You want to work there. Click here for access to the entire job description and to apply. I’m not at all involved in the hiring process, so don’t email me your resume or anything. If I was a little younger and not currently having a ton of fun with OfficeDrop I might apply myself! And I’d finally get to use my French language skills in a business context…
Here is a little bit about what they are looking for, from the job description on their site:
Preference for someone with a technical or software programming background
- Strong excel modeling skills a plus
- Bilingual (French / English) a plus
- Strong analytical skills
- Excellent communication & listening skills
- Creativity and high energy
- Aggressive, self starter
- Passion for new technologies – an active user of web and mobile applications
At the Associate Level (additional requirements):
- Previous experience (~2 – 4 Years) in a venture backed or private equity / venture capital role. Must have some prior equity based transaction experience
- Thoughtful about the ever changing web and mobile landscapes
- Strong network in the startup World
Microsoft Office 365 launches tomorrow, and now that I see the marketing video I think that the Skype acquisition makes a lot more sense.
Microsoft Office 365 Video
My big question is how open with Office 365 be? Will outside developers be able to write to and interact with all the Office services? I get the feeling MSFT is trying to do everything – file sharing, collaboration, cloud content management & storage, webinar hosting… it’s a lot. I can’t imagine all of it will be best of breed. So many customers will likely want to supplement weaker offerings with outside developed programs. If MSFT if open they may lose a little revenue, but will likely actually grow the pie and increase stickiness… we’ll see how this plays out.
2 quick links
1) The definition of a venture capital fund – from the SEC
The only people who’s definition of a venture capitalist matter are the SEC and investors in private equity funds. And, well, the SEC just decided what a venture capital fund is. I’ve been following Dan Primack as he writes this one up. See the definition here.
2) Apps rule; the web is dead
Scroble has a solid piece on how it is clear that apps are beating the web, yet many tech industry experts are not willing to believe it. His basic point is – look at how normal people use their devices, and you’ll see that it is totally app centric. Ignore users preferences and workflow at your own peril. Check out my last post on app usage surpassing web browsing for more data…
People are now spending more time using mobile apps than they spend surfing the web! According to a report by Flurry released yesterday, a serious platform shift is happening in how people interact with data.
The report says:
…for the first time ever, daily time spent in mobile apps surpasses desktop and mobile web consumption. This stat is even more remarkable if you consider that it took less than three years for native mobile apps to achieve this level of usage, driven primarily by the popularity of iOS and Android platforms.
This is pretty big news. Check out the chart from the post:
Time spent using the internet is only growing at 16% year over year, but mobile app usage minutes is growing over 90% year over year. So it looks like mobile has got a lot more legs to grow on!
Flurry also reports that social networking and games account for almost 80% of the time spent on mobile apps. This stat doesn’t surprise me too much, as mobile gaming is really taking off. I am a little surprised about the social networking thing – what are they using, Facebook’s app? Or LinkedIn? Maybe Twitter, actually. I wonder how this fits with Facebooks HTML5 strategy?
This data fits with how OfficeDrop is seeing growth. Our Android app has really taken off and is now a huge percentage of our recent growth, and I’m excited for our other upcoming mobile offerings. I think this survey should help clear up any thoughts on the importance of mobile apps and consumer preferences.
Dan Primack has a good interview with the CEO of BankRate.com, a company that was public, went private a few years ago, and returned to the public markets recently.
I’m not going to quote the entire interview here, you should just click the link above and read it yourself, but the part that interested me was about how being private with a PE backer let the company make some acquisitions that it would not have been able to make if it was public.
Fortune: Buyout firms often talk about the advantages of being private. Do they exist?
Evans: There definitely were some advantages to being private… We also saw strategic assets available for sale, and that acquiring them could really change the trajectory and competitive position of our company.
We wouldn’t have been able to make those acquisitions if we’d been a public company, both because the private equity backer provided capital and because one wouldn’t have taken our paper.
I’m more than a bit surprised about this reasoning. Usually companies cite having a public currency with which to make acquisitions as a major reason to IPO… this is totally opposite of what you’d usually consider the norm.
It also leads me to think about what happens when a private company that has shares trading on one of the private secondary markets makes acquisitions with stock. Is the acquired company then able to sell stock right away to third party accredited investors? Or is there the standard lock up language like you’d have when a public company acquires a private company? Or does the fact that the private co can control the sale of share on the secondary market negate the need for such a lock up?