors to amplify?
When is the investor available to review announcement materials and participate in potential media interviews?

How to make the most of your startup’s big fundraising moment by Ram Iyer originally published on TechCrunch

India set an ‘incredibly important precedent’ by banning TikTok, FCC Commissioner says

India set an “incredibly important precedent” by banning TikTok two and a half years ago, FCC Commissioner said, as he projected a similar fate for the Chinese giant Bytedance app in the U.S.

Brendan Carr, Commissioner of the FCC, warned that TikTok “operates as a sophisticated surveillance tool,” and told the Indian daily Economic Times that banning the social app is a “natural next step in our efforts to secure communication network.”

The senior Republican on the Federal Communications Commission said he is worried that China could use sensitive and non-public data gleaned from TikTok to “blackmail, espionage, foreign influence campaigns and surveillance.”

“We need to follow India’s lead more broadly to weed out other nefarious apps as well,” he said.

Carr’s remarks further illustrates a growing push among U.S. states and lawmakers that are increasingly growing cautious of TikTok, which has amassed over 100 million users in the nation.

India has banned hundreds of apps, including TikTok, PUBG Mobile, Battlegrounds Mobile India and UC Browser, with affiliation to China in the past two years amid skirmishes at the border of the two neighboring nations.

New Delhi said it had banned the apps because they posed threats to the “national security and defence of India, which ultimately impinges upon the sovereignty and integrity of India.”

TikTok had over 200 million monthly active users in India and counted the South Asian nation as its largest international market by users prior to the ban.

“India’s strong leadership has been informative and helpful as we have debated banning TikTok in the US,” Carr told the Indian paper (paywalled). “For those who argue that there is no way to ban an app, India is an example of a country that has done it and done it successfully.”

The U.S. House banned TikTok on all House-managed devices last week, citing a “high risk due to a number of security issues.” The move followed nearly two dozen states at least partially blocking the app from state-managed devices over concern that China could use it to track Americans and censor content.

“If you look at the history of TikTok’s malign data flows and its misleading representations, I don’t see a path forward for anything other than a blanket ban working,” he told the newspaper.

India set an ‘incredibly important precedent’ by banning TikTok, FCC Commissioner says by Manish Singh originally published on TechCrunch

Micromobility in limbo: Takeaways from Paris and LA

Shared electric scooters came onto the scene five years ago with a promising vision of getting people out of cars and onto greener modes of transportation. Yet despite billions in VC money and plenty of hype, the future that micromobility companies promised still hasn’t quite arrived.

In cities like Paris, most people aren’t replacing car trips with shared e-scooter jaunts in a meaningful way; the cost of riding scooters makes them an expensive option for last-mile transit connections and equitable access; and the public disclosures of Bird and Helbiz have shown us that achieving profitability is incredibly difficult. Plus, cities that allowed shared e-scooter companies in their midsts are increasingly making it difficult for scooter companies to operate sustainably.

For the sake of traffic flow and carbon emissions, there need to be alternatives to cars. Are shared e-scooters the answer to that, or are they just another shitty option? What have we gained by introducing shared micromobility to cities?

We decided to take a look at two cities that were at the forefront of the e-scooter revolution – Los Angeles and Paris. The former has garnered a reputation of being a bit of a free-for-all, with a laissez-faire capitalist regulatory approach that allows multiple operators to compete for rides and space. The latter has some of the strictest regulations in the game, including limited operator permits, and in fact is still considering banning shared e-scooters entirely.

“From a societal perspective, I’d be more concerned about e-scooters leaving Los Angeles than Paris,” David Zipper, a visiting fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School’s Taubman Center for State and Local Government, told TechCrunch. “Paris is so dense and has a great metro. It’s possible scooters there are replacing forms of transportation that are even greener. LA is different. It’s so car dominated and hungry for alternatives to the automobile.”

Despite that apparent hunger, two scooter operators – Lyft and Spin – recently exited the Los Angeles area, blaming a lack of favorable regulations and too much competition, which apparently made it difficult to turn a profit. In total, there are still six operators in LA – Bird, Lime, Veo, Superpedestrian, Wheels (now owned by Helbiz), and Tuk Tuk, a new entrant.

The fact that both cities – one sprawling, the other dense; one under-regulated (so say the shared scooter companies) with several operators, the other highly regulated with fewer operators – still haven’t quite got it right with e-scooters raises a key question. What type of market, if any, is the right one?

Paris: To ban or not to ban?

People walk or ride their electric scooter past the statue of the Marechal Joffre, in Paris, on May 19, 2020. (Photo by THOMAS COEX/AFP via Getty Images)

If ever there were a city where you’d think shared e-scooters would thrive, it’s Paris. The city is one of the most densely populated in Europe. Most households don’t own a car, and if they do, they use them rarely. And Paris is led by Mayor Anne Hidalgo, an advocate for the reclamation of public space from roads and vehicles for a more liveable, “15-minute city.” In her time in office, Hidalgo has removed parking spots, turned streets into walkable areas and opened new bike lanes.

And yet, Paris is in the midst of potentially banning its 15,000 shared e-scooters as politicians from several parties call on Hidalgo not to renew the contracts of Lime, Dott and Tier when they expire in February 2023. She is expected to make her decision any day now, and indeed there are some rumors floating around that she already has.

Paris has been an important market for the e-scooter industry at large, but the city has chafed against the vehicles, citing safety incidents, some of which were fatal.

Over the years, Paris has responded to safety issues with increasingly strict regulations. Last summer, following the death of someone who was hit by two women riding a scooter near the Seine, Paris implemented “slow zones” for scooters. A year later, the whole city turned into a slow zone, with shared e-scooter speeds capped at just over 6 miles per hour.

Despite these harsh regulations, the city is still on the verge of saying goodbye to shared scooters forever.

Shocked. Appalled. Frustrated. These are the feelings I had upon first hearing the news of the potential ban. So what if there are accidents? Car accidents happen all the time! Boohoo to your complaints about scooters on sidewalks! Build better bike lanes, then!

But looking at the scattered statistics of how scooters are used in Paris, it’s possible that scooters aren’t providing the value that cities need – namely, limiting car usage.

Lime told TechCrunch that 90% of its fleet in Paris is used everyday, and a scooter trip starts every four seconds in the city. In 2021, over 1.2 million scooter riders, 85% of whom were Parisian residents, took a total of 10 million rides across all three operators. Lime estimated that could have replaced 1.6 million car trips. Could have, but did they?

One study from 2021 found that e-scooter users in Paris are mainly men aged 18 to 29, have a high educational level, and usually jump on a scooter for travel time savings. Most riders (72%) in the study said they shifted from walking and public transportation, not cars. Another survey of French scooter riders found that shared scooters were “more likely to replace walking trips than other modes of transport.”

These results aren’t limited to Paris. A survey among customers who were registered with five different shared e-scooter apps in Norway in the fall of 2021 found that in all circumstances except for night rides, e-scooters most often replace walking. E-scooters do replace cars with longer e-scooter trips if the user is male, if the e-scooter is privately owned, and to destinations poorly served by public transport, the study showed.

What is getting in the way of the ultimate goal – to shift travelers away from cars? Perhaps most people, in Paris at least, wouldn’t use a car anyway because the city is walkable and public transportation is sufficient. Or, maybe would-be car drivers and taxi riders just need more time to get used to the concept of scooter riding as a way of life. Or, maybe scooters just aren’t reliable as forms of transport for longer journeys.

Fluctuo, an aggregator of shared mobility data, found the average scooter trip length in Paris was 2.67 kilometers in July 2022 and 2.53 kilometers in November. A long enough journey that you might prefer not to walk it, but too short to drive it in a place like Paris.

Whether scooters are getting people out of cars or not, they’re certainly popular in Paris. A September Ipsos poll commissioned by Lime, Dott and Tier (and therefore taken with a grain of salt) found that most Parisians agree e-scooters are part of the daily mobility of the city and are consistent with City Hall’s broader transport policy. Most of the respondents (68%) said they are satisfied with the number of self-service scooters on the streets of Paris, while a quarter indicated they would actually like to see more.

And in response to the potential ban, a recent petition launched by a Paris resident has garnered more than 19,000 signatures in opposition.

Hannah Landau, Lime’s communications manager for France and southern Europe, told TechCrunch a ban would make Paris a global outlier.

“No major city in the world that introduced a shared e-scooter service has permanently banned them,” she said. “In fact, the major global trend today is cities renewing their programs – such as London – or even expanding them with more vehicles or larger service areas (NYC, Chicago, Washington D.C., Rome, Madrid, Lyon).”

Lime, Dott and Tier have put forward a variety of measures to Paris’ city hall, which they say will address safety concerns and ensure a renewal of scooter licenses next year. Among the proposals are a joint campaign to raise awareness about traffic laws; a fine system that uses cameras on public roads; expanding use of scooter ADAS to prevent sidewalk riding; and equipping scooters with registration plates.

Among major cities, Paris may be unique in weighing a blanket ban, but other locales have recently shown an appetite for limiting scooters, including Stockholm, Tenerife, Spain, Boston College and Fordham University.

– Rebecca Bellan

Los Angeles: City of Autos

A shared scooter parked on a sidewalk in Koreatown, a neighborhood in central Los Angeles, on December 29, 2022.

Let’s add a couple more wheels back into this discussion. Yes, I’m about to get personal about the automobile. Buckle up!

Automakers rewired American citiesover the last century, and if you ask me, we’re all suffering for it – especially Angelenos. Gas-powered cars, SUVs and trucks infamously clog LA’s arteries. They muck up the air, driving climate change and health issues alike. Plus, a driver in an SUV once hit me while I was standing on the sidewalk, innocently looking for a nearby ramen joint. See, I told you it was personal!

All this is to say that, as an occasional driver and grudge-bearing pedestrian (the kind who bellows, “I’m walkin’ here!” in a vaguely New York accent), my heart aches when I see micromobility operators bail on cities, as Spin, Bolt and Lyft have in LA.

This isn’t because I ride scooters regularly, and it’s not because scooters are now scarce (a block from my apartment in central LA, I can find several Limes and Links on sidewalks and in the crooks of curbs). I simply want to see cars reined in, to rebalance the city around public transit, walking, biking and even scooting — whatever it takes to free up streets and reduce fumes. But what future do scooters and the like have here, given the recent exits, and Bird’s financial struggles to boot?

That depends on who you ask. At least one operator — Lime — says things have never been better in Tinseltown. A spokesperson recently told us that Los Angeles is Lime’s biggest American market today.

While acknowledging LA’s shortcomings for scooters, including its sprawling geography, the spokesperson likened 2022 to a “wow moment” that showed how “micromobility is here to stay.” Lime credited its local staff, work with city officials and investments in hardware for the apparently strong year, but the company did not respond when TechCrunch asked if its LA operations are currently profitable. Lime is privately held, so we don’t get as much insight into it as we do Lyft and Bird.

Lime’s experience in LA may be an outlier. Both Spin and Lyft told TechCrunch that they needed to strike new, longer-term deals with municipalities here in order to return. “In a nutshell: The challenge with LA is that it is an open vendor market with no vehicle cap,” Spin’s chief executive Philip Reinckens said in an email to TechCrunch. “This had led to an imbalance of vehicle supply to rider demand as operators over-saturate the market.”

“A long-term arrangement for limited operators would be a necessary condition to consider re-entry,” Reinckens added.

Santa Monica, a coastal city in LA county, already seems to be on board with this approach. Next year, Santa Monica says it plans to limit the number of permitted scooter operators from four to just one to two.

Zooming out: Greater LA area has a mixed reputation among cyclists, but officials have shown some willingness to accommodate things other than cars lately. There are a few interesting public initiatives underway, including recently announced efforts to promote cycling in South LA, North Hollywood and San Pedro. It’s no revolution, but it could make the city a bit safer for all lightweight modes of transportation, including e-scooters.

Taken together, LA’s scooter free-for-all seems destined for consolidation, leaving fewer operators with a whole lot of ground to cover. But shared e-scooters on the whole also don’t seem to be at risk of getting the boot, much unlike Paris.

– Harri Weber

Micromobility in limbo: Takeaways from Paris and LA by Rebecca Bellan originally published on TechCrunch

The year customer experience died

This was a rough year for customer experience.

We’ve been hearing for years how important customer experience is to business, and a whole business technology category has been built around it, with companies like Salesforce and Adobe at the forefront. But due to the economy or lack of employees (perhaps both?), 2022 was a year of poor customer service, which in turn has created poor experiences; there’s no separating the two.

No matter how great your product or service, you will ultimately be judged by how well you do when things go wrong, and your customer service team is your direct link to buyers. If you fail them in a time of need, you can lose them for good and quickly develop a bad reputation. News can spread rapidly through social media channels. That’s not the kind of talk you want about your brand.

We’re constantly being asked for feedback about how the business did, yet this thirst for information doesn’t seem to ever connect back to improving the experience.

And make no mistake: Your customer service is inexorably linked to the perceived experience of your customer. We’re constantly being asked for feedback about how the business did, yet this thirst for information doesn’t seem to ever connect back to improving the experience.

Consider the poor folks who bought tickets for Southwest Airlines flights this week. One video showed airline employees had sicced the police on their own passengers. Consider that the airline admittedly screwed up, but one representative of the same airline actually called the police on passengers for being at the gate. When it comes to abusing your customers and destroying your brand goodwill, that example takes the cake.

For too long we’ve been hearing about how data will drive better experiences, but is that data ever available to the people dealing with the customers? They don’t need data — they need help and training and guidance, and there clearly wasn’t enough of that in 2022. It seemed companies cut back on customer service to the detriment of their customers’ experience and ultimately to the reputation of the brand.

The year customer experience died by Ron Miller originally published on TechCrunch

How we covered the creator economy in 2022

This summer, I went straight from VidCon — the largest creator conference — to a labor journalism seminar with the Sidney Hillman Foundation. One day, I was chatting with famous TikTokers about their financial anxieties (what if they accidentally get banned from TikTok tomorrow?), and the next, I was learning about the history of American labor organizing.

These topics are not at all unrelated: at its core, writing about creator economy is labor journalism. The creator beat is a labor beat.

Creators are rebelling against the traditional route to making a living in artistic industries, taking control over their income to make money for themselves, rather than big media conglomerates. Consider creators like Brian David Gilbert, who built a devoted fanbase as a chaotically hilarious video producer for Polygon, the video game publication at Vox Media. Gilbert quit to work on other creative projects full time, likely because he realized that with his audience, he could make way more money independently than his media salary paid him. Then there’s YouTube channels like Defunctland and Swell Entertainment, which are basically investigative journalism outlets run by individual video producers. We see chefs building their brands by going viral on TikTok, or teachers who supplement their income by sharing educational content on Instagram. In artistic industries that notoriously underpay for the expertise that its laborers provide, YouTubers, Instagrammers and newsletter writers alike are proving that creativity is a monetizable skill — one that they deserve to make more than a living wage with.

This belief — that the creator economy is a labor beat — has guided my coverage of the industry this year. Below, I’ve rounded up some of our best stories about the state of the creator economy.

There are no laws protecting kids from being exploited on YouTube — one teen wants to change that

Like most teens, Chris McCarty spent a lot of time on YouTube, but they had a serious question. How can the children of influencers protect themselves when they’re too young to understand what it means to be a constant fixture in online videos? As part of their Girl Scouts Gold Award project, McCarty worked with Washington State Representative Emily Wicks to introduce a bill that seeks to protect and compensate children for their appearance in family vlogs.

As early as 2010, amateur YouTubers realized that “cute kid does stuff” is a genre prone to virality. David DeVore, then 7, became an internet sensation when his father posted a YouTube video of his reaction to anesthesia called “David After Dentist.” David’s father turned the public’s interest in his son into a small business, earning around$150,000 within five monthsthrough ad revenue, merch sales and a licensing deal with Vizio. He told The Wall Street Journal at the time that he would save the money for his children’s college costs, as well as charitable donations. Meanwhile, the family behind the “Charlie bit my finger” video made enough money to buy a new house.

Over a decade later, some of YouTube’s biggest stars are children who are too young to understand the life-changing responsibility of being an internet celebrity with millions of subscribers. Seven-year-oldNastya, whose parents run her YouTube channel, was the sixth-highest-earning YouTube creator in 2022, earning$28 million.Ryan Kaji, a 10-year-old who has been playing with toys on YouTube since he was 4, earned$27 millionfrom a variety of licensing and brand deals.

Is MrBeast actually worth $1.5 billion?

I’m fascinated by MrBeast, but kind of in a “watching a car crash” way. MrBeast is still cruising comfortably along the highway, but I worry about the guy (… not too much. I mean. He’s doing fine). His business model just doesn’t seem sustainable to me, despite his immense riches and irreplaceable success. As he attempts to raise a unicorn-sized VC round, we’ll see if he can keep escalating his stunts without becoming yet another David Dobrik.

Is going bigger always better? MrBeast’s business model is like a snake eating its own tail — no one is making money like he is, but no one is spending it like him either. He described his margins as “razor-thin” in a conversation with Logan Paul, since he reinvests most of his profits back into his content. His viewers expect that each video will be more impressive than the last, and from the outside looking in, it seems like it’s only a matter of time before MrBeast can no longer up the ante (and for other creators, this has led todisaster). So, if MrBeast’s business really is a unicorn — I’d wager it is — then he has two choices. Will he use the cushion of $150 million to make his business more sustainable, so he doesn’t have to keepburying himself alive? Or will he keep pushing for more until nothing is left?

Casey Neistat’s David Dobrik documentary explores what happens when creators cross the line

Speaking of David Dobrik, longtime YouTuber Casey Neistat debuted a documentary at SXSW this year about the 26-year-old YouTuber. When Neistat started working on the documentary, he wanted to capture the phenomenon that was Dobrik and his Vlog Squad, who used to be YouTube royalty. The documentary took a turn after Insider surfaced allegations of sexual assault on Dobrik’s film set — then, Dobrik nearly killed his friend Jeff Wittek in a stunt gone horribly wrong. Neistat does a brilliant job capturing the creator’s fall from grace, plus the way in which the lack of regulations on YouTube film sets can set the stage for disaster, especially when creators are incentivized to do crazier and crazier stunts to stay relevant.

Television series like “Hype House” and “The D’Amelio Show” dedicate entire plotlines to creators’ fear of being “cancelled,” but Dobrik is still doing okay, calling into question just how far a creator has to go to lose his fans. Dobrik just opened a pizza shop in LA and has his own Discovery TV show. Wittek has had at least nine surgeries to date as a result of his accident on Dobrik’s set.

“I think that there’s always a pursuit. It’s relevant for a musician – how do you keep your music interesting?” Neistat said. “But what makes individuals like David Dobrik different is that their pursuit is not coming out with the next song or making the next movie. Their pursuit is, how can I be more sensationalist? And that is a very, very, very dangerous pursuit, because the minute you achieve something that was crazier than the last, you then have to go past that.”

YouTube Shorts could steal TikTok’s thunder with a better deal for creators

The biggest open secret in short form video is that you can’t get rich on TikTok alone, because even the most viral creators earn a negligible portion of their income from the platform itself. TikTok has long been dominant in the short form scene, but YouTube Shorts could give TikTok a run for its money next year as it becomes the first platform to share ad revenue with short form creators. Ad revenue doesn’t seem that glamorous, but I couldn’t be more excited to see how this program will change the short form game in 2023.

A big reason why TikTok and other short-form video apps haven’t unveiled a similar revenue-sharing program yet is because it’s trickier to figure out how to fairly split ad revenue on an algorithmically-generated feed of short videos. You can’t embed an ad in the middle of a video — imagine watching a 30-second video with an eight-second ad in the middle — but if you place ads between two videos, who would get the revenue share? The creator whose video appeared directly before or after it? Or, would a creator whose video you watched earlier in the feed deserve a cut too, because their content encouraged you to keep scrolling?

OnlyFans CEO says adult content will still have a home on the site in 5 years

At TechCrunch Disrupt, I interviewed OnlyFans CEO Ami Gan and Chief Strategy Officer Keily Blair about the platform’s future, especially in regard to sex workers. In large part due to the success of adult creators, OnlyFans has paid out over $8 billion to creators since 2016. For comparison, the mostly safe-for-work competitor Patreon has paid out $3.5 billion since 2013. Online sex workers are some of the savviest, highest-earning creators in the business, yet they are the most vulnerable. Changing credit card company regulations and internet privacy laws can wipe out their business, and last year, that almost happened on OnlyFans. The company said it would ban adult content, then walked back that ban — but even still, adult creators have been skeptical about how long they can keep making a living on the platform. On our stage, I asked Gan if adult content will still be on OnlyFans in 5 years. She said yes.

OnlyFans has been putting a lot of effort into upcycling its image from an adult content subscription platform to a Patreon-like home for all kinds of creators, but it’s far from moving away from them as users. Today CEO Ami Gan of the platform confirmed that adult content will still have a home on the site in five years, and those creators can continue to make a living on it.

The confirmation, made today on stage at TechCrunch Disrupt, is notable because of the rocky relationship OnlyFans has had with adult creators. Last year, the company announced it wouldban adult contenton the site after pressure from card payment companies and efforts itreportedlywas making to raise outside funding. Then it abruptlysuspended the decisionless than a week later after an outcry from users.

How we covered the creator economy in 2022 by Amanda Silberling originally published on TechCrunch

Pin It on Pinterest